View Full Version : P-mount cartridge question


wlmill
10-26-2011, 06:56 PM
Hi, I talked about this a little bit on another thread. I have a Technics SL-Q30, with an Audio-Technica AT92ECD P-mount cartridge. I have thought about buying the aftermarket shibata stylus from LPgear, however it seems a little pricy. It is more than I want to pay for a stylus right now. For that kind of money I could purchase a pretty good used turntable that accepts standard mount cartridges, which I am planning on doing. I am planning on keeping the Technics SL-Q30 until then, and I want to get the best sound out of it as possible.

I have heard that the Shure N97XE stylus will fit the Shure M92E cartridge. If this is so, would I have to change the tracking force on my table? I can adjust both the tracking force and antiskate on this turntable. before I spend money to do this, do you think this cartridge combination would sound any better than the AT92ECD?

hifi_nut
10-26-2011, 07:24 PM
Man, I wish Hakaplan ( Howard ) were here to tackle this one.

goldwax
10-26-2011, 07:39 PM
Hi, I talked about this a little bit on another thread. I have a Technics SL-Q30, with an Audio-Technica AT92ECD P-mount cartridge. I have thought about buying the aftermarket shibata stylus from LPgear, however it seems a little pricy. It is more than I want to pay for a stylus right now. For that kind of money I could purchase a pretty good used turntable that accepts standard mount cartridges, which I am planning on doing. I am planning on keeping the Technics SL-Q30 until then, and I want to get the best sound out of it as possible.

I have heard that the Shure N97XE stylus will fit the Shure M92E cartridge. If this is so, would I have to change the tracking force on my table? I can adjust both the tracking force and antiskate on this turntable. before I spend money to do this, do you think this cartridge combination would sound any better than the AT92ECD?

Seems like a lot of work and uncertainty for results that may not pan out for you. Why are you unhappy with the AT92ECD? I run a couple on different turntables and am very pleased with them. Instead of putting $40 into a new Shure stylus, why don't you wait and put that money toward a better universal-mount table?

Also wondering what your time line for upgrading your TT is.

wlmill
10-26-2011, 08:56 PM
Seems like a lot of work and uncertainty for results that may not pan out for you. Why are you unhappy with the AT92ECD? I run a couple on different turntables and am very pleased with them. Instead of putting $40 into a new Shure stylus, why don't you wait and put that money toward a better universal-mount table?

Also wondering what your time line for upgrading your TT is.

Don't get me wrong, I am very happy with the AT92ECD, it is a great sounding cartridge. I was just wondering if I could make this Turntable sound any better? I have heard the Shure N97XE is a pretty good sounding cartridge, and was curious if anyone had tried the stylus from the N97XE in the M92E?

I am hoping to get a new turntable within the next three months. I am hoping to find a nice used one. After I posted this question, I thought the same thing. Maybe I will just hold on to the money and buy a turntable.

boreas
10-26-2011, 10:10 PM
I believe the N97xE will fit the M92E body. Both are Shure's "Vee Bottom" cartridges. I wouldn't do it though. Frankly, quality control on the N97xE styli sucks. You're just as likely to get a bad one as a good one.

If you don't actually have the M92E to install a different stylus in I'd just stick with the AT92ECD. If you do have the M92e I'd look for a NOS N111HE, N94E, N104E or the JICO equivalents.

John

lico
10-26-2011, 10:26 PM
The N97xe will fit the M92E. It fits on a Shure M104E P mount cartridge, which interchangeable with the M92E.

Will it sound better than the AT92E? My subjective opinion is no. The AT92E sounds better. Took me a while to admit it, since I paid a lot more for my Shure M97xe than a AT92E. I'd like to try one of those shibata styli sometime myself.

wlmill
10-26-2011, 11:08 PM
The N97xe will fit the M92E. It fits on a Shure M104E P mount cartridge, which interchangeable with the M92E.

Will it sound better than the AT92E? My subjective opinion is no. The AT92E sounds better. Took me a while to admit it, since I paid a lot more for my Shure M97xe than a AT92E. I'd like to try one of those shibata styli sometime myself.

Yes, that shibata would be nice. I would like to have it, but I don't know if I want to pay the price.

boreas
10-26-2011, 11:24 PM
I should add a couple of things to my earlier post.

Yes, you would have to reset the VTF if you were to install an N97xE, not because the stylus requires a different VTF (it doesn't) but because it's heavier than the N92E so it would increase the VTF.

