Albert Porters after market panzerholz plinths

Dbcooper,

Its an interesting question, about testing a material to try and determine its sonic properties. Let me relate an anecdote which might be appropriate.

A couple of years ago, I was invited to one of the "jam" sessions held at Gregory Singer's violin shop on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. Singer has a small performance space inside his wonderful shop, filled with some of the world's finest stringed instruments. Not only do Juilliard students often come to play, but so do some of the world's finest concert musicians. On the night I came, cellist Nicholas Anderson brought his Gofriller Count Marcello cello, made by Gofriller in Venice is 1697. The group played the Brandenberg Concerto, which was written a couple of decades after this cello was made. To say that I have NEVER heard anything like this instrument is an understatement. Even better was that I got to sit about 5 feet away from it, and I also had a chance to see the cello's back. Which is the point of this response- this cello has a bookmatched knot, not a small knot, but a really big, ugly knot, in butterfly fashion, on the upper section of the cello's rear.

I would think that in 1697 there was not a shortage of wood to use for making cellos. Its extremely rare to see even one knot in a Strad, Guarneri, etc. Yet this cello had not one, but two knots. As an aside, Pablo Casals and Jacqueline du Pre both played Gofriller instruments, but the real issue is, why did Gofriller use this material?

I don't think he did any "tests" in the sense you mean. There were no labs back then.

I'm not suggesting tests are not worthwhile, but you would have to know what you are testing for. Would it be transmission speed of sound through the material, and of what frequencies? And what thicknesses? In the case of Albert, since he is using a kind of clamping system to drain vibrations from his SP10 chassis, this would certainly affect the range of vibrations or resonances being transmitted into the plinth, so then how would you test that?

Furthermore, you would need to know what parameters actually make for the "best" sound. Given this thread, with people like Raul saying they know what the best sound is, I really doubt that there would be a lot of agreement on that score.

Jonathan Weiss
OMA

Heavy + rigid = better isolation.

Is it any more complicated than that?

Jonathan Im well aware why a musician would want to play these irremplacable instruments. Im sure these master craftsmen centuries ago did have a method of tests but long forgotten.

Why not put them on display and have a new one built for a tiny fraction of the cost? If needed to try to replicate the tone of these old instruments, ancient wood is available to purchase today

I simply asked,please read above again and I,m not looking for a fight its just that I disagree about test methods.

250 pounds of mass loading with slate is one method to do I guess and Alberts plywood plinth for his sp10mk2 was the beginning of the end to his Walker table.

To have answers why these vintage tables react so positive to certain material and built methods would be of interest would it not?

To have answers why these vintage tables react so positive to certain material and built methods would be of interest would it not?

I have ideas about that.

First of all the Technics SP10 MK2 and MK3 sound good in their original Obsidian plinth. They sound good with the original Technics arm too.

The MK3 is especially powerful, expending a lot of energy keeping speed perfectly as set. I think any after market plinth, even one made only with multiple layers of Baltic Birch properly bonded, result in an improvement over the original Obsidian.

When you move into a plinth like Steve Dobbins builds, Oswald Mills builds and I build, you simply improve upon lesser methods.

Higher quality, heavier, less resonant materials push these tables up against the best out there, regardless of when they were built. I think belt drive is less sensitive to this but also result in improvement when heavier designs are implemented.

In other words, Mapman is correct

Heavy + rigid = better isolation.

Is it any more complicated than that?

As Raul frequently states, mating these tables (new or old) with proper arm and cartridge combo finishes the job we begin with table and plinth.

Albert, a question about the Boston Audio mat on a sp10 mk 2. Where you able to fit the standard mat-1 on the Mk2 platter or did you have to have one custom sized? I ask because the mat's diameter per BA is 293.5mm and the diameter inside the lip that I measured is 292.5mm.