Confessions of an Audiophile Junky-I Got Center Stage With Pitch Perfect Sound

[Steve williams]

I’ve done the A-B-A test 3 times now in my system. It’s a revelation as it becomes impossible to listen to your system without them. There is a total collapse of the soundstage. Where as we used to know and love it now sounds 2 dimensional and very plain. You begin to wonder where is the great sound we used to know in our systems.

 

[DaveyF]

I’ve done the A-B-A test 3 times now in my system. It’s a revelation as it becomes impossible to listen to your system without them. There is a total collapse of the soundstage. Where as we used to know and love it now sounds 2 dimensional and very plain. You begin to wonder where is the great sound we used to know in our systems.

Steve, since you are removing the CS footers and reverting back to no isolation footers at all, it may be instructive to try an alternative footer. Do you still own the Stillpoints?
If so, maybe place those in the same locations as where the CS were. That would be an interesting experiment.

 

[Steve williams]

Im totally divested of Stillpoints Davey

I think rockitman will be doing that experiment

 

[DaveyF]

Steve, do you have any other footers?
I did notice that when i removed my Harmonix from my digital source gear ( and went footer less) that the soundstage collapsed-- to some extent.

 

[LL21]

Hi LL21

To be honest, I struggle with the hyphenated categories, although, certainly CS is not an active system. I won’t claim “isolation” as it implies that, based on the substantial improvements in the performance of the component, one might assume that a shaker table would reveal a significant reduction in transmission over a broad band of low and high frequencies. I’m not saying that there wouldn’t be a measurable change, but I can tell you with certainty that I am not able to accomplish a broadband transmission reduction equivalent to this magnitude of improvement over the span of 13/16 of an inch (the height of the smaller foot).

For Center Stage to work, the 1st Law must be “in the equation”, but the 2nd Law is dominant largely through a fresh approach in material science. I’ve tried to be straightforward about this in the white paper and throughout this thread.

Having said this, #3 is an interesting question, although I cannot agree with your presumption for obvious reasons. Without exception in my experience with CS, individual songs seem to have a “perfect” volume level. You know it when you hear it. Everything clicks. It must be inherent to the recording. Is there an adaptation to fluctuations in wave amplitude.....complicated yet logical. But, I can’t say that I hear it.

I hope this helps.

Hi Joe,

Thank you. I guess in an even more dumbed down approach, does the CS footer 'deform' under pressure and then stay in that newly deformed shape...based on the vibrations from the equipment above? Just trying to learn big picture/high level.

 

[mullard88]

I agree with Tango. I would insert all the CS footers on all the parts of the chain that I believe they would be successful in improving the system's sound. I do not have the luxury of doing it equipment by equipment since my racks are moved every 90 days for aircon maintenance. This is the reason I did not acquire any CMS racks. These CS footers finally presented an alternative for me to be able to try a CMS product.

 

[joelavrencik]

Hi Joe,

Thank you. I guess in an even more dumbed down approach, does the CS footer 'deform' under pressure and then stay in that newly deformed shape...based on the vibrations from the equipment above? Just trying to learn big picture/high level.

Hi LL21

They do not.

 

[LL21]

Hi LL21

They do not.

Interesting...thank you!

 

[Tango]

you were going to send a couple sets to me to try per our last phone call. if you changed your mind (which I would understand) you never told me. and don't misunderstand me as i'm not upset you have not sent them, I did not need to try them.....but I could if you like.

Dear Mike,

This tweak is interesting and doesn’t cost much. It caught my attention because of the manner in which Mr.Lavrencik took in handling controversial. Very humble, sincere and patient.

I have many things going on with my system. First I have to optimize my 927 setup. I need to change the tonearm cable and also bypass the phono cable that came with the table. I need to tweak my arm/cart setup until Lady Anna really sings. I also have to customize and install a second arm/cart to the 927. Then I have a homework to deliver to Ron in evaluating the Axiom/Palladian as the second arm/cart on my AF1 Premium. Then I have the Elite coming in December. Then the Schnerzinger devices come a month after that. And then my second phono EMT JPA66 will come. And then .....

