Dear Lewm: +++++ " reveal the nature of these especially good tt mats. " +++++
that mat/pad with our build blend material is only the tip of the iceberg in relation with build materials and its importance in TT- tonearms - cartridges and maybe some other items. The mat is only one kind of use in the audio world.
No, the material that Ralph describe is different from the one we own, between other things ours has a lower weight due to the blend material used.
IMHO I think that the real importance of that build material subject is that we are starting to talk about when one or two years ago we did not heard nothing on this build factor.
Sooner or latter the TT and tonearm designers/manufacturer ( mainly ) must take " the bull by its horns " if they want to offer better quality performance products to we the customers.
I posted several times that we deserve the very poor non-evolution audio products we have because we the customers never ask for more: sometimes because a very poor know-how, sometimes because we don't care about and sometimes because we are thinking like 30 years ago ( with no evolution attitude. ). Of course there are some exceptions on both sides: builders and customers.
Here in this thread we have a precise example of that " old thinking " way: where Quiddity try to expose and sustain with numbers a few subjects/factors the next post to it say something like this: " if we go for the numbers a Yamaha will be better than a Lamm unit ".
Well I say that almost any audio " stage/performance " can be numbers related ( here and now ) if we know what to measure, where and how to measure, when to measure and with which tools/instruments we must to measure.
Lew, we are talking in this thread ( like in many other ones. ) of products designed 30-40 years ago that are competitive with today designs: turntables, tonearms and cartridges, with almost no evolution in the audio industry, why is that? I ask, who has the culprit? manufacturers or customers, I think both but mainly the customers that are manipulated by the " professional " ( some corrupted with intention and some " corrupted " by non know-how. ) magazine reviewers and that are ( the customers ) the ones that buy those very poor audio design items, yes we deserve what we have!
I think there are a lot of talent out there for design and build a lot better audio products in any single link of the audio chain but unfortunately we customers don't give to them any " sign " that motivate them to be better than what they are showing today, we are proud with what we have.
Anyway, continue with the thread subject.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
that mat/pad with our build blend material is only the tip of the iceberg in relation with build materials and its importance in TT- tonearms - cartridges and maybe some other items. The mat is only one kind of use in the audio world.
No, the material that Ralph describe is different from the one we own, between other things ours has a lower weight due to the blend material used.
IMHO I think that the real importance of that build material subject is that we are starting to talk about when one or two years ago we did not heard nothing on this build factor.
Sooner or latter the TT and tonearm designers/manufacturer ( mainly ) must take " the bull by its horns " if they want to offer better quality performance products to we the customers.
I posted several times that we deserve the very poor non-evolution audio products we have because we the customers never ask for more: sometimes because a very poor know-how, sometimes because we don't care about and sometimes because we are thinking like 30 years ago ( with no evolution attitude. ). Of course there are some exceptions on both sides: builders and customers.
Here in this thread we have a precise example of that " old thinking " way: where Quiddity try to expose and sustain with numbers a few subjects/factors the next post to it say something like this: " if we go for the numbers a Yamaha will be better than a Lamm unit ".
Well I say that almost any audio " stage/performance " can be numbers related ( here and now ) if we know what to measure, where and how to measure, when to measure and with which tools/instruments we must to measure.
Lew, we are talking in this thread ( like in many other ones. ) of products designed 30-40 years ago that are competitive with today designs: turntables, tonearms and cartridges, with almost no evolution in the audio industry, why is that? I ask, who has the culprit? manufacturers or customers, I think both but mainly the customers that are manipulated by the " professional " ( some corrupted with intention and some " corrupted " by non know-how. ) magazine reviewers and that are ( the customers ) the ones that buy those very poor audio design items, yes we deserve what we have!
I think there are a lot of talent out there for design and build a lot better audio products in any single link of the audio chain but unfortunately we customers don't give to them any " sign " that motivate them to be better than what they are showing today, we are proud with what we have.
Anyway, continue with the thread subject.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.