The heavier stylus assembly would also mean that the scale on the SL-Q30 counterweight would be unreliable so you'd need to reset the VTF with a scale or stylus force gauge.

This would not be necessary with the three styli I mentioned in my earlier post. These are all designed to fit a P-mount cartridge and conform to the T4P spec for weight and overhang.

John

wlmill
10-26-2011, 11:29 PM
I should add a couple of things to my earlier post.

Yes, you would have to reset the VTF if you were to install an N97xE, not because the stylus requires a different VTF (it doesn't) but because it's heavier than the N92E so it would increase the VTF.

The heavier stylus assembly would also mean that the scale on the SL-Q30 counterweight would be unreliable so you'd need to reset the VTF with a scale or stylus force gauge.

This would not be necessary with the three styli I mentioned in my earlier post. These are all designed to fit a P-mount cartridge and conform to the T4P spec for weight and overhang.

John
That is what I thought, I think I might just continue using the AT92ECD.

lico
10-26-2011, 11:44 PM
I have a N104E Jico equivalent on my Shure P mount. It sounds nice - but I still get some sibalence on tracks compared to the AT92E. Maybe the Shure needs more breaking in - or maybe it's because the cartridge I put it on is old, who knows. It's the kind of thing I probably would not notice unless I did an A/B compare, as with most things audio. Makes me think the AT92E is hard to beat, unless you pay a lot more.

Or I might be tempted to try this...

http://www.garage-a-records.com/proddetail.php?prod=4213he

Multiplex
10-27-2011, 12:13 AM
The N97xe will fit the M92E. It fits on a Shure M104E P mount cartridge, which interchangeable with the M92E.

Will it sound better than the AT92E? My subjective opinion is no. The AT92E sounds better. Took me a while to admit it, since I paid a lot more for my Shure M97xe than a AT92E. I'd like to try one of those shibata styli sometime myself.

It's funny, the differences in our systems and ears...

I tend to disagree with that. Though it is a fantastic buy, I find the Audio Technica to be fatiguing. It has a bright, dynamic, "exciting" sort of sound that can be quite impressive on certain albums. Channel separation is very good, too. However, I always find myself a little irritated with the AT92ECD after prolonged listening.

When set up properly, the M97xE can sound beautiful and detailed. It is too subdued for some, but I love the smooth mids and deep lows. The highs seem more precise, and offer a little more space than the AT. It also handles sibilance better than the AT and tracks lighter. It is particularly great if your system tends to be a little bright or gets brash at higher volumes.

I don't know about the P-Mount thing though... The 1/2" Shure M97xE is extremely finicky to set up, and to complicate matters, many N97xE styli are defective. If you do this, make sure the retailer you buy from has a satisfaction guarantee. If it is to be mounted in a P-mount table, you must examine the cantilever to make sure it is perfectly straight in line with the cart body, and not skewed or rotated. Also make sure the diamond tip is properly aligned on the cantilever. These issues are not a big deal on a 1/2" mount, because you can compensate for improper zenith by rotating the cartridge in the headshell. Not so with a P-Mount.

Not so sure how close overhang would come either... You will have to compare the length of the M97xE cantilever to the original on your P-Mount cart. It should be okay, as long as they are within a mm or two.

Another, perhaps simpler option would be to upgrade the AT92ECD to a Vivid Line stylus for about $80. That would be a considerable improvement for maybe a few $$ less than the Shibata.

http://www.lptunes.com/Audio-Technica-8008-cartridge-stylus-p/ats8008.htm

I've never heard this one, but I have heard Beatcomber's samples of the Vivid on a Stanton. It's impressive! The Vivid's trackability should rival or better the Shure. Detail would probably also be better. The AT92 will likely retain that bright "AT sound," but you can also experiment with resistance loading to tame it back if that is an issue for you.

.
.
.
Addition:
I have a N104E Jico equivalent on my Shure P mount. It sounds nice - but I still get some sibalence on tracks compared to the AT92E. Maybe the Shure needs more breaking in - or maybe it's because the cartridge I put it on is old, who knows. It's the kind of thing I probably would not notice unless I did an A/B compare, as with most things audio. Makes me think the AT92E is hard to beat, unless you pay a lot more.

Or I might be tempted to try this...

http://www.garage-a-records.com/proddetail.php?prod=4213he

Hmmm. Now, that looks interesting... Wonder who makes it?

sachu888
10-27-2011, 01:07 AM
EDIT:Wrong suggestion,I thought he has Shure cart.

