Albert Porters after market panzerholz plinths

There is no cheap way out for an effective plinth. It took many hours to develop Albert's plinths and so far many, many months of listening. The first plinth made from Baltic birch was very good and in it the SP-10 MkII trounced the Walker, using identical cartridges. The first Panzerholz plinths were actually made for the Garrard 301 and made mincemeat of the $500 built-up plywood ones from Europe. The single arm Panzerholz plinth for the SP10 was a significant improvement over the layered plywood version and the new two arm version, with its higher mass offered even more improvement, especially in the midrange. Panzerholz is frighteningly expensive and Albert's plinths are very labor intensive to fabricate, so the prices are at a place where very little profit is made. There are very few audio products out there where the cost of the raw materials represent one third of the retail price. The opinions on the effectiveness of these plinths aren't Albert's alone. There are at least twenty longtime and highly critical analog fanatics in his group whose opinions helped shape the design over the last three years.

John

Dear Nikola, If my slate plinths are at all "beautiful" it is only because the company that cut the slate for me does a nice neat job. Once I got the slate slabs back here, I just sealed them with a mixture of oils, and that's all I did for beauty. (The sealer makes the gray-ish slate go more toward the black color.) I paid not much attention to beauty.

Dear Raul, I consider that we are friends, so this is a friendly discussion. To me the issue of mounting the tonearm on a separate base is a whole different can of worms. There are really good reasons to link the tonearm and turntable bearing solidly in space that have little to do with massive plinths. But I do admire your willingness to experiment with all sorts of unfashionable ideas. I HAVE heard an SP10 in a minimal, low-mass plinth, and it was quite unremarkable. I have not tried mounting any tonearm separate from the turntable chassis, because I just think that's not a good idea. Here is my thought experiment that leads me to this conclusion: Suppose you are in a small boat floating in a lake. Someone asks you to perform an intricate task by hand, like calligraphy for example. The paper on which you have to write can be either in a separate boat, so that you have to lean out of your boat and do calligraphy in an adjacent boat, OR you can have the paper and pen in your own boat. Obviously, the task is going to be easier when you, the paper on which you have to write, and your tools are in the same boat, because a second boat is going to bob up and down independently of yours, thereby increasing the difficulty of doing your job maximally well. That's how I think of the tonearm/cartridge vs the turntable; they should be in the same mechanical universe, not in two different universes. The tonearm/cartridge movements due to environmental influences should be identical to those seen at the platter bearing. If you mount the tonearm on a separate pod, there are no guarantees of that. You are introducing another source of error, needlessly. I know there are fancy, expensive turntables that feature separate tonearm pods; I think the idea is fundamentally flawed.

John, There are 'modest' people who are also satisfied with
the 'second best' and probable also able to buy some LP's. That is btw the reason that I am so kind to Lew.

Regards,

Nandric, I understand that. I am a person of less than modest means myself. My point is that the creation of an effective plinth is more than just the application of idle woo. There is a lot of work involved and for Raul to casually dismiss it as worthless is unfair to everyone involved. He certainly hasn't tried Albert's plinth so his opinion of it is of no value itself.

John

Dear John: First than all I'm not diminish the Albert job or any other person job. I was very clear in my answer to Lewm about, please read it.

In the other side and like Albert point out too: why don't test a Denon/Technics/Pioneer/Kenwood in non-plint fashion and then share your experiences against the plinth version.

+++++ " The first plinth made from Baltic birch was very good and in it the SP-10 MkII trounced the Walker, using identical cartridges. " +++++

that test IMHO was invalid because there were at least 2-3 different parameters that had influence in the quality performance that preclude a precise answers: different tonearm, different arm board and different tonearm wire.

In that time and when I was ( for second time: thank you Albert. ) in Albert home I told him this.

Btw, I'm not only twice in Albert's home listening his audio system but the second time I knew 7-8 persons of his group and I have a more or less clear their aptitudes on system listening/discern, not only that but Albert knows very well my " ears ".
Additionally I had other audio systems DD TT plinth experiences other that with Albert.

Not only that I own two different ( self design. ) heavy plinths ( 50 kg each one. ) that I used and test with my DD TTs ( Lewm, no stand alone arm board. ).

So I'm not totally unaware like you think.

Anyway, the subject is that there are more than one alternative for the DD TT overall approach.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.