-edible zone-
--#Review: Boston Audio Mat 2
- Date: 11/24/2013 with edits 6/18/2017
- Author: Steve Clarke
- Model: BA Mat 2
- Category: Turntable platter mat
- Suggested Retail Price: $279 (includes shipping)
- Description: Solid machined carbon graphite platter mat
- Manufacturer url: https://www.boston-audio.com
- Manufacturer: Boston Audio Design
- Made in USA
- Distribution: refer to BA website for dealer location near you: link: https://www.boston-audio/dealers.html (or buy direct)
Photos of the mat in use during this review:
*
Above photo: BA Mat 2 on author's Technics SP10 mk 2
It started with a question; "which mat might be best for this very
good sounding record player?" Is any mat other than the standard issue
rubber mat preferable?
At this moment in time we live in the age
of the internet. On the internet one can query any of a few dominant
search engines to provide a list of discussions and articles on any
topic. Most of it is available freely. Some of it is not free.
So,....... restricting myself to the free info, I queried Google on
platter mats for the SP10 mkII and came up with some useful suggestions.
To summarize some of the serious contenders, I can list a few popular
mat options for the SP10 mk2 that came to light during my search.
- SAEC SS 300 solid mat (Japan).
- Boston Audio Mat 2
- OMA graphite Mat (USA)
- "Vintage" Micro Seiki solid copper mat (Japan, 2nd hand)
- The original Technics mat for this player (typically, every used sp10 mkII that you can buy will, likely, come with one.
- Herbies Audio Lab: Way Excellent II - 5mm (USA)
From the above list, and from having read several reviews on Boston
Audio turntable mats, I decided on a BA MAT 2 as my first choice. A
hunch....but there are many who will support the choice. And this is
based on their own experience with Boston Audio turntable mats. So I
simply surfed the web over to Boston Audio Design's site and asked the
proprietor there (Austin Jackson) if I could buy a mat. This mat is not
free. I had to pay. So would you. But there is a 30-day trial period as
part of the deal. And shipping was included within the asking price.
Ordering: By email direct from Boston Audio Design. Payment was
convenient. I used Paypal. Delivery was timely. Austin sent the mat via
USPS 2nd Day air. Receiving: The mat arrived intact in a well packed
box. Double boxed actually. It also comes with a letter sized data
sheet.
Putting to use: All I had to do was remove the Boston
Audio Mat 2 from its shipping container, remove the Technics rubber mat
from the player and plop the new BA Mat 2 down over the spindle pin.
Then, I thought, it was ready to play records. Or was it.
Observations: The OEM Technics mat is
thick. Five mm thick as a matter of fact. (.197 inches measured with
digital caliper) So is the Boston Audio Mat 2. (5mm) The OEM Technics
mat is made from some unidentified compound of firm rubber. Firm yet
supple. Even after 34 years in the atmosphere, my sample remains supple
and perfectly fit for use. The Boston Audio Design Mat 2 is machined
from solid graphite and displays no flexibility. It is a hard mat.
The BA mat 2 fits down over the spindle and into the pocket of the
SP10 platter like it belongs there. On my sample The spindle hole on the
BA mat is a bit oversize. Enough so that some care might be taken to
ensure that the mat is well centered over the spindle pin. Otherwise
there is some evidence of eccentric run-out between mat and platter as
the platter turns. This is seen only if you are looking for it, but if
your are the evidence is there.
The BA Mat 2 is machined (lathe
turned) from solid carbon graphite (BA is protective about the exact
composition of the graphite they use). It is a solid, rigid piece that
does not flex with normal hand pressure. Nor does it seem to flex under
its own weight. It is a stiff piece. Place the BA mat 2 on this platter
and one wonders if there is adequate traction between the aluminum
platter of the SP10 and the mat. For good reason. There is no
traction.
The SP10 mkII motor produces one heck of a lot of
torque when it starts and stops spinning its platter. It is presumed
that the torque is also delivered when it makes speed corrections during
the course of playback. With the oem mat in place, hold a record brush
on a spinning record and watch the Technics' strobe. The strobe
indicates that platter does not slow down from this application of
external force onto it. Neither the record or mat. However, do this with
the BA Mat 2 and the -record- appears to come to a stop while the
platter continues to spin. At first I could not tell if it was the
record slipping against the BA Mat 2.....or if it was the BA Mat 2
slipping against the sp10 platter. This much I was able to sort out by
what I did next.
The stuff I used to "stick" the mat to the
platter is resin of a type that comes from trees. Liquid solder flux.
You can find a very similar product under the name "Pine Tar". Also
known as pitch. Tree pitch. It is a gummy, sticky residue. Organic
stuff. Park your car beneath a pine tree and come back later to find
tree pitch drops on your nice shiny paint job. Sticks like glue. Heck,
tree pitch is even used as an ingredient in some glues. But is it too
sticky?
