TT mats

To the OP's point, why is a/any mat relevant for his/her TT?

This is lost in the discussion?

Slaw, to the contrary, most all the posts ARE relevant to the OP's question.  Mostly the posts speak to the "why" part or to the sonic signature of one mat or another. From that it should be obvious that the mat makes a big difference in sonics. (At least I believe so.)  For info related specifically to the VPI Scoutmaster, one would need to know which of a few different possible platters is mounted on the OP's turntable (from what I can tell, VPI offers a few options) and to have auditioned more than one mat on that particular platter.  That qualification would narrow the audience for this thread by quite a bit.

I am a firm believer in TT mats . I purchased my Boston Mat 2 4 years ago to use on a SL1210 MK5 that I paid less for then the mat . I used that mat on top of the 1/8 stock rubber mat . I felt the rubber mat would help with the platter ringing issue and the Boston with the mechanical reflections from the stylus vinyl interface . This table performed very well until I upgraded to a SP10 Mk2 . The Boston is now on the SP10 with the 1/8 rubber mat and a K-Works ERSA Mat to handle EMI Issues . I stumbled on the K-Works mat by meeting Igor @ a listening session . I am familiar with ERS paper and use it . It sounded like a good idea so I tried it and it eliminated a slight amount of haze . I run a very LOMC cartridge .04 mv . It all adds up to better SQ.

Is there a feeling that mats are more critical on direct drive tables than belt drives? If the OP is still reading, we should clarify that.