Regards,
Sachin

goldwax
10-27-2011, 01:19 AM
Again, why fool with a Shure and various adjustments or drop $80 on a new AT stylus when either solution is only going to last you three months? Why not stick with the current AT till you're ready to get a new TT. It's not a bad cart, so why not keep your dry and wait to agonize over cart selection when you have a better and more permanent table?

boreas
10-27-2011, 01:29 AM
Again, why fool with a Shure and various adjustments or drop $80 on a new AT stylus when either solution is only going to last you three months? Why not stick with the current AT till you're ready to get a new TT. It's not a bad cart, so why not keep your dry and wait to agonize over cart selection when you have a better and more permanent table?

If it were me, I'd keep the SL-Q30 as a spare. It's one of the better Technics P-mounts, full auto, quartz controlled with an adjustable counterweight that allows fine tuning within the 1.0 to 1.5 gram T4P standard. That might make having a better than average cartridge and stylus mounted on it somewhat more important.

John

Multiplex
10-27-2011, 01:49 AM
If it were me, I'd keep the SL-Q30 as a spare. It's one of the better Technics P-mounts, full auto, quartz controlled with an adjustable counterweight that allows fine tuning within the 1.0 to 1.5 gram T4P standard. That might make having a better than average cartridge and stylus mounted on it somewhat more important.

John

I agree! If you spend the money on a better stylus, you might be very happy with it's sound. You are already happy with it's speed stability. You'll have to spend lots for a belt drive that will keep up. Keep it as a back up, or add it to a second system. I have three systems with TTs in my house!

Just a note:

I have a Technics SL-QX300, which is similar, but with pitch control. (I love it, BTW!) Looks like the SL-Q30 has a similar tonearm to mine. If so, the tonearm counterweight will actually exceed the limits of 1.0g-1.5g if need be. In that case, I wouldn't worry about the added weight of the Shure's Dynamic Stabilizer. You'll just need a digital scale to dial it in. The adjustable anti-skate is nice, too.

I used to track my ATSLT88E cartridge at 1.7g on it, no problem. This means it might also work well with Grado cartridges, because they usually like tracking around 1.7g. (...assuming of course they don't hum on that table. Grados don't produce any objectionable hum on any of my Technics DD TTs.)

avole
10-27-2011, 02:33 AM
As bob_in_okc mentioned on the other thread, the Digitrac 300SE is an excellent pmount cartridge and well worth trying.

dlaloum
10-27-2011, 03:23 AM
The M92 interchangeably can take anything from an N92, through N99E, and up to N97xE, N97xSAS, and even VN5xMR (the stylus from the V15VxMR) or the VN5xSAS (Jico version)

They will all fit. (as will a variety of excellent NOS older model Shure styli as mentioned earlier)

Now for the "Gotchas"

A cartridge has its cantilever resonance tuned to go with a specified capacitance (they all assume 47k resistance)

If the stylus you are fitting is from a lower inductance cartridge, then you will need to compensate by providing lower capacitance than cartridge spec, to get something close to the factory performance of that stylus.

As soon as you start mixing and matching styli, performance and the sound profile changes (that is why they "sound" different).

Note that I am differentiating between better tracking, extracting more detail or better imaging, and the tonal balance of the cartridge.

The tonal balance is the part of the sound that our ears are MOST sensitive to.

If you want to get involved in swapping styli and hybridising cartridges (which I heartily recommend) - for best results you will also need to be able to modify and tune both capacitance and resistance.

With regards to the differing sound of the AT92 and the M92, if you drop the R load from 47k to 35k on the AT, and raise the R load from 47k to 56k (Felix likes 65k on the M97xE) - they will start sounding very very much alike.

In factory spec, they reflect the "house sound" of AT and Shure..... AT = slight rise at the top end, Shure = slight drop at the top end.
With our ears being a "relative" instrument, this highlights the upper end with the AT, and the bass with the Shure.

Adjust the loading and you can set them both to a very neutral response... then you can really compare their strengths and weaknesses....

With regards to adjusting the VTF:
I do not own a M97xE or other Shure stylus with brush.... What I do own is several Jico SAS styli including N97xE and VN5xMR

In both cases the stylus weighs 0.25g more than the N99E standard p-mount stylus.
It also happens that the brush applies between 0.2 and 0.3g of pressure on the vinyl surface, and requires the VTF to be increased by that amount to compensate..... so: the additional VTF required is provided almost precisely by the additional weight of the stylus!

