SP10 Mk II vs Mk III


A couple of guys here were planning to do listening comparisons of the Technics SP10 Mk II vs the Mk III, in their own homes and systems. Has anyone actually completed such a comparison? I am wondering whether the "upgrade" to the Mk III is actually worth it in terms of audible differences between the two tables. Possibly mounting either table in a well done wooden or slate plinth mitigates any sonic differences that would otherwise be heard. I am thinking of Albert Porter and Mike Lavigne in particular, who were going to do the comparison. Thanks for any response.
lewm
Lewm, the plinth is made of a combination of solid birds-eye maple and brazilian rosewoods. I did not weigh it, but based on my gym workouts, ha-ha, I figure around the 40lb mark +/- 5. My japanese lead plinth for my TT-101 is about the same at 20Kg.

I have tried it with various cones, no cones, sorbathane and the sprung version just seems to have better clarity and defintion to my poor ears. In that sense the SP-10 plinth then is a combination of mass loaded and sprung isolated. Interestingly the japanese heavy leaded plinth was designed as far as I can tell from surfing Asian websites for either Sony, Denon or Victor direct drives and I have sen a Garrard 301 also on one. I used to live in Asia and still travel there now on business and if I have time look / shop for audio goodies.

My floor is carpet on ply on sub floor nailed to concrete in a purpose built H/T & Audio room in the basement. I don't particularly suffer from floor resonance but would also prefer to have the turntables isolated on shelving attached to the wall if I could - another project waiting to happen!

Steve
Pryso, Thanks for that input. I was unaware that the rod in Albert's plinth actually goes thru to the bearing housing. Very ingenious. So you're correct; that IS different from what Raul has done. You've given me some food for thought; a similar device could in fact be placed under a slate plinth.

Raul, As regards your remark that the SP10 MkII and III may not be the best of their contemporary Japanese brethren, that may or may not be correct, but the point is moot, since those tables are so rare and unavailable. In any case, I would bet that any of them would also benefit from re-thinking the plinths they came in. In many cases it was a big hollow wood box, a nice box, but still a box. Last time I visited my son in Tokyo, I saw a mint Yamaha GT2000 sitting on the floor in an audio salon. Sadly, it had been promised to another customer. The price was actually quite reasonable, about $1500, I think. Anyway, the subject of this thread is the SP10 and its variants.
Hello everybody!

I am new of this forum. I am writing from Tuscany, Italy, where i live. I happened here looking for info on how to build a plinth for the SP10 MKII. I went quickly to the posts and there's already so much information that I must first of all say thank you to everybody.

My SP10 is flying here from Australia just now, i got it on ebay (from a respectable seller) a few days ago. I hope it will arrive safely...

I think that building a plinth is great fun! Also nice that all SP10 will look very differntly!

I've seen Albert Porter's plinth on soundfoutain and ordered there the template. So now I am working on the plinth project. I really liked Albert's ones (except a few minor hestetical choices), and I will probably work on the same ideas. Specifically i would like to ask you all if some of you has experience with graphite (carbon block) as a mean to add mass and dampen resonances. I can acces a cheap source for this material as well as a CNC machine to work it, so i wondered if it could be of any use.

Meanwhile, thank you again.
Silverprint, As far as I know, graphite has some excellent qualities for audio use, but I don't think it's very dense. In other words, the weight per unit of volume is not great. Therefore graphite might not be so good for mass loading. This is not to say that it could not be useful in building a plinth, but probably in conjunction with other more dense materials, like hardwoods or slate.
I think one of the advantages of carbon graphite would be constrained layer damping effects achieved by varying material thickness and directionality of carbon fibers. This is how it's done in bicycle frames to obtain strength where necessary as well as lightness. The resonant signature of the material could be varied throughout the construction-- which might have interesting if unpredictable effects unless computer modeled.