Upgrade from TW Acustic Raven AC-3 to what?

Not sure if there is a specific recommendation on mat type or need for it in the first place. I have tried the millenium mat extensively as well as the boston audio. My ears tell me no mat is better than either of these two.

I am now wondering if increasing the copper platter thickness by using one of those copper mats would be even better.

Andrew

That's another whole can of worms. But if the top surface of the platter is already copper, all that you would be doing by adding a copper mat is to increase the effective total mass of the platter. Sonic qualities should not change much. (Famous last words.)

My Raven AC-3 has remained the same although I changed the tonearm to SME V12, and the cartridge to My Sonic Lab Signature Gold.
I bought the AC-3 back when it was first introduced and was hot. My dealer told me it practically sold by itself. I gather TW is less newsy these days while many other new brands and models getting reported at shows and reviews...I am still fine with my AC-3. The quality has held up well. I am wondering though, that since TW is offering upgrades (Black Knight feet and motor and what not), whether any AC-3 owner has taken up any upgrades and can share their experience.

Alec,

As you know, there are those who constantly tweak to a fanatic point. Those guys try everything a manufacturer has to offer, and Raven owners are no exception. I know several of them, and from what I can gather they all disagree on the merits...like always. :-D

I suppose you'll have to see for yourself, right?

Best,
Win

.

Dear Alec,
Having read some of the early responses I think the idea of taking an unsuspended table and converting it into a suspended one by means of the support seems to defeat the object of the exercise ;^)

I know that this suggestion might go against the grain but assuming that you are applying the vinyl directly to the copper platter, have you considered trialling a few mats?
One reason I say this is that the mech impedance of the copper platter is dissimilar to vinyl and you may get a more acceptable result by improving the match?

Speaking from experience I was in a similar position to that which you describe. It seemed like sacrilege to add to what should be a perfect interface but I cured the problem by first of all adding the basis of the Ringmat Support System i.e. a hybrid mat consisting of a thin latex Base Mat plus the "Gold spot" Ringmat.

Further to this I also notice that dressing the cables to prevent undesirable vibration being passed into the T/T was critical. (In fact it is critical to suspended tables too but possibly more so here)

The stand I use is multi-stage (3 shelves), tri-spiked on each level (so no micro-rocking) and made not from maple but oak. It isn't massively heavy and the resonant frequency isn't too low - so it will act as a mechanical filter when situated on a concrete floor.
The spikes ensure that only a tiny proportion of vibration is passed from one level to the next and this shrinks correspondingly as you progress up the stack. By the time residual vibration reaches the T/T it has passed through 5 levels of minimal coupling (if you include 2 within a set of Stillpoints.)
Whatever is left we would hope would be dealt with by the T/T's own mass.
This basically leaves airborne feedback and the Supply/Tonearm cables as the final sources of feedback.

Airborne feedback is almost untreatable apart from a separate room or moving the T/T further away from the speakers. The T/T should handle this ok provided it isn't mounted directly on top of the speaker. ;^)
Mech cable resonance on the other hand is treatable. It's worth playing around with this factor as I mentioned earlier.
Hope my experience proves helpful in some way.