I just don’t have time to try CS footer in the next six months. I hope you can try them. Your testimonial will be reliable to me. If you rave about them and buy them after test then it is really a magic footer. If you are not saying much then it means you are being polite and diplomatic about it .

Gosh..it is fun putting you on a spot.

Just kidding Mike.

Tang

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Dear Mike,

This tweak is interesting and doesn’t cost much. It caught my attention because of the manner in which Mr.Lavrencik took in handling controversial. Very humble, sincere and patient.

I have many things going on with my system. First I have to optimize my 927 setup. I need to change the tonearm cable and also bypass the phono cable that came with the table. I need to tweak my arm/cart setup until Lady Anna really sings. I also have to customize and install a second arm/cart to the 927. Then I have a homework to deliver to Ron in evaluating the Axiom/Palladian as the second arm/cart on my AF1 Premium. Then I have the Elite coming in December. Then the Schnerzinger devices come a month after that. And then my second phono EMT JPA66 will come. And then .....

I just don’t have time to try CS footer in the next six months. I hope you can try them. Your testimonial will be reliable to me. If you rave about them and buy them after test then it is really a magic footer. If you are not saying much then it means you are being polite and diplomatic about it .

Gosh..it is fun putting you on a spot.

Just kidding Mike.

Tang

Dear Master Tang,

thank you for that.....if i get the opportunity, i will do my best to measure up.

and i hope you are having a great day.

looks like you have lots of fun, exciting things in the present, and lined up, to occupy your time that we will all look forward to hearing about, so I don't blame you for not taking on another project. i wish i could play around with new arms, carts, and phono's too.....maybe at some point. for now, i will live vicariously through your adventures.

best regards,

Mike

 

[PeterA]

I’ve done the A-B-A test 3 times now in my system. It’s a revelation as it becomes impossible to listen to your system without them. There is a total collapse of the soundstage. Where as we used to know and love it now sounds 2 dimensional and very plain. You begin to wonder where is the great sound we used to know in our systems.

Steve, this comment surprises me. I recall reading about your revelations after acquiring the MasterBuilt cable loom and the CMS racks. I may have to go back to read your posts, but I seem to remember they brought out a never before heard sense of realism, detail, and yes, soundstage with all of the micro level information needed to reproduce ambient hall and stage information. I had also understood that the new level of transparency allowed the listener to better discern a particular recording and thus a clearer experience of various listening perspectives presented by different recordings. If you have removed the footers three times now, are you saying that none of that prior greatness you heard from your system about the soundstage is retained? What about the sense of Presence? Was it really that flat sounding after your investments in MasterBuilt and CMS?

Or, are you saying (implying) that the degree of improvement with the CS footers is surprising, astonishing really, given their cost and diminutive size, so that what in reality is a relative improvement in soundstage definition compared to what you had before, but as small incremental improvements really matter at this point in your system development, that the removal is "shocking" because the reference sound is no longer quite as good.

I tend to read your posts now as extreme enthusiasm for every incremental improvement in sound because your system is at such a high level. I noticed this same degree of enthusiasm from MikeL when he changed bearings or cartridge mounting plates in his tonearms, or added a new record weight. Enthusiasm well justified because of all the monumental work that went into the system beforehand and the constant experimentation that lead to these refined and higher level improvements. That last 5%.

Did you really experience a total and complete collapse of soundstage when these footers are removed? If so, I'm perplexed about your positive comments of the system before the addition of these new footers. You never described your system as 2 dimensional and very plain before.

I don't mean to come across as overly critical about your writing, but for us to gain a more accurate understanding of what these footers are doing in particular, and what a member's system sounds like in general, then these kinds of descriptions seem too exterme and only serve to diminish past reports about a system's sound. Virtual system threads are wonderful places to get to know fellow members' systems. If the owner's opinion of the sound so radically changes with the addition of what some refer to as a tweak, I am left confused about the previous reference point.

