Albert Porters after market panzerholz plinths

Raul,

ok, i get it about what you were referring to.

OTOH it's clear we are not referring to the same thing at all.

you are mentioning about the stock SP-10 and removing the bottom-plate of the stock case-work in hopes of improving performance.

i am referring to completely removing the case-work and installing the motor and platter inside a custom plinth...and even that point is only related to the Mk3 due to it's considerable torque.

so my comment about a 'nude' SP-10 does not support your comments. they are related in a round about way but i don't share your viewpoint although it would not greatly surprise me if removing the bottom of the stock casework might be better. although i think it more likely that removing only the bottom plate would cause the remaining casework to resonate more.

i don't mean to be argurmentative; i'm simply trying to make sure that my intended meaning is clear.

++++ " Even seems to me that my SP-10s and Denon's could perform even better with out its metal bottom cover. I don't try it yet but maybe is time to make this test and see what happen. " +++++

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.

Mike is not suggesting running the Technics MK 3 nude. His comment does not support what you've been pressing since the beginning of this thread.

One Technics MK3 renovation by Dobbins removes the MK3 top cover with speed switches (which is often damaged) and puts the rest of the table into his heavy plinth. Speed change is still accomplished at the motor controller.

I leave the cover and switches and support the entire works with a heavy brass rod attached to an iron block fastened to the chassis with stainless steel. This mechanism locks down any vertical movement and flex while absorbing motor vibration.

I have no doubt Steve has addressed this problem in another way and gets excellent results. With either method, both of us and most others such as the famous original constrained layer MK3 plinth by Akito Knita rely on multi laminations, mass and constrained layers to bring out the best performance of these powerful tables.

Dear Mike/Albert: I'm not asking and don't need that you support nothing I posted.I know exactly what Mr. Doobins made because I seen at his place.

In my personal nude version I can't go with out the top " case " only the bottom one because I need it ( the top one ) to put on place the AT footers.

The subject is that many " things that surround the original SP are resonance/vibrations focus so is good to work with out it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Dear Mike and friends: You posted: +++++ " although i have not listened that way myself, i would be skeptical it would be optimal. " +++++

I think this statement, that I respect, said all about nude version discusion:

+++ although i have not listened.... +++++

My subject is not if I have reason or not. I already heard several DD TT with different new plinths and the nude version. At least what I'm saying is because I heard it.

All the ones that are " skeptical " on the subject never had the opportunity to heard a nude version and the ones that in direct or indirect way are already in the commercial plinth market have no interest about.

Enough and useless to go on from my part.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Dear Lewm: On other topic: TT torque. I would like what do you think on the whole torque subject?

In a home system IMHO we really don't need that fast start/stop that the SP-10 or DP100 or EMT has and that was asked in Radio broadcasting job or for Djs. These TTs were not designed for audiophile specific needs.

I never had on hand the today DD Monaco design and I can't speak if comes with that kind of very high torque.

We really need it? or a DD design for home systems really does not need it and maybe could work/perform better with lower torque? what do you think?

Maybe Teres too could put some light on this important TT characteristic? or Monaco TT owners and of course any one that could share his experiences about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.