Albert Porters after market panzerholz plinths

I think it is difficult to predict the sonic outcome solely on the basis of the plinth material alone.

Here's why:

Because a stereo system is a matrix of ..."systems, within a system" each having their own contributing tone and resonance qualities and each are affected by the others in the context of the whole, therefore the variables and contingencies are incalculable, therefore, at best we can only navigate through this minefield by starting first with generalizations and then through experimentation, trial and error and then using our own ears can we finally arrive at a place that provides us with a sound that is pleasing to our subjective individual tastes.

A cartridge is a system, a tonearm is a system, a speaker is a system, a amp is a system, a room is a "system", a support platform is a system, cables are a system, tubes are a system, a turntable is a system, on and on....plus, each of those systems uses a different materials and in different shapes, sizes, thicknesses, with different mass,

Therefore in one persons system i can see slate complimenting the rest of their system better than panzerholz might or vice versa.

The other factor that is often overlooked is whether a plinth material is being properly "executed" together with the rest of the systems on the turntable. Just one example (and there are many), the panzerholz plinth is heavy and has great dampening qualities but is the armboard touching or not touching the panzerholz? are the armboard torque bolts too loose or too tight? which creates either a sink for noise or is perhaps trapping the noise in the tonearm and back to the sensitive stylus. Etc, etc, So, you can have a great plinth material but "drop the ball" in utilizing its inherent dampening qualities. So experimentation can have great value. Its hard work and tedious at times but that is where the magic can sometimes happen. We might be so close to striking the vein of gold but give up one day too early !

I would venture that a schroder arm (wood tube) might sound better on a 200lb slate plinth (soft stone) than it would on a panzerholz plinth, whereas a metal tubed (metal)tonearm better on the panzerholz plinth(wood).

So, wood and stone i predict will have better synergy than metal and stone.

Now to muliply the problem, what is the cartridge body material made from? (smiling) Are the speaker cabinets made from real walnut or mdf based? (smiling again) All these infinite factors effect the final tone and resolution of your sound.

In the end, i think all you can do is work with the best craftmanship in audio designs that are built with passion, mix their components as best as you can, listen and then steer/dial in that last bit of sound to get to a place that is musically satisfying. You do this, i think, by looking at the materials the components are made from, make an educated guess, then try it and listen if you've moved the sound in the direction it needs to go. No, i dont have all the answers , just more questions.

Panzerholz is a very good base ingredient to "cook" with but it is amongst a plethora of other good ingredients too, i think it just depends ultimately on... "how good the cook is".

Dear Vertigo,
Some days it hardly pays to get out of bed.
But I don't think the situation is as hopeless as you paint it, in terms of predicting outcomes. I find that if a "system" (using your definition of the term) affects the sound a certain way in a certain context, then it will tend to do that in other contexts as well. The unpredictability lies in the ear/brain of the listener.
Also, if we take that the job of a plinth is essentially the same no matter what it is made of, which is to be "neutral", then it follows that Panzerholz and slate should not be so different from one another.
Anyway, my head is spinning.

Hi Albert,
You can see a photo of my SP10 Mk3 slate and hardwood combination plinth on my system site. The wood base is made of solid cherry and baltic birch. Underneath I have mounted a brass block, recessed into the wood base and dead center under the bearing housing, with a threaded brass rod that contacts the bottom of the housing. Same idea as yours, only I used brass for all parts, and the brass rod has a slightly finer thread pattern compared to yours. I am very thrilled with the results, needless to say. Paul Dang (I think) in Houston made the wood base for me to my specs. Very nice guy, and his workmanship is superb. The Mk3 is or was NOS, but I had Bill Thalmann work his magic on it nevertheless. Six bolts hold the slate to the wood base. Five more hold the Mk3 down tightly against the surface of the slate.