* Photo: rosin solder flux
Firstly, I removed the brand new BA Mat 2 from its recess
within the SP10 platter. A beautiful piece of machining, the SP10 mkII
platter. Then, using the brush applicator of the liquid solder flux jar,
I applied a circular array of small dots of pitch to the Technics'
platter surface. I did so sparingly. Thin dabs. Not very much and just a
1/2 dozen light spots of pitch. Then I replaced the BA Mat 2 into the
sp10 platter. And I allowed the resin a few minutes to firm up.
Afterward, the record would not slow when holding a cleaning brush
against it while spinning on the platter. This told me it had been the
BA Mat 2 that was slipping against the SP10 platter.
The next
day I was able to remove the Mat 2 from the SP10. This means that the
rosin isn't dangerously sticky. What I found were areas of residue
spots, nickel sized, sticking to both the inner platter surface and also
to the bottom mat surface. It is possible to clean this off, but I want
to leave it there to provide traction between platter and mat. No
apparent damage done. Problem solved. Others have volunteered their
solutions to this problem. Some suggested putting down an array of
transparent tape onto the inside surface of the platter. Then the mat 2
will find some traction between itself and the top non-adhesive
substrate of the tape. Seems like a good suggestion to me.
Another observation: Some records may have a type of warp that will not
allow any type of grip between the mat surface and record. A dish warp
being the worst case. Warped records like this will have little traction
against the mat and may lose traction during playback.* My solution to
this problem is to simply not play such records on the mat. Others may
solve the problem with a a record clamp that goes over the spindle pin
in combination with a spacer puck that fits over the spindle but beneath
the record, thus curving the record into contact with the outer rim of
the mat. Still another solution would be a rim weight.
*. It should be stated that any 'hard' mat will exhibit this behavior; no traction (slippage) between mat and record.
Listening:
(11-24-2013)
The comparison between the oem rubber mat and the BA Mat 2 right
away reveals some sonic differences. It was quite obvious (with the BA
Mat 2) that upper frequency notes appeared cleaner and with sharper
articulation. More air. More float. More sustain. Longer decay. Mahler
No. 5. Haitink / Amsterdam Concertgebouw on Philips. Opening trumpet
solo and the combined brass instruments that carry the piece forward and
into the symphony was and were clean and relaxed. No brass blare. No
haze. No perceivable distortions. Just clean massed brass instruments in
nice focus. With the oem rubber mat in comparison the same passages has
a slight glare. Like peering through a lens at a subject that is
back-lit by the sun and with a slight solar flare blocking parts of the
view. In direct comparison the BA Mat 2 appears to have cleaned the lens
for this part of it.
Led Zeppelin II (Classic Records 180g).
Whole 'Lotta Love; It may seem that one normally wouldn't expect to hear
lots of fine inner detail in hard rock recordings. But there are - in
fact- tons of fine detail to be reproduced in these recordings. That is
when your record playback system is capable of doing so. On this first
track of side 1 there are numerous fine details floating within the
driving atmosphere of it. Firstly, I noticed how the cymbals were
reproduced with excellent tone and timber of the spun bell bronze
they're made from. Realistic. But it did not require an analytical ear
to notice how long the sustain and decay of each cymbal hit was.... The
initial strike; stick against metal. The splash, ripple, shimmer and
ring. Like floating and flying in the space between and above the
speakers. While these artifacts are prominent and obvious in the
recording, it was also obvious that with the mat 2 the above noted
musical artifacts were improved by a remarkable amount.
Then,
toward the end of the piece, the driving rhythm notes appeared to be
accompanied by soft musical reply to each phrase. Not heard with such
clarity before this. It is an inner detail. Keep in mind that the SP10
mkII is very capable of reproducing lots and lots of detail from within
the record groove. But now, with the Mat 2, there is more detail to be
enjoyed. Not analytical. Its just there in the space before me.
Driving rhythm. Musical energy. That sense of flow........what are the
effects of the Mat 2 on these? Nothing deleterious that I can tell. I
may have been concerned about this when I saw the mat 2 slipping against
the sp10 platter. But that thought is put to rest. And what I hear is
foot tapping, dance inducing rock and roll drama. Good stuff. For the
SP10 mkII, I like this mat. Recommended provided you can live with a
hard mat for the above previously noted reservations.
(6-18-2014)
Added listening notes:
Now that I've had this BA Mat 2 for half a
year I can say that I still continue to use it on the SP10 mkII. I've
found it acceptable to live with the mats short-comings (poor traction)
as well as the mats sonic benefits. The primary and most noticed
difference between the BA Mat2 and the oem standard mat is in the upper
frequency region where an obvious sense of added clarity exists. The
other frequencies are not adversely affected. Nor can I say that I hear
any overt differences there. I should also note, again, that there is no
change in VTA/SRA when changing the oem mat with the BA Mat 2. Both mats
are the same thickness.
I can also note that even though I've
been skeptical about the lack of traction between record and this hard
mat, there does not seem to be any absence of visceral energy when such
should be present. Not that I'd notice subjectively.