We are often told to just listen for ourselves. That is great advice, but right now, this is an active thread discussing the effects of these devices. They are not available right now, so talking about their effect is the next best thing and really what a forum like this one is all about.

I look forward to reading the first field reports from users about their experience and if they too hear this complete collapse of soundstage. Perhaps their listening reports could start with a description of the system's stage before the insertion of the footers (the A part), then a description of the stage with the footers (the B part), and finally a new description of the stage with the footers removed (the A part) in the A-B-A test that you suggest. Marty, Micro and others seem to have a semblance of a soundstage in their systems currently. If they too report a complete collapse of their soundstages with the removal of the footers, then I will begin to wonder what is really going on.

 

[Steve williams]

are you saying (implying) that the degree of improvement with the CS footers is surprising, astonishing really, given their cost and diminutive size, so that what in reality is a relative improvement in soundstage definition compared to what you had before, but as small incremental improvements really matter at this point in your system development, that the removal is "shocking" because the reference sound is no longer quite as good.

I am

As great as I thought my sound was before the CS (and it was ) I can honestly say that the collapse of the sound stage is so dramatic that you begin to understand. The soundstage without the feet becomes 2D

Did you really experience a total and complete collapse of soundstage when these footers are removed? If so, I'm perplexed about your positive comments of the system before the addition of these new footers. You never described your system as 2 dimensional and very plain before.

It's fascinating Peter that the soundstage before the CS to my mind was as good as it gets but the feet locks in the sound so perfectly that the immersive effect of the sound reaches out and grabs you such that the soundstage with the feet sounds 3D

Plus I have also commented about PRAT. I never knew how to describe this in an understandable way until I heard the true effect of the CS foot. It's true effect however becomes obvious with an A-B-A test

If they too report a complete collapse of their soundstages with the removal of the footers, then I will begin to wonder what is really going on.

Peter I know you paint me as an extremist but I can say that every one who has used the CS foot has experienced this

IIRC mobiusman made the same comment in his reviewhen he removed them........

At the end of my evaluation I had to remove these footers because Steve needs them back while I wait for my final production models. I chose to remove the footers one by one so I will be able to do the AB-A comparison, since this change will be instantaneous rather than during the progressive changes that occurred on the two insertion processes. I believe that this is the single best evaluation technique for the footers. When I get V3, hopefully everything in my system will be stabilized, including the Niagara 7000 and then I can perform and longer evaluation and see if there is any improvement beyond the 8 day duration of each of listening tests.

Before giving you a step by step assessment of what happened when I removed one set of footers at a time, I want to repeat that an AB-A test is the only true way to evaluate the benefit because it demonstrates the full impact of the footers, rather than the progressive changes upon insertion.

Removal of each set of footers at a time was very obvious in its impact. At each step, the reduction of sound stage and most particular believability was the most noticeable change. I was somewhat surprised that the removal of the footers from my solid state Spectral 300RS amp made the single biggest change, although it is possible that it was because it was the first part of the overall system to be removed, suggesting that one must have these under all of the core electronics. I next removed a set from under my ARC Ref CD-9, a tubed unit, which produced the same qualitative change as I experienced when I removed the footers from the Amp, although with about only 1/3 ot the difference compared to the removal of the amp. The same thing happened when I removed the Lamm phono stage while listening to a record, although the difference was greater than removing footers on the digital leg. I do not know if this is due to the increased resolving power of analog, the higher quality of my analog leg or the more likely, a combination of both. This is not surprising since the main thing I listen for is believability and real life is analog and not a bunch of sample points with algorithms filling the gaps, regardless of sampling rate.

So in the midst of an audio spending spree, my take on the wisdom of spending another $4800 for these footers was simple----It is all about believability for me. I want to be taken away from my overwhelming daily life as a psychiatrist and addiction specialist. It is the rare system that I have listened to that achieves that. While I thought I had that ability with my system pre-Centerstage, I could not have predicted the magnitude of the benefit of the Centerstage footers on this front. I have no doubt that regardless of the level of sophistication of your system, these footers will push the sound in the direction of increased believability. It is my belief, based on the system improvements I made during my evaluations, from listening for a week since removal of the footers and from listening to high end systems for 55+ years, the better the system, the greater the benefit of these footers.

