Albert Porters after market panzerholz plinths

slate is a metamorphic rock with a highly aligned crystal structure.

I would expect different physical characteristics depending on orientation. Whether this is significant or not for this application? Who knows?

Mapman, In less sophisticated terms, that's what I said to the guy who posted those data on Vinyl Engine, to which Tim referred. He responded that orientation of the grain structure of the slate would make no difference to the outcome of his study, but he offered no relevant proof. Really, it does not matter. The very fact that MDF = slate by his method of analysis is proof to me that his method is irrelevant to the issue of what makes a good plinth. My SP10 Mk2 came to me originally in a custom-built MDF plinth; the MDF enhanced all the potential colorations inherent to the SP10 (a kind of "grayish" slightly dull coloration). In slate, and I am sure in Panzerholz too, the SP10 is transformed.

FWIW, I think the original plinth is made from obsidian, which is volcanic glass. Obsidian glass cools from lava rapidly and essentially has no crystalline structure whereas slate is a metamorphic rock formed over long periods of time under extreme heat and pressure and evidences strong alignment of crystalline molecules. So that is a very major structural difference. Does it affect the sound? Again, who knows....

Mapman, Do not agonize over the science, because there IS no good science in this endeavor. Experiments could be done but who would fund them and who has the time (and who cares enough)? The path is open to you based on empiric observation. Obsidian is probably excellent. Slate and Panzerholz, using some new tricks and probably more mass than the Technics obsidian plinths, seems better based on a consensus of opinion. Other kinds of hardwood probably also work well. I once considered buying an obsidian plinth and then mass-loading it with slate or other dense material. That might work, too.

Hello all,

Plinths are interesting beasts in that they perform differently with different mechanisms. Recently, several Garrard 301 turntables were tested side by side in the Washington DC area. Among the plinths there were ones of Panzerholtz, Baltic birch, slate, ebony combined with maple and one I do not recall. At the end of the day, the ebony/maple combination was the winner, according to the ears of those present. What does it mean? To me, it means that the material used may be somewhat friendly to the particular turntable in question.

Does it mean that Panzerholtz is best for a Techincs? Maybe, but let's not forget that different listeners like different flavors, and let's not forget that different materials when combined with others respond in different ways. How a top plate is made surely has an effect on the other components of a given turntable, including the plinth. A steel top plate may respond differently from an aluminum one, and two different aluminum ones may react differently depending on shape, thickness, etc. A turntable, like a system, should be considered as an entity unto itself, in my honest opinion.

Now, all of us have heard great turntables that have no plinth per se. Consider the Brinkman Balance, the Spiral Groove SG2, the Continuum, and other really good ones that come to mind. Most have no conventional plinths, yet they are considered among the world's best. Why? Could it be that the mechanisms of the vintage turntables with their cumbersome top plates need corrective attention the new designs do not require? Maybe.

When I designed the Saskia and its plinth, I had no idea what influence slate would have because I had never worked with the material before. I could do sort of a predictive analysis by studying available information, but the best I could hope for was a result that would not be detrimental to the design goal. Basically, I designed for isolation, so the plinth material would not be detrimental to the overall outcome. Considering that slate does not damp and only redirects resonance was only one challenge of the excercise. The whole time I was building and finishing the plinths for the Saskia from raw materials I was wondering how the end result would match my expectations. In the end, it worked out very well sonically. It is what was described to us in school as a "happy accident" I suppose. But was it? Maybe it was the consideration given and accommodations given.

How would the turntable with no top plate sound in a different material? I suppose it depends on the designer's objective, doesn't it? One can overbuild to outrun a possibly negative result, or he can design to accommodate one. Then again, he can work with a material that has proven itself to be favorable to a given design. What he cannot do is carte blanche accept that one material is inherently superior to another. The design will decide that.

Win