Hello Dgob,
For me, this is the mat the rules them all. In my system, the Mat2 works way better than the Mat1. The lower treble was an area that the Mat1, in my opinion, was a bit fuzzy. the Mat2 renders the lower treble with increased clarity and focus.
The biggest improvement is in bass slam, texture and definition. For some reason, the Mat2 manages to go lower in the bass, while at the same time tightening the bass. I went back and forth several times between the Mat1, SAEC SS-300 and the Mat2. The marked increase in bass depth and definition was a constant that the Mat2 was able to accomplish everytime I put it back on the Mambo.
I'm very impressed about the Mat2 being able to offer a very dramatic improvement over the Mat1. It has much better sound definition than the Mat1. All this came as a surprise to me since I was just expecting a minor improvement overall.
The Mat2 is in a much higher league than the Mat1. Boston Audio should have called it the Mat5, since it sounds about 5 times better than the Mat1, at least to my ears.
A few more notes:
- The Mat2 is as quiet as the Mat1.
- The Mat2 offers better balance and definition from top to bottom.
- The Mat2 is very rigid. It won't bow when using a thick O-ring with a reflex clamp, which was always a problem with the Mat1.
- The Mat2 is 5.11mm, measured with a calibrated Mitutoyo coolant-proof caliper. The Boston Audio website states that it is 5mm thick. The original Mat1 is 3mm thick.
- The weight is 564 grams (this is not dead accurate since I don't have a calibrated scale). The Boston Audio website says it weights 540 grams. The original Mat1 weights 360 grams.
Best,
iSanchez