Very very handy - I can set my arm up for standard p-mount VTF, and swap in my Shure p-mounts with the Jico-SAS in place when I want to... piece of cake!

The caution is that the Shure brushes require 0.5g (more than the Jico), and I do not know what the weight of the Shure brushes is, and whether they balance out their additional VTF requirement.
Even if they don't - on your table, it will definitely be within the adjustability range of the arm.

This is an excellent TT - you are unlikely to get a true step up from what is possible with this TT under $1000 - and most likely $1500 is the point at which you will start to hear improvements... Maybe...:scratch2:

There are tweaks and mods that can be applied to ANY turntable that can also improve things with the current setup - including changes to feet/platform/isolation, additional damping within the plinth, additional damping of the platter, etc....

Under most circumstances however the biggest audible variations will usually occur with cartridge/stylus changes.

Where you are right now, with an M92 you can go all the way to a SAS stylus, and have performance at or approaching V15 levels.
If you add to this the ability to custom load your cartridge (phono stage adjustability, or loading plugs... ) - then you will have available to you everything you need to achieve very good performance indeed.


Note: I am not saying anything agains the AT92 - quite to the contrary, I have just managed to find an original NIB PT808 - the original naked shibata version that AT put out many years ago.... just another AT92, but with a top stylus.... I have not tried it yet.

bye for now

David

SA-708
10-27-2011, 11:25 AM
Shure did make some p-mount cartridges that came with the dynamic stabilizer. I've got a NOS Realistic RXT5 (same as the Shure M111HE if I recall right) which I have not yet had a chance to try out. The instructions say to only use it with the stabilizer down when using it on a p-mount arm, in order to see 1.25g of VTF at the stylus tip.

dlaloum
10-27-2011, 11:54 AM
Could you weigh the stylus alone?

Would be interesting to compare it to the weight of a N99e! (and a SAS)

I've never managed to get my hands on any of the original P-Mount with brush cartridges... (M111HE?)

Nor have I been able to find inductance specs for them, to try to identify the generator....

wlmill
10-27-2011, 08:12 PM
The M92 interchangeably can take anything from an N92, through N99E, and up to N97xE, N97xSAS, and even VN5xMR (the stylus from the V15VxMR) or the VN5xSAS (Jico version)

They will all fit. (as will a variety of excellent NOS older model Shure styli as mentioned earlier)

Now for the "Gotchas"

A cartridge has its cantilever resonance tuned to go with a specified capacitance (they all assume 47k resistance)

If the stylus you are fitting is from a lower inductance cartridge, then you will need to compensate by providing lower capacitance than cartridge spec, to get something close to the factory performance of that stylus.

As soon as you start mixing and matching styli, performance and the sound profile changes (that is why they "sound" different).

Note that I am differentiating between better tracking, extracting more detail or better imaging, and the tonal balance of the cartridge.

The tonal balance is the part of the sound that our ears are MOST sensitive to.

If you want to get involved in swapping styli and hybridising cartridges (which I heartily recommend) - for best results you will also need to be able to modify and tune both capacitance and resistance.

With regards to the differing sound of the AT92 and the M92, if you drop the R load from 47k to 35k on the AT, and raise the R load from 47k to 56k (Felix likes 65k on the M97xE) - they will start sounding very very much alike.

In factory spec, they reflect the "house sound" of AT and Shure..... AT = slight rise at the top end, Shure = slight drop at the top end.
With our ears being a "relative" instrument, this highlights the upper end with the AT, and the bass with the Shure.

Adjust the loading and you can set them both to a very neutral response... then you can really compare their strengths and weaknesses....

With regards to adjusting the VTF:
I do not own a M97xE or other Shure stylus with brush.... What I do own is several Jico SAS styli including N97xE and VN5xMR

In both cases the stylus weighs 0.25g more than the N99E standard p-mount stylus.
It also happens that the brush applies between 0.2 and 0.3g of pressure on the vinyl surface, and requires the VTF to be increased by that amount to compensate..... so: the additional VTF required is provided almost precisely by the additional weight of the stylus!

Very very handy - I can set my arm up for standard p-mount VTF, and swap in my Shure p-mounts with the Jico-SAS in place when I want to... piece of cake!