So in summary Peter I have done this test 3 times in my system and each time the effect is identical

 

[microstrip]

(...) I look forward to reading the first field reports from users about their experience and if they too hear this complete collapse of soundstage. Perhaps their listening reports could start with a description of the system's stage before the insertion of the footers (the A part), then a description of the stage with the footers (the B part), and finally a new description of the stage with the footers removed (the A part) in the A-B-A test that you suggest. Marty, Micro and others seem to have a semblance of a soundstage in their systems currently. If they too report a complete collapse of their soundstages with the removal of the footers, then I will begin to wonder what is really going on.

(...) Did you really experience a total and complete collapse of soundstage when these footers are removed? If so, I'm perplexed about your positive comments of the system before the addition of these new footers. You never described your system as 2 dimensional and very plain before. (...)

Peter,

You have to go to the basics of stereo to understand this complete collapse of soundstage.

According just to the physics of sound, stereo only manages to pan a sound source between your loudspeakers. Artificially enhancing and manipulating phase it is possible to create the illusion of sound outside the boundaries of the speakers and suggest depth.

Most of the soundstage as we perceive it in stereo is created from tonal cues encoded in recording that are processed by our experienced brain - particularly reflection in boundaries such as walls, floor and ceiling or even other objects in the stage. It seems to me these feet manage to create a system that manages to present this ques in a way our brain processes them easily, extracting more information from them - and then we recreate a better soundstage in our illusion, increasing our enjoyment. Many people refer that our perception is particularly sensitive to additive nasty distortions, that block our capacity to enjoy sound reproduction - perhaps the feet also manage to eliminate a few of them. Only longer term use will allow me to see if they have any kind of negative effect on my enjoyment - in this moment I am flooded by the wow effect!

There is a nasty consequence of the use of this type of product - you get used to it, and in some sense your brain becomes lazy - if you suddenly suppress this clever processing carried by the feet, a lot of information seems to disappear and you may feel the soundstage collapses.

We should remember that the information is encoded in the recording - theoretically we could devise a system to carry this information directly in the nerves that bring it to the brain! The role of the high system stereo system is to present information in a way we can recreate the illusion of being there or they are here, according to our preference.

We should see our high-end systems as preprocessers - they prepare and condition the recordings to be better understood by our brain, that surely has many preferences, created by experience and surely our intentions.

Please add IMHO to all these sentences!

 

[PeterA]

Peter,

You have to go to the basics of stereo to understand this complete collapse of soundstage.

According just to the physics of sound, stereo only manages to pan a sound source between your loudspeakers. Artificially enhancing and manipulating phase it is possible to create the illusion of sound outside the boundaries of the speakers and suggest depth.

Most of the soundstage as we perceive it in stereo is created from tonal cues encoded in recording that are processed by our experienced brain - particularly reflection in boundaries such as walls, floor and ceiling or even other objects in the stage. It seems to me these feet manage to create a system that manages to present this ques in a way our brain processes them easily, extracting more information from them - and then we recreate a better soundstage in our illusion, increasing our enjoyment. Many people refer that our perception is particularly sensitive to additive nasty distortions, that block our capacity to enjoy sound reproduction - perhaps the feet also manage to eliminate a few of them. Only longer term use will allow me to see if they have any kind of negative effect on my enjoyment - in this moment I am flooded by the wow effect!

There is a nasty consequence of the use of this type of product - you get used to it, and in some sense your brain becomes lazy - if you suddenly suppress this clever processing carried by the feet, a lot of information seems to disappear and you may feel the soundstage collapses.

We should remember that the information is encoded in the recording - theoretically we could devise a system to carry this information directly in the nerves that bring it to the brain! The role of the high system stereo system is to present information in a way we can recreate the illusion of being there or they are here, according to our preference.

