Cost Incurred to Achieve a Vinyl LP Replay

@dogberry I have shared with you in the past on occasions about your methods used for mounting Tonearms.

Additionally, I don't remember your Brand of preferred TT being discussed, but I am very familiar with SME as a Brand. I have heard the 3009 Tonearms in use for most of my time around Audio Equipment, a friend loves to get under the hood and extract every last morsel that a 3009 can offer, I have heard these in use on numerous occasions.

The SME IV and V model TA's have been extensively demo'd and as a result I  have owned the IV Model for numerous years. It took a very long time until I discovered a TA design that superseded the IV and other owned TA's.

I have been demo'd the TOTR SME TT's on regular occasions in my days of visiting Commercial Events, it was at this time I chose to adopt a different drive TT.

Over the years I have encountered these TT's in use and not too long ago I was regularly receiving demo's of the SME 20/12 model in a system I was familiar with. 

As for your own investment of approx' CDN- $54K, this is another outlay from a 'dye in the wool' Vinyl LP  enthusiast, that is very close to the figures I have put forward.

Using my own experiences, which are made known and now using the contributions from forum members offered to this thread, there is a furthering  of reinforcement to my own notion, that suggests there are constrained attitudes expressed by individuals for their purchases. It is interesting how there is a description of offer that mirrors my own, which is not wanting to aspire to something quite different than what is already created.  

When seeing the selections made by 'dye in the wool' enthusiasts for Vinyl Replay Source Items, even though choices being made are not typical across the individuals in their Brand Selection. The accumulating monies outlaid are seen to be similar in requirement, to acquire the ancillaries that offer the individual a experience of replayed music that is meeting their unique preference. 

@cleeds The first iteration of the OWC Mercury Pro, which was where the exact same make and model of disk limitation arose. OWC could not sell me a replacement disk of the same model. Newer versions allow the disks to be mounted as a JBOD, and I prefer that, with one disk copying to the other three every day. They now use SoftRAID rather than built-in hardware.

@pindac If I weren't such a slut for cartridges and had only the one I thought "best" no doubt I would also want the best tonearm and table, which is how those who can afford it get into the super-tables; always chasing "the best.". A variety of cartridges is like insurance against going along that path.

@pindac 

@dogberry I have shared with you in the past on occasions about your methods used for mounting Tonearms.

Indeed you have. I thought you might be amused to see the latest twist among my pods: using two per tonearm. The latest pair have built in micrometer adjustment of VTA, but seemed to tip rather easily. So I placed a pod under the distal end, so that it rested upon it. More mass, more stability, and sounds very good!

Next step, as there always is a next step, is to ask Lee at Acoustand to make me custom tonearm panels with a mounting hole at both ends. That way the tonearm panel can be firmly attached (ie mechanically coupled) at both ends to a 10lb weight sitting on spikes - 20lb on spikes will damp every vibration arriving at the tonearm mount, I think.

I have been allocated my own personal listening space within the home, which indirectly meant 'in my mind',  there was no holds barred on the aesthetic front. I have thoroughly abused this new liberty, not much amuses me when it comes to being creative with an assembly. 

My mounted on Granite Sub Plinths under the HiFi Racks are sheets of Steel with a dimension of 900mm (36") x 1100mm (44") x 12mm (1/2"). 

The raised above the floor by approx' 500mm (20") Sub Plinth for the Monoblocks is a Granite Slab weighing in at approx' 250Kg. Positioning that proved to be fun, but it is doable with the right plan in place. 

As with all changes made to a mechanical interface on a TT, TA or Cart' a change will be detected for the perceived sonic, it is almost certain to occur.

Living with the new set up and perceived sonic, will over time produce indicators where the change made is being perceived as valuable or whether something seems to be amiss.

If the amiss indicator shows regularly, reverting back to a earlier set up, should be enough to allow for showing where the change is for the better or worse.

It is not uncommon for a sonic that is unfamiliar and causing questions to stir, actually proves at the time of a revert, that the latest produced sonic is the most attractive option to be maintained.

Looking at your Image, I can see opportunity for a substantial tidying up of the sonic, if the table is isolated from the TT and Pods by mounting these onto a Sub Plinth / Sub Sub Plinth, using different configurations of materials for the separators.

Ah, yes, but the wooden surface is the top of a 400lb oak chest from the early 1700s. I cannot get rid of it, nor move it elsewhere, so I must make the best of it.

And maybe, just maybe, oak that is nearly 400 years old is just about as dense or sonically equivalent to panzerholz? Bet no one has tested that!

Either way, Lee has agreed to make me tonearm panels that will attach to a 10lb pod at both ends.