Why Use Aluminum for a TT Platter?

I just know in direct comparisons in the same system between VPI tables: Aries 3, Aries 1, Classic 1, and Classic 2 it appeared consistently whether with or without a mat that the new aluminum VPI platters ring like a bell compared to the VPI super platter and acrylic platters. Resonance, noise, and brightness were in abundance compared to the others.

Let me restate that. ;-) The mass is not there for inertia.

That flywheel affect that folks like to think about when high mass platters are mentioned with belt drives would only matter when the platter is accelerating or decelerating. Once the platter is up to speed the mass would make any sudden changes in platter speed near impossible.

This is also why so many DD tables have light-weight platters. The motor on a DD is designed to directly manipulate the platter in order to correct speed. The platter is supposed to have it's acceleration constantly manipulated.

02-09-11: Wntrmute2 wrote:
"Belt drives...in terms of speed accuracy, are clearly inferior to properly implemented direct drive tables."
Humm, proof, evidence to back this up?
-----

I was going to ask this as well, until I realized who the author was. Although I must ask - who's making a properly implemented dd nowdays? I recall people liking the Goldmund DD.

Has2be, I wasn't speaking about Michell at all, simply about the chemical composition of Delrin. It was also chemical and spelling education as well. Miss that part?

I think the key to an aluminum TT platter is to properly damp the aluminum to reduce resonance. This is often done within the platter and/or on top of the platter as in the case of SME. Mass does matter depending on the drive system and what problem the designer is attempting to solve.

Regarding the whole belt vs. DD discussion here, I agree with Dan ed, though this is far too complex a topic to discuss on this thread and I think we should stay away from gross generalizations regarding TT drive systems. It's how its implemented that counts.