Direct Drive vs. Idler Drive vs. Belt drive

Another interesting tidbit on patter mass comes to mind. When I bought my SP 10 MK II I was quite content with it. I came across a custom machined platter for it that weighed about twice the mass as the stock one, made of stainless steel as I recall. I ordered it and installed it. What I found is that the sound became smoother but was robbed of life. The table was fully capable of keeping accurate speed at the stock platter weight, and there was nothing of consequence to be gained from increasing it, matter of fact it was a step backwards. Perhaps platter mass does matter, but only within the context of what the designer envisions.

Why you did that ? You could just add Micro Seiki CU-500 gunmetal mat on top (perfectly matched). Here is mine. The weight of CU-500 is 2.7kg and it's 5mm thickness. That was huge upgrade for my stock SP-10 mkII.

When you're using not original parts, but some overkill superheavy custom platter why do you expect improvement ?  Technics platter is already heavy. 

Why you did that ? You could just add Micro Seiki CU-500 gunmetal mat on top (perfectly matched). Here is mine. The weight of CU-500 is 2.7kg and it's 5mm thickness. That was huge upgrade for my stock SP-10 mkII.

When you're using not original parts, but some overkill superheavy custom platter why do you expect improvement ? Technics platter is already heavy.


Then why are you adding mass to the platter also? It is already designed to operate as the engineers at Technics intend it to, yet you feel you can improve upon that. 

This is no different than what I originally did, which followed the line of thought of increased platter mass would improve sound quality by less resonance and increased rotational stability. For me that was not the case, and I returned the item and gained a bit of knowledge/experience of what I prefer in turntable configurations. 

I am noticing something about you. It appears you are one of these people who believe that your choices are the only correct way to do things in this hobby. If others disagree with you or have a different perspective then they are misguided or ignorant. Audio is a journey and there are many pathways to take, and folks often have a different destination in mind and value a different perspective of what they get to hear and experience. Honestly, it would make my time here more enjoyable if you would refrain from interacting with me. Unfortunately this place does not have an ignore button. 

I did different thing and it’s not just about mass, because the SP-10 MKII does not have additional layer of the different material on top surface of platter as mk 3 model so i just used Micro Seiku CU-500 to upgrade it.

As the result, the platter made from one material was decoupled by gunmetal mat (material with different properties and different resonance). This is more like upgrading mk2 model looking at next mk3 model. There was the reason why Technics decided to add another later on top of the platter. So i had a gunmetal between the platter and vinyl record.

I asked why you just replaced original platter, because every Technics platter is balanced and there is a stamp about it. I have no idea who made the platter you’ve been using, maybe it was a bad platter (i mean not as good as the original) ? Increasing mass on Technics platter with gunmetal mat was huge improvement, but maybe not just because we add mass. This is what i want to say.

And another example is Kodo The Beat turntable, based on Technics motor, look at the Kodo platter.

Also nearly all turntables from Artisan fidelity comes with their own copper mats on top. Even tweaked Technics MK3 or Garrard 301

Even if the platter replaced with thicker and heavier one those guys always add copper mat on top of it, just like the latest Technics SP-10R.

P.S. @neonknight I am interacting here not with you personally, but with audio subject that can be interesting for others. No matter who is right or wrong, it’s important to add some information and everyone can decide what he like more.

@atmasphere,

WRT to platter mats, the concept that materials cannot absorb/attenuate vibration is not correct.  Very thin viscoelastic materials can absorb surprising amounts of vibration - the energy is converted to heat.  This article is an excellent example - https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/36723450.pdf.  Note that just about any thin material that can stretch such as a PVC film that protects a metal plate can act like a viscoelastic material.

Also, materials - metals while known to have different vibration damping characteristics, is actually well documented - download a report from this site: https://apps.dtic.mil/docs/citations/AD0640465.  Aluminum while being cheap has good damping characteristics and cast aluminum (i.e. ATP-5) can be better than extruded (i.e. 6061), but cladding improves it and magnesium beats all - but magnesium has that small issue of being able to burn quite vigorously.  But, some tonearms such as those from SME are manufactured from magnesium and for good reason.

I have personally had excellent results from a piece of very thin leather (sourced from a craft store) about 1-mm thickness with skin side down to a VPI aluminum platter and suede side to the record.  The suede side is very dense - much closer to a felt-type material so that the record mates to the record with little or no air gap, but does not produce lint.  A similar type mat (but pig-skin) was once available and very well reviewed -https://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/hiraga/mat.html.  

Also, as far as the triboelectric effect leather can vary based on type and moisture (which it can absorb) with the following being the latest (2015) triboelectric series (download from this site) - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-09461-x.

Just some thoughts,

Neil

"I did different thing and it’s not just about mass, because the SP-10 MKII does not have additional layer of the different material on top surface of platter as mk 3 model so i just used Micro Seiku CU-500 to upgrade it.

As the result, the platter made from one material was decoupled by gunmetal mat (material with different properties and different resonance). This is more like upgrading mk2 model looking at next mk3 model. There was the reason why Technics decided to add another later on top of the platter. So i had a gunmetal between the platter and vinyl record.

I asked why you just replaced original platter, because every Technics platter is balanced and there is a stamp about it. I have no idea who made the platter you’ve been using, maybe it was a bad platter (i mean not as good as the original) ? Increasing mass on Technics platter with gunmetal mat was huge improvement, but maybe not just because we add mass. This is what i want to say.

And another example is Kodo The Beat turntable, based on Technics motor, look at the Kodo platter.

Also nearly all turntables from Artisan fidelity comes with their own copper mats on top. Even tweaked Technics MK3 or Garrard 301

Even if the platter replaced with thicker and heavier one those guys always add copper mat on top of it, just like the latest Technics SP-10R.

P.S. @neonknight I am interacting here not with you personally, but with audio subject that can be interesting for others. No matter who is right or wrong, it’s important to add some information and everyone can decide what he like more. "

@chakster 

The above speaks to the concept that I had previously mentioned of the platter being critically damped and non-resonant being a more significant contributor to sound quality than platter mass as a sole indicator. 

I appreciate your above post, its far less combative and judgmental. I hope we can proceed forward on a more civil discourse.