The caution is that the Shure brushes require 0.5g (more than the Jico), and I do not know what the weight of the Shure brushes is, and whether they balance out their additional VTF requirement.
Even if they don't - on your table, it will definitely be within the adjustability range of the arm.

This is an excellent TT - you are unlikely to get a true step up from what is possible with this TT under $1000 - and most likely $1500 is the point at which you will start to hear improvements... Maybe...:scratch2:

There are tweaks and mods that can be applied to ANY turntable that can also improve things with the current setup - including changes to feet/platform/isolation, additional damping within the plinth, additional damping of the platter, etc....

Under most circumstances however the biggest audible variations will usually occur with cartridge/stylus changes.

Where you are right now, with an M92 you can go all the way to a SAS stylus, and have performance at or approaching V15 levels.
If you add to this the ability to custom load your cartridge (phono stage adjustability, or loading plugs... ) - then you will have available to you everything you need to achieve very good performance indeed.


Note: I am not saying anything agains the AT92 - quite to the contrary, I have just managed to find an original NIB PT808 - the original naked shibata version that AT put out many years ago.... just another AT92, but with a top stylus.... I have not tried it yet.

bye for now

David

Thank you for the information. I still have the Technics P24 cartridge that came with this turntable, but when this turntable was given to me it did not have a stylus. I decided to purchase the AT92ECD instead of replacing the stylus. Have you heard this cartridge? If you have, is it worth purchasing a stylus for this cartridge? Or would it sound about the same as the AT92ECD?

dlaloum
10-27-2011, 08:43 PM
The P24 is the same cartridge body as the P22, P202, P23, etc... etc..

Like many other manufacturers, the variance was only in the stylus.

A P22/P202 stylus is very good indeed - and made of pure unobtainium

Jico make a SAS stylus that fits the P24 ($133 direct from Jico) - more economical than the SAS for shure with the brush....

Is the cartridge any good - yes its is, Technics was very leading edge when it designed these...
But most of the aftermarket needles are very basic...

Other than the SAS there are:
0.3mil Eliptical
http://www.turntableneedles.com/Needle-718-DEE_p_1332.html
HyperEliptical
http://www.turntableneedles.com/P24-Needle-718-DHE-copy_p_3817.html
Shibata
http://www.turntableneedles.com/Needle-718-D-Shibata_p_3717.html

I believe these are all made by Jico along with
http://www.turntableneedles.com/JICO-SAS-type-798-DSAS-for-Technics-EPS-30-series_p_3943.html

Yes it is another good option - the magic in any stylus is in the quality of the cantilever more than the needle though - the original P202 was a hollow boron tube.... (VERY high end) - the closest current equivalent is the SAS which is a solid boron rod.

Also as mentioned earlier the Digitrac 300SE is excellent (same as an early high compliance OM30)

bye for now

David

p.s. with the most basic eliptical stylus you are at the same level of quality as with an AT92E (eliptical), and the same HE and Shibata options are available for the AT92...
The P24 is lower inductance - so the electrical response tends towards a flatter frequency response.... but I would say much of a muchness with the AT92 - the stylus is the key

wlmill
10-28-2011, 11:40 PM
Thank you for all of your suggestions, I appreciate all of the time you have taken to answer my questions. If I upgrade this turntable, I think I will purchase the Digitrac 300SE. It sounds like what I am looking for.

wualta
10-29-2011, 12:20 AM
Another vote for the 300 SE. I got one, then a friend got one. Difficult getting the p-mount-to-half-inch adapter stuffed into the tiny fixed headshell of an SME Series III, but we did it.

SA-708
11-01-2011, 01:28 PM
Could you weigh the stylus alone?

Would be interesting to compare it to the weight of a N99e! (and a SAS)

I've never managed to get my hands on any of the original P-Mount with brush cartridges... (M111HE?)

Nor have I been able to find inductance specs for them, to try to identify the generator....

Sorry to have missed this question earlier; life has been crazy lately.

The RXT5 stylus alone is 1.5 grams and the cartridge body is 5.3 grams for a total of 6.8 grams together. The instructions say to use the cartridge as a p-mount with the brush down only, which should remove a half gram of VTF (per the leaflet's directions for use in an adapter) for a net VTF of around 1.55 grams, by my calculations.

There's no inductance spec in the cartridge leaflet, but it lists 47,000 ohms resistance and 200 to 300 picofarads capacitance per channel as the optimum load.

