Paul, Which manufacturer does not purposely leave tuning with footers/support to the user? I have heard of only a few turntable designers who sell their product with Stillpoints, and now a particular electronics manufacturer who may supply his products with Center Stage Footers. Are there others?
Zero Distortion: Tango Time
- Thread starter bonzo75
- Start date
Paul, Which manufacturer does not purposely leave tuning with footers/support to the user? I have heard of only a few turntable designers who sell their product with Stillpoints, and now a particular electronics manufacturer who may supply his products with Center Stage Footers. Are there others?
This whole discussion reigniting your thread about visiting Tang and hearing his system started when I asked specific questions about you inserting the Mooks into his system. So, for starters, this is a discussion about Mooks, or more generally, about footers. I have not heard Mooks in my own system, only in a friend's system. It was too long ago to describe their effect.
My "main components", I mean: speakers, electronics, source. I view cables as tweaks. Supports can be tweaks too, unless they are generic, solid, sturdy, racks. If they have special shelves, they are tweaks, IMO.
Regarding switching between cartridges, or arms, or DACS, or turntables for a different sound, I consider that tweaking the sound of one's system to his mood at the moment.
I can't speak for Tang when he wrote something about "sorted well" or something, but for me it means selecting components that are appropriate for each other. That means speakers for the room; amps for the speakers; preamp for the amp; cartridge for the arm; arm for the cartridge and turntable. I suppose room treatment is a tweak so far as they are adjustable, varied and alter the sound of the room to the listener's taste.
I am sorry you find a problem with this whole debate. I find it quite interesting and perhaps worthy of its own thread. FWIW, I define homogenizing as the effect of a tweak that moves a system sound away from transparency. Of course, one could argue that that could happen with any component including speakers, amps, or source. No one said this stuff is easy. Well, perhaps David does.
Peter,
Esoteric, Ayon, MBL are all brands that I have or have had here that incorporate isolating foot designs though I'm sure there are many others that I have not used myself. But I wonder if you are referring to manufacturers that are using footers of another brand, ie stillpoints etc?
Esoteric, Ayon, MBL are all brands that I have or have had here that incorporate isolating foot designs though I'm sure there are many others that I have not used myself. But I wonder if you are referring to manufacturers that are using footers of another brand, ie stillpoints etc?
This whole discussion reigniting your thread about visiting Tang and hearing his system started when I asked specific questions about you inserting the Mooks into his system. So, for starters, this is a discussion about Mooks, or more generally, about footers. I have not heard Mooks in my own system, only in a friend's system. It was too long ago to describe their effect.
My "main components", I mean: speakers, electronics, source. I view cables as tweaks. Supports can be tweaks too, unless they are generic, solid, sturdy, racks. If they have special shelves, they are tweaks, IMO.
Regarding switching between cartridges, or arms, or DACS, or turntables for a different sound, I consider that tweaking the sound of one's system to his mood at the moment.
I can't speak for Tang when he wrote something about "sorted well" or something, but for me it means selecting components that are appropriate for each other. That means speakers for the room; amps for the speakers; preamp for the amp; cartridge for the arm; arm for the cartridge and turntable. I suppose room treatment is a tweak so far as they are adjustable, varied and alter the sound of the room to the listener's taste.
I am sorry you find a problem with this whole debate. I find it quite interesting and perhaps worthy of its own thread. FWIW, I define homogenizing as the effect of a tweak that moves a system sound away from transparency. Of course, one could argue that that could happen with any component including speakers, amps, or source. No one said this stuff is easy. Well, perhaps David does.
I totally agree with your last post especially last para. The problem I have is people are voicing what is a tweak and what is not and what homogenizes and what does not without having (imo) done their research. And others want to join in saying exactly, they too have figured out the golden formula to identify homogenizing tweaks. I thought you were too, but you weren't. You were agreeing in general that is the right direction to keep out homogenizing tweaks. No argument there.
Yes, and Magico sells special footers as upgrades to their speakers. I was mostly referencing components like electronics and DACs. I'd like to ask a few designers what they think about the topic. They must not mind or presumably don't care if people experiment with after market footers under their gear. Pass has paid some attention to their rubber footers because the designs have changed over time. My SME turntable has two options, the standard hard metal ball (which sounds better), and a rubber ring insert one can use instead to protect furniture.