Lewn,

I think its just that i have a very high standard of what i expect a "hi end stereo" to do. For some of the prices some have shelled out here you would think their sound would be absolutely amazing, yet the casual listener probably would not be wowed or amazed. I have heard some very expensive systems and some ultra expensive systems and have been very underwhelmed. They all seem to suffer from some problem or deficiency that makes them seem rather mediocre. With that said, i think as you move to the more exotic materials, designers and components things are more within reach of being what i think they should be when i first began my foray into "hi end". Guys who are just entering and becoming members have no idea just how far they will have to go and how hard they will have to work, in listening , comparing, buying , selling just to start breaking the surface of "getting special results". Even then it will take some luck, some careful planning to get there. Alot of "midfi stuff" sold here...i think is not much better than a system sold at a london drugs store and it never goes under the guise of "hi end" and some of them sound pretty good.

I admit i am a little let down by "reviews", jaded by money lost on "midfi products" advertised as "hi end audio" but all i'm trying to do is say ...the road to bliss is a complicated one, a slow one and an expensive one. I believe this to be accurate, so i consider myself more of a realist than a pessimist. The flood of turnover products is my proof. I feel i am getting close to try hi end sound though...and i'm sure others are getting their too...by the way congrats on your new sp10mk3 with reed arm. That looks like it has lots of potential to be a sonic stunner! Nice!

Lewn,

I think this better illustrates what i'm trying to get across.

Simon yorke s10 designer, a stereophile interview(taken from a review of one of his tables:

***I questioned Yorke about the laminate; he told me defiantly that "I have a box as big as this sofa at home full of materials I've tried for armboards. It sounds preposterous, but I've been driving along in my car and I've seen things lying by the side of the road and I've put on the brakes and jumped out of the car and grabbed this thing and put it back in the car and taken it home and machined an armboard out of it to see what would happen and listened to it. It's kind of obsessive, really. You can talk about machining and all the bullshit people talk about—bearing tolerances—but materials are awfully important. And if you change these materials you can make [two] turntables from the same set of drawings...[that have] completely different sonic signatures. I've got boxes worth of platters. I've made platters out of wood, stone, glass—any number of things. The same with armboards." ****

Also as you say...****if we take that the job of a plinth is essentially the same no matter what it is made of, which is to be "neutral..."

But what is neutral? And how do we get it? How many different sonic attributes does a material need to be able to pull off RIGHT in order to portray NEUTRAL perfectly. (alot) I think you've made my point. We THINK to arrive at neutral is a SIMPLE endeavor, yet micheal fremers former reference table designer simon yorke is slamming his brakes on the highway searching for a great armboard material!!! Why do you think he didnt just order some slate or panzerholz?

Again as i said now multiply that by the materials used in other systems and theyre quantities/qualities AND how they will ultimately interact with a plethora of other items within a system, you realize the complexity of arriving at the finest level of playback is complicated.

Notice that simon must obviously do alot of experimenting and not all of it is objective or can be predicted or measured. I take that to mean that sound and how it will manifest itself is to some degree still a mystery. Remember also that he did his listening and designing in some degree IN ISOLATION (as do all/alot of designers,ie they use theyre own gear, cables, cartridge,(not yours) to fine tweak. This means that his results to a greater or lesser degree are biased toward his system not necessarilty ours , therefore results will vary to some degree, hence the complicatedness of it all.

Yes, we can and do make progress and we can feel safe that a slate or panzerholz plinth are good bets and a very good place to start but their not blanket, across the board answers or guarantees of anything (i think)(and i think maybe some think they ARE)...but for the finest of finest nuances to be brought out in a system, that last, little bit, you have to experiment with mats, cartridge bolt torques, footers, cables, cartridge shims, tube rolling, racks, different armboard materials, speaker placement, vibration control, room treatment and you kinda have to do it on your own and trust your ears.

I think what makes vinyl playback so full of potential and special over digital is the fact that vinyl playback is DEPENDENT on the mechanical vibrations of MATERIALS to mimick reality.