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
Lew, not to muddy the waters but I believe there was more than one mat for the Technics. My Mk2A has the matching mat as the parts list, SFTG172-01. I saw another on a Mk2 that had more circular ribs and seemed to be lighter/less hard. I don't know if that was stock or not.

Also, does anyone have a stock Mk3 mat to compare part numbers against the one above?

I also have an AT-666 stabilizer (metal) mat that Raul recommended. I'm long overdue in trying it due to continued delays with a proper plinth for my Mk2A. Hopefully not much longer now.
Pryso, I had both a MkII and a Mk2A for a while. You are quite correct; there is a difference between the rubber mats supplied for those two tts. The MkII mat has those fine concentric rings, as you say, and may be more flexible, made of less rigid or thinner rubber, compared to the 2A mat. The Mk2A mat resembles, if it is not identical to, the rubber mat supplied with the Mk3. (I also have the correct original mat for my Mk3; it is not warped, but I expect to be using something more like the SAEC, based on my listening tests with the Mk2A and DP80.) Problem is also that my Mk2A mat is NOS, was never used and therefore warped a bit during storage. There must be a way to flatten it, but that is what motivated me to shell out money for the SAEC mat, which came highly recommended by Raul.

John, This business of piling one mat upon another seems a bit odd to me, unless it is to build up the mass to match that of the stock rubber mat, which is a good idea. I really like the Boston Audio Mat 1 on my Lenco, but it is way too light to use by itself on a Technics, due to possible effects on the servo.
Lew, wild guess here. On Vinyl Asylum there has been some discussion of boiling rubber tt belts to restore original tension, apparently as recommended by VPI. I'm wondering if you could boil your warped mat in an appropriately sized pan to see if the rubber "remembers" its original shape? You might begin with three minutes in boiling water, then try longer times in one minute increments to see if that does not fully do the job. I can't see how this would hurt your situation and it might help.

Good luck.
I have asked myself how the mat got warped in the first place, for a clue as to how to remove the warp. I assume it absorbed moisture, but I question my own hypothesis; why should rubber absorb moisture? Anyway, it's got to be totally flat to be useful as a platter mat, so whatever is done probably should be done with the thing under some sort of pressure to squeeze it flat. I guess brief boiling could not hurt it. It is NOS, was never used at all, came to me in original wrapping, complete with warp.
Lewm, What is the weight of the stock mat? Where did the info come re: servo and weight? I am still using the stock mat with my mkll and in the market for on now. Who did you purchase your Saec from and how much does it weigh?
thanks
Richard