Acrylic platter


I have a Project expression II turntable which comes with an aluminum platter . I was wondering on buying an Acrylic platter made specifically for my turntable . My question is will it make a difference for the better changing my aluminum platter for an acrylic one ? I'm using an Ortofon Salsa moving coil cartridge with it , project speed box , cables are JPS superconductor Q and phono stage is the dedicated moving coil gold phono board of the Audible Illusions 3A preamp .
mannypr55

Showing 7 responses by nandric

My previous TT Audiomeca J1 had acrylic layers with lead in between, my present Kuzma Stabi Reference has also acrylic layers with aluminum plate in between. You can buy an acrylic mat for much less money, try and if satisfy you can eventual glue the mat on your aluminum platter.
I just compared the SEAC SS 300 (solid) mat with the acrylic one but 5mm thick. My friend Lew advised the SEAC for my SP 10 mk II. Now I was always an admirer of P.Lurne who was the TT designer by Goldmund first and started his own company 'Audiomeca'later. I owned his Audiomeca J1 with acrylic/lead platter and nearly bought an mat because there was any on this TT. But I thought I should ask first instead to buy first and than ask later. So I eventualy grasped that this TT or rather the platter should be used without any mat. The theory behid was that acrylic and the stuff of which LP's are made are similar in ,uh, structure. Well when I corrected the arm hight for the 'level difference' I was stunned by the fact that this, say, 40 euro mat sounds better as the 'metal one'. Actually 'metal on metal' make no sense to me. And I nearly bought the expensive Micro copper mat but was, lucky me, scared by its weight (and price).
But as Dgarretson already mentioned one should first measure the lenght of his spindle. I have just sufficient space to put my Orsonic DS 200 disc stabilizer on my records. To me this stabilizer is indispensable.
Dear Lew, I am sorry for the confusion. I thought that the context was 'obvious' but I also know that many thoughts are seldom explicite and contain implicite parts. The acrylic mat (5mm) I was talking about I own for some time but never used because I got, also thanks to you, the SEAC metal mat which is much better than the original Technics
rubber mat. So I was very happy with the SEAC mat and had no reason whatever to search for some other. But because my comrade Don was searching for 'some' acrlylic mat I remebered my own and wanted to check this one first before giving to him whatever advice or present(grin). The 40 euro was my guess about the price.
So to check this acrylic mat I removed the SEAC mat from my Sp10 and was surprised with the sound of the acrylic in comparison with the SEAC metal mat. But thinking about possible explanation I remebered the Lurne's philosophy about the platters and of course the circumstance that I owned one of his TT's the Audiomeca J1 which had no mat at all. His explantion was that acrylic and vinyl have similar 'structure'. This make more sense to me then 'metal on metal' approach. But this is of course my own subjective opinion without any 'objective claim'.
I own the Kuzma Stabi Reference at present which also use acrylic but like Lurne's Audiomeca as a sandwich with aluminum plate in between instead of lead like Lurne, probaly because lead is not allowed at present. So I am not sure if your objection would apply to such use of acrylic also? I have some idea how metal platters are 'balanced' but have no idea how the acrylic platters are made. I also have no preference one way or the other for the simple reason that I am an simple amateur. Anyway I would also like to try those Boston Audio mats that you also mentioned in your advice to me. But back then I was able to get the SEAC mat for an very attractive price.
Dear Lew, Exactly what I thought about Richard: 'fearless and adventuresome'. Who else would dare to mess with, uh, 'the best' DD TT ever? In my previous post I mentioned to have 'some idea' how metal platters are 'balanced'. Well by my first Thorens I noticed those 'holes at random' on the underside of the platter. Those were the balancing 'holes'. By my next TT, the Linn LP-12 there were no such 'holes' so the only way to balance this platter is on the (CNC?) lathe. I also owned 3 different Linn platters and all of them have had different weight which means that they were 'processed' on the lathe till they were balanced. To my mind and in retrospection the only part of this TT which is made well and probably the explanation of its succes. As you I also have 'my own machinist' who owns an CNC lathe. Observing this kind of work is like looking at some artist. Those 'machines' move on way or the other but always around. To be able to make whatever on those machines is like an wonder. This imply mastership in order to produce an masterpiece. And those well balanced platters are each an masterpiece. BTW both platters on my previous Audomeca J1 and Kuzma are 8 kgr. each and both with inverted bearing. So I suspect that if the use of lead was allowed Kuzma would copy also this material from Lurne(grin). If I was not 100% sure that he is from Slovenia I would think that he is Chinese...Besides I never told to anyone in Serbia that I bought whatever from Slovenia...
Dear Richard, ''different operators produce different 'quality' even thought they are using the same program.'' Lew is better equiped for this domain of knowledge but a big part of the frontal lobe 'govern' our hands. Every single person who has seen Michelangelo's
David or Pieta has difficulty to believe that those are made by human hands. And he (1475-1565) had only chisels and hammers to his disposal. Back then the church was the
most important 'pricipal' while the church authorities were capable to select the 'best workers' available to build and decorate their churches. We use the word 'talent' to express or explain the differences in 'quality' which you also mentioned. However 'talent' is probably the gift of the 'mother nature' but the fact is also that without practice no mastership is possible. Because of the division of labour many of us are not even able to use an hamer in a proper way despite the constitution of our frontal lobe.
Addendum for Richard. You may be interested to know that
physicist designer David Fletcher and the master machinist
Demian Davidson produced togehter the so called 'The arm',
'The better Breuer' or simply the Sumiko 800 tonearam.
This tonearm is handcrafted from 160 different parts and was
provided with 6 different counterweights. For the carts
from 6 g till 22 g. Those weights are sold depending from
the cart which customers owned. So the most Sumiko owners
have just one weight. I made much effort to complete my
weights and even assisted 'my machinist' by the production of the
missed 4 weights. My job was to measure each one and raport
how many grams needed to be cut of. I was very careful not
to cross the 2 meter border line to the 'monster'
(aka the CNC lathe). Now I think that I am the only person
who owns an complete Sumiko 800 with all the weights.
To my mind this one as well as the FR-64s and the
Triplanar are the real works of art.
Dear Lew, I understood Richard in the same way as you. My
mentioninig of the chisel and hammer by Michelangelo and
(implicite) the old lathes by creation of the Sumiko 800,
FR-64 and Triplanar was not about the 'instruments used'
but about the masters who used them. I even try to explain
what 'talent' means. Well 'talent' is an expression or an
linguistic entity but the talent is something that can be
observed in the reality. Something that shows itself.
I hope that this is understandable English. Anyway it
seems to me that all three of us have similar thoughts
about the 'mastership' which, uh, produces the 'masterpieces'.