Herbie's Grungebuster CD Mat - A quick experiment

[Mr. Lin]

Tonight I was inspired by the recent thread about the Millennium CD mat to pull out my own mat from a couple years ago. I bought the Herbie's CD mat purely out of curiosity, but whatever was going on at the time, I was distracted and didn't make any concerted effort to see if it worked.

What I did tonight was just for fun, far from anything resembling a scientific experiment. In fact, I only used two CDs.

First up was the hybrid SACD of Bill Evans' Explorations. I listened for about two minutes, then applied the Grungebuster mat and listened for another two, and finally removed the mat and listened again. I repeated that cycle a couple times. With this CD is was difficult for me to hear any difference, although something seemed to sound slightly different, I couldn't put my finger on what it was.

Next CD was Telemann For Bassoon. I chose this one because it's a fantastic recording that really allows you to hear the reediness and woodiness of the instrument. I repeated the same steps as above with the Bill Evans CD. This time something definitely sounded different when I went from using the mat, to not using it. But again, I had a real hard time trying to determine what it was. The best way I can describe it is that, with the mat applied to the CD, the bass seemed fuller (but not much louder), and the recording itself sounded more open and airy. When I removed the mat, it seemed as if everything was farther back from the listening point (all illusions of course), and consequently there may indeed have been less micro-dynamic detail (like the keys of the bassoon clacking).

The conclusion? There really isn't one, I'd say inconclusive at best. I cannot say for certain that I heard any significant differences with the mat on, although as I said, with the Telemann CD I strongly suspect there were indeed differences. Never at any time did I feel like one way sounded better than the other, I could have lived with either one. Because of that, save for another future experiment, I will probably not use the mat just because I'm paranoid about the stress it puts on parts of the transport.

I will say this, however. I have quite a lot of Herbie's products and aside from this one, they all work. I don't know what the problem was here. I see he's just released a new version that seems a lot more intelligently designed. It's carbon fiber, and it only covers the clear plastic at the center of the disc, rather than the whole thing. I may well try one eventually.

 

[Scuzzer]

It's carbon fiber, and it only covers the clear plastic at the center of the disc, rather than the whole thing. I may well try one eventually.

Ah crap, I thought the whole deal with disc covers was the centripetal force and light/emf scattering properties. How can something that only covers the clear part effect that?

 

[Quint]

I’ve owned every iteration of Herbie’s CD mats, and the best by far is the new Super Black Hole. Every previous mat had at least one small weakness, but the SBH has none that I can hear. I’ve owned the Millennium mat, and IMO the SBH is better. I use it on every disc I play on my Oppo BDP-83SE, and the results are always eye-opening. I wish I had the confidence to use it in my Marantz SA-7S1, but alas I don’t, because if perchance it jams in the player, I would literally have to disassemble half the transport to get it out, and it’s a VERY difficult player to open up. But in the Oppo, the SBH is a no-brainer.

 

[Arkay]

I wonder if you would hear more of a difference with lower-quality players? It might correct weaknesses in transport design that the better-quality players might have already addressed, making the need for this kind of tweak less significant. To draw a parallel, tube buffers often made a big improvement in the sound of early, cheap DVD players being used to play CDs, but they did nothing, or even had adverse effect, on TOTL/audiophile-grade CD players. I realize that these technologies address different issues, but the parallel may be valid: high-end CD players often have larger stabilizing clamps, for example, that more closely mimic the effects of the mats.

 

[Quint]

I wonder if you would hear more of a difference with lower-quality players? It might correct weaknesses in transport design that the better-quality players might have already addressed, making the need for this kind of tweak less significant. To draw a parallel, tube buffers often made a big improvement in the sound of early, cheap DVD players being used to play CDs, but they did nothing, or even had adverse effect, on TOTL/audiophile-grade CD players. I realize that these technologies address different issues, but the parallel may be valid: high-end CD players often have larger stabilizing clamps, for example, that more closely mimic the effects of the mats.

I think there’s some truth to that. Most of these mats are designed to reduce disc vibration in the transport. Since many cheaper players have inferior transport mechanisms compared with more expensive units, it makes sense that CD mats are more effective in less-expensive players. That theory reflects my personal experience—I’ve used the Super Black Hole on my Oppo and on many other, MUCH more expensive players (Esoteric, Ayre, Marantz, and dCS, to name a few), and it was indeed less effective on those players.

 

[Mr. Lin]

Ah crap, I thought the whole deal with disc covers was the centripetal force and light/emf scattering properties. How can something that only covers the clear part effect that?

This is from Herbie's website, regarding the new Super Black Hole:

Unlike the original full-size grungebuster CD mat, the Super Black Hole does not tend to catch air pockets under it and, with its smaller size, is easier to place on the disc. (We discovered years ago that a smaller mat that simply addresses the clamping/disc interface and hub area of the CD provides superior results).

I wonder if you would hear more of a difference with lower-quality players? It might correct weaknesses in transport design that the better-quality players might have already addressed, making the need for this kind of tweak less significant. To draw a parallel, tube buffers often made a big improvement in the sound of early, cheap DVD players being used to play CDs, but they did nothing, or even had adverse effect, on TOTL/audiophile-grade CD players. I realize that these technologies address different issues, but the parallel may be valid: high-end CD players often have larger stabilizing clamps, for example, that more closely mimic the effects of the mats.

Arkay, that is very smart thinking, and I bet you're right. Next time I have the Jolida hooked up I'll try it out. Same with the Naim, but that's a hell of a CD player and I doubt I'll hear much improvement there. The Naim already has an excellent transport/magnetic puck system, and they've addressed vibration issues in the design of the CDP.

Well Quint, you have me more eager than ever to try out the SBH. I do have an Oppo 981, and as soon as I'm able to afford it, I'll be getting the standard BDP-83.