Right now I use one always on my VPI HW-40, but I rarely used the one I had on my previous VPI Prime. The reason is difficult to explain, the one on the HW-40 is easy to use, whereas the one of the Prime was finicky, wouldn't always seat cleanly or easily and was just generally not quite as easy to use. I also have a Technics SL 1200 GAE, which of course does not have a periphery ring so I have the perspective of comparison. I also have used the vacuum hold down system employed by SOTA. The advantage of either the periphery ring or a vacuum hold down is that these hold the record snuggly against the platter. This flattens the record of course, but it also reduces or eliminates any resonances that might be induced in the records themselves. Is there an audible benefit? In some cases yes, and the effect can be quite noticeable. There are many times, however, when there is no appreciable difference in sound. In my experience, the cartridge plays a role in this with some being much more sensitive than others. Another factor is that stereo records are more likely to benefit for either a periphery ring or a vacuum hold down system than mono records. With respect to the trade-offs between a periphery ring and a vacuum hold down system, the periphery ring is a passive device with no moving parts and nothing to go out of whack. On the other hand it is helpless to cope with a record that is manufactured improperly such as one that is out of spec undersized. The vacuum hold down system is easier to use at the expense of being more complex. Either is able to do more than a record flattener alone can do and neither has the potential to damage a record.