I guess the point I was trying to make is that the product leaves the factory sounding or "voiced" a particular way. It is then often "voiced" to sound a different way when it is in someone's system at home because the owner is experimenting with changing that sound. Ideally, that change can lead to greater transparency and a less homogenizing sound. I suspect that is because the designer is working under market/pricing constraints, but I really don't know.
I accept that this whole discussion is open to a subjective understanding of what "transparency" means, and that it is difficult to ascertain whether or not a sound is in fact more transparent to the source. I think one needs a lot of experience in the hobby to get this or to know how to recognize it by listening, which is why I think I am only now beginning to open my mind and curiosity toward the subject.
Last edited:
Yes, and in the hope of enhancing the attribute's of particular components, but not homogenisation!
IMHO by definition tweaks do not change the frequency response of a system - they produce small changes that too small to be measured significantly but are audible by audiophiles who want to listen to them.
The definition of a bad or good tweak is extremely subjective - IMHO no tweak is perfect, all of them are compromises. They enhance some qualities at the expense of others. Homogenization and transparency means they are counterbalancing characteristics of the vinyl recording and reproduction. IMHO all tweaks are commission, sometimes we perceive them as omission until we become familiar with them - surely YMMV on this subject.
Even apparently related tweaks can be deeply different in action and results - an active isolation platform and a pneumatic isolation platform are night and day.
And yes, ideal sound reproduction would be tweakless. But stereo is not ideal...
No absolutes could be an absolute mantra on this sport.
I’d also suggest the term tweak itself is waaay too open and unspecific and this adds noise and confusion on the topic and is about as helpful as snake oil.
For that matter any one person’s tweak is just as equally another’s component or infrastructure.
Perhaps if everything was viewed as essentially either a system component or system mod to then be evaluated individually within the limits of context of any system, room, listener or musical content we’d get even more useful understanding on the impacts and effects of any approach in audio.
This is good advice indeed. Nevertheless, I don’t get the logic of paying for a ‘tweak’ that doesn’t do anything. It must do something that I like and there has to be a net enhancement to musical enjoyment. Otherwise, I am better off without the tweak.
I agree the topic of tweaks deserves its own thread.
A few manufacturers will include third-party parts such as footers because they have neither expertise nor interest in creating such. I remember Chris Brady of Teres including the original Stillpoints with some of his turntables for that reason.
Then again some manufacturers believe there is a market for footers based on sales or popularity of third-party add-ons, and they want a piece of it.
However, I suspect few designers/manufacturers believe - much less will tell you - their product is optimal using something you must get from someone else.
Imo, some this discussion (not yours Peter) claiming things like racks or cables are tweaks is, I'll be kind here, rather quirky. If something is necessary how can it be a tweak? I've never known of a system without cabling between components - well I guess there are all-in-one boomboxes. From what state is a rack a tweak - the state of sitting on the floor?
Taking from you mention of "voicing", for now I will say a tweak is something that changes the sound (the "voice") of a product from what it is natively out of the box and broken-in.
Generally I differentiate between what I call 'infrastructure' and tweaks, iow infrastructure is not tweaking. It includes the room with its acoustics, clean power on demand, and vibration abatement/isolation.
A few manufacturers will include third-party parts such as footers because they have neither expertise nor interest in creating such. I remember Chris Brady of Teres including the original Stillpoints with some of his turntables for that reason.
Then again some manufacturers believe there is a market for footers based on sales or popularity of third-party add-ons, and they want a piece of it.
However, I suspect few designers/manufacturers believe - much less will tell you - their product is optimal using something you must get from someone else.
Imo, some this discussion (not yours Peter) claiming things like racks or cables are tweaks is, I'll be kind here, rather quirky. If something is necessary how can it be a tweak? I've never known of a system without cabling between components - well I guess there are all-in-one boomboxes. From what state is a rack a tweak - the state of sitting on the floor?
Taking from you mention of "voicing", for now I will say a tweak is something that changes the sound (the "voice") of a product from what it is natively out of the box and broken-in.
Generally I differentiate between what I call 'infrastructure' and tweaks, iow infrastructure is not tweaking. It includes the room with its acoustics, clean power on demand, and vibration abatement/isolation.
