I meant to follow up earlier. I've been swapping between all 3 and have gone back to the original mat for the moment! The oddest part to all this is that sonic improvements depend on the record/recording. The changes to the sound depending on which mat is used are ridiculous - making most records sound utterly different. Depth, timbre, space, tone, clarity, blackness, silence all vary. In fact, so much so, I wonder which one is correct!
So I replaced the original Garrard 401 mat with an EP
So I replaced my original Garrard 401 mat with a 10" record.
Years ago, I had tried the Boston graphite mat and it deadened the music. I’ve messed around with cork tile, paper, little brass rings, 12" record, no mat, and kept going back to the old mat. The 10" record on the other hand is interesting...reduction of smearing, damped and woolly bass. It’s not that it was badly smeared and soft, but it definitely tightened things up and improved (increased) the highs.
Any stories to tell?
Years ago, I had tried the Boston graphite mat and it deadened the music. I’ve messed around with cork tile, paper, little brass rings, 12" record, no mat, and kept going back to the old mat. The 10" record on the other hand is interesting...reduction of smearing, damped and woolly bass. It’s not that it was badly smeared and soft, but it definitely tightened things up and improved (increased) the highs.
Any stories to tell?
- ...
- 14 posts total
- 14 posts total