The cartridge is still new in the box, $49.95 Radio Shack price tag on the side, waiting for its turn on my Technics SL-MA1 turntable here at work. With the Dynavector DV-10P on there now, it may be a while before that happens. With the full VTF and anti-skate adjustment on the SL-MA1, I should be able to try it out both brush down and brush up.

jhoyt
11-01-2011, 02:41 PM
My first suggestion on the Q30 would be to damp the gadzooks out of the platter. I damped the platter on my QL1 with window "rope caulk", taking care to apply it EVENLY to not throw the platter out of balance. Also watch that the damping material does not rub on the plinth when the platter is turning. An alternative would be Dynamat, or equivalent. The rope caulk took almost all the "ringing" out of the platter, and with the stock mat makes a great foundation for playing records.

Fortunately, I'm in a situation where I can literally jump on the floor in front of the TT, and it will not affect it at all. But not everyone lives on a solid concrete slab floor. :D Isolation upgrades may well help you out, depending on your own situation.

Technics really did a lot of thing *right*. I think you have a keeper of a turntable.

dlaloum
11-01-2011, 11:19 PM
Just finished adding modelling clay to the inside of the platter on my Revox B795


The inside of the platter has 12 "slots" around the edge, each slot was filled with a precisely weighed amount (5.75g) of non hardening modelling clay (plasticine).

With the Mat off, the ringing of the platter is noticeably reduced, with mat on, I am not sure of the difference - very subtle... and may be imaginary...

Possibly a good tweak if you have a way of ensuring that the platter remains balanced.

goldwax
11-02-2011, 12:47 AM
...

Pio1980
11-02-2011, 09:08 AM
Just finished adding modelling clay to the inside of the platter on my Revox B795


The inside of the platter has 12 "slots" around the edge, each slot was filled with a precisely weighed amount (5.75g) of non hardening modelling clay (plasticine).

With the Mat off, the ringing of the platter is noticeably reduced, with mat on, I am not sure of the difference - very subtle... and may be imaginary...

Possibly a good tweak if you have a way of ensuring that the platter remains balanced.
Plasticine aside, the mat damping typical for supplied DD mats is the reason I suggest keeping them as-is and avoid mat swapping on DD TTs. It seem this is alway considered during the design process. BTW a lossy coupling is necessary to damp lower freqs and using something to stick the mat to the platter can defeat that effect.
Addl; checking the platter resonance with a record on the mat is also instructive, it does change the result for the better.

dlaloum
11-02-2011, 09:13 AM
We are meandering off topic... (as usual...)

With the JVC, I can easily turn power off, and pop the needle on the platter or on the plinth to test for resonances... (I used this method in optimising the table support structure - shelf, feet, concrete paver etc...)

With the Revox, I am not sure how this can be achieved, as there is no easy way to lower the needle without powering on....
On the other hand the standard suspension works very well, and I have never felt the need for the sort of test regime and platform work I did for the JVC! (on the other hand the Revox shares the plaform with the JVC, so will in any case reap the benefits)

wlmill
11-02-2011, 10:58 AM
This turntable is definitely a keeper. As I have mentioned in another thread, if you have a chance to pick up one of these turntables you really should. I have read some of the mods you guys have been mentioning, and they might be worth trying out. While reading through these posts, I went and rapped on the platter with my fingers and I did not hear any ringing at all. I even lifted the mat a little and there was still not any ringing. I am very impressed with this turntable, and I am going to keep it for a second system I want to put together. I may be enlisting your help in finding a good 2 channel receiver.

wlmill
11-02-2011, 05:46 PM
I lifted the mat completely off the platter and I could hear some ringing when I rapped on the platter. I do not hear any ringing with the mat on the platter. I am not going to really worry about this right now. My philosophy with sound is, if it ain't broke don't fix it.

Pio1980
11-04-2011, 12:31 PM
The stock mat with a record in place should adequately damp platter ringing for most practical purposes. Some do benefit from additional damping.

wlmill
11-04-2011, 01:39 PM
The stock mat with a record in place should adequately damp platter ringing for most practical purposes. Some do benefit from additional damping.

you are right, I have had a bad experience with a turntable in the past that could have benifited from some dampening. I turned my amp up all the way of course without anything playing to see if I could get my SL-Q30 to feedback and it would not. so Technics did do a lot of things right. It would be fun to see how much better I could get this tt to sound, but I would need help doing this, from someone who is a lot smarter than I am.