I applaud you standing, Tima! This differentiation should become a standard in the audio terminology.
Cheers,
Infrastructure is basic. When you start using infrastructure for voicing... By using racks from CMS, HRS, SRA, Stacore, footers... Assuming they all don't sound the same and one makes your equipment sound different from the other... For me that's tweaking. Ditto with cabling. If you kept in the stock power cords plugged in from the wall, that's not tweaking
Call it tweaking if you like, but it's not. By introducing some notion of intent, your taxonomy further confuses. I don't think it helps us communicate anything relevant.
Anything you put your equipment on, including the floor, wil impact how it sounds. The floor is not a default condition. There are no stock vibrations that come with gear, no state from which one 'tweaks'. In the case of racks or platforms that are practically colorless, operating your gear without the influence of vibration is not changing how it sounds out of the box any more than setting it on the box it came in.
You can call power cords 'cables', but that too is confusing. Let's use 'signal cables' and 'power cords'. There are no default signal cables although I vaguely recall one manufacturer who requires the use of a specific cable or brand.
Suppose you live in an area with a high amount of electromagnetic interference - are you voicing your system by trying to eliminate its impact?
Every room is (likely) different. There are no default acoustics.
Infrastructure may be rudimentary, but only in the sense that every system operates in some context. Being aware of infrastructure and addressing it is as integral to an audio system as knowing what voltage your electrical system is on.
Tima, this is fairly easy to figure out. If a room has racks of different brands, or has transitioned from one brand to another for the rack, that is tweaking...unless someone who has compared the rack has said that the first rack was unable to fix a vibration problem (such cases are rare, mostly the shifts are for a sound). There are racks from a few hundred quid to a multi thousand. I clearly remember that when Mike moved from MM3 to MM7, his added bass caused vibrations to go through to his NVS - this led to him installing the Herzan. However, some consider this a tweak, I don't. He was fixing an issue in that case. Yes, if he did other things to change the voicing of the Herzan, or moved from Brand A to B, that is a tweak.
Power cables was an example. We use power and signal cable terminology when required. The intent of my post was not to provide an exhaustive list of terminologies used in hifi. Anyway, that is very clear too - if people say they have a hum and require shielding, they are fixing a problem. If they move from Kubala Sosna to Siltech to MIT to Goebbel to Kuro, they are not. They are tweaking. Yes, if they compare, they can say that one cable was much more colored than the other, and that is good if they progress towards less color, which is what I understand Kuro owners are doing. But here we have proper compares being carried out by the owners.
Ked, hardly anyone is comparing racks. The debate is more someone going from e.g. Stillpoints to Mooks, or Rollerblocks to RevOPods.
Stacore and Herzan/Taiko Tana are seperate options in their own right.
For me, all my moves have been to more neutral options, reducing colouration and enhancing neutrality and the difference between recordings.
Stacore and Herzan/Taiko Tana are seperate options in their own right.
For me, all my moves have been to more neutral options, reducing colouration and enhancing neutrality and the difference between recordings.
Yes they are. Otherwise, get an Ikea rack. And don't claim one brand of rack makes a difference to another, and that racks are not changing the sound only footers are.
I can see how an argument can be made that racks and signal cables are either tweaks or not. Yes, they are fundamental to a system, but they are not included with the gear the way power cords are. People do compare one brand to another to get the best sound for them, and the manufactures often charge as much as some amps, speakers, or source components. Transparent Audio refers to their products as "components".
Ked's argument that people compare brands is little different from people comparing amps, preamps or cartridges in their systems. It can and does lead to confusion. But, I think we can agree that items like footers or power cords are tweaks.
Perhaps we should start a new thread and get to the heart of the matter by defining some things and agreeing to terms.
Ked's argument that people compare brands is little different from people comparing amps, preamps or cartridges in their systems. It can and does lead to confusion. But, I think we can agree that items like footers or power cords are tweaks.
Perhaps we should start a new thread and get to the heart of the matter by defining some things and agreeing to terms.
Imo it needs to be kept simple. Just accept it all is a tweak, and say which is better and which is not, which is more colored and which is not, just that if you are commenting treat it with the same diligence and respect of compares and reporting that you treat your arms, carts, amps, etc. Don't say those don't color, racks don't, footers do
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |