However, this has confused me. I can see that there two main vibrations we are trying to dampen. One is from the motor and the other from base (e.g with footfalls in homes with wooden floors). Now, I can see how the damping layer can absorb and prevent the vibrations from the floor going up to the arm. But, if the motor and arm are directly coupled either via the plinth or through the motor-idler-platter in case of idlers, then how does the damping layer help?
Typically a metallic cone footer placed below a TT (or speakers or amp) will drain away the vibration from the plinth to the shelf of the rack, then to the floor through the structure of the rack. The travel of the vibration is one way - from the large flat surface area of the cone which acts as a large coupling receptacle for the vibration from the much larger surface area of the bottom of the plinth, to the point of the cone which is very, very tiny compared to the flat surface. The reverse direction will effectively be like an open circuit, much like a mechanical valve or electronic diode, because the point of the cone is too small to couple any significant amount of vibration from the rack/floor back to the plinth.
Many TTs also use soft footers (think SL 1200) which acts as a damping layer, but the difference is it works to isolate vibrations from TT to rack, and vice versa.
The idea of CLD (as far as my limited knowledge of the science) is to restrain/damp the vibration on one layer A with another layer made of a different material B, making the composite material A+B formed from two materials a better dampener than A alone.
The plinth will absorb the vibrations from the motor. The absorbed energy will be wasted as heat.
Isolating the motor as in PTP from the rest of the top plate will reduce the amount of vibrations that travels to the motor platter cartridge tonearm reflected from the pivot of tonearm cartridge, which leads to smearing of the desired sound signal.
Another not so popular method of motor isolation is to mount the motor on a separate structure placed directly on the shelf (and not on the plinth) such that it is correctly aligned in height as well as laterally. It's complicated. However, the shelf of the rack is still common to plinth and motor mount, but whatever vibration that travels from the motor to the plinth will obviously be much diminished.
Yet another method of isolation is to create a tonearm base separate from the plinth. Disadvantage is the arm base needs to be carefully placed after each move of the TT. And perhaps periodic checks would be required for correct pivot-spindle distance. This base also will need its own cones like the main plinth. Again, the shelf is common, etc in this case.
But having said that, don't over think. Just build a regular multi layered plywood plinth (use the best plywood you can get hold of - ideally void free) and you'll find that it sounds pretty damned good. Just make sure that you get a competent carpenter to glue and finish the veneer to heritage furniture grade (don't accept anything less). Higher mass in this case is really better as repeated often by arj, because the motor is so torquey and can put out lots of energy.
PS: I really like the idea of throwing away the useless parts of the top plate - it gives you total flexibility in choosing an arm (or arms) and also eliminates the biggest weakness of the Lenco - it's thin top plate. Do retain the on-off switch, though.
Hope I've not confused you further