We should see our high-end systems as preprocessers - they prepare and condition the recordings to be better understood by our brain, that surely has many preferences, created by experience and surely our intentions.

Please add IMHO to all these sentences!

Thank you Micro. These observations seem to be consistent with what Steve writes. Could you describe what you remember about what you perceived of your system's sense of soundstage before the introduction of these footers? Was it also flat and two dimensional or do these footers enhance and improve the sense of stage that you already had before? I ask for this specifically, because I and others now experience a sense of soundstage when listening to my system. If I insert these footers into my system and then remove them, are you saying that the degree of three dimensional staging I now hear will disappear, collapse and be lost? This seems to be what you and Steve are saying, and I am trying to understand if that is true and image how this is possible.

 

[rockitman]

if you desire objectivity; in a perfect world one would have 2 sets of the same electronics side by side ( one set all dressed up with the footers and one set not) where you could A/B over time to observe the actual delta positive and negative over that period. since we know that will never happen in the real world maybe the next best approach would be the 'baby step' approach Micro has chosen, where you only focus on one piece of gear you know intimately and keep the variables limited.



or as Steve mentions, just throw them all in and trust your sense of reference point over time and not worry about it.

I think you hit it here Mike..baby Steps. That's what I am doing now since Stillpoints were hinted to be inferior at some point in this thread. I am down to my stock footers save for the speakers and am re-balancing my sense of the system sound without footers (keep in mind most stock footers are not voiced for the equipment they sit under)....it's a crap shoot. I then plan to go "Source" component by component to try to discern and evaluate changes in sound from stock to Stillpoints in my case.

I suspect if these CMS footers endure the honeymoon phase and become quite popular and available for demo, I will try a set in a systematic fashion as you and Micro suggest. It will be interesting to try and keep track of which component is impacted most (better or worse) w/ aftermarket treatment. I have to admit my approach to Stillpoints a few years back was rather shotgun like.

 

[LL21]

I think you hit it here Mike..baby Steps. That's what I am doing now since Stillpoints were hinted to be inferior at some point in this thread. I am down to my stock footers save for the speakers and am re-balancing my sense of the system sound without footers (keep in mind most stock footers are not voiced for the equipment they sit under)....it's a crap shoot. I then plan to go "Source" component by component to try to discern and evaluate changes in sound from stock to Stillpoints in my case.

I suspect if these CMS footers endure the honeymoon phase and become quite popular and available for demo, I will try a set in a systematic fashion as you and Micro suggest. It will be interesting to try and keep track of which component is impacted most (better or worse) w/ aftermarket treatment. I have to admit my approach to Stillpoints a few years back was rather shotgun like.

Very much looking forward to your thoughts here! Let the games begin!

 

[PeterA]

I think you hit it here Mike..baby Steps. That's what I am doing now since Stillpoints were hinted to be inferior at some point in this thread. I am down to my stock footers save for the speakers and am re-balancing my sense of the system sound without footers (keep in mind most stock footers are not voiced for the equipment they sit under)....it's a crap shoot. I then plan to go "Source" component by component to try to discern and evaluate changes in sound from stock to Stillpoints in my case.

I suspect if these CMS footers endure the honeymoon phase and become quite popular and available for demo, I will try a set in a systematic fashion as you and Micro suggest. It will be interesting to try and keep track of which component is impacted most (better or worse) w/ aftermarket treatment. I have to admit my approach to Stillpoints a few years back was rather shotgun like.

I agree with this approach, Christian. $1200 for a set of four is not that expensive, but it becomes $9,600 for the eight components that I have on footers excluding my turntable. Still not an outrageous amount, but I have heard tremendous improvements from cartridges costing this much more than previous cartridges. I would feel more comfortable trying one set for two weeks and then if impressed, perhaps order a few more or the complete batch.

EDIT: I should add that as tempting as the "all at once" approach is, it is possible that they are more and less effective under certain components. At this early stage of user reports, it would be a shame to try them all at once and not ever know if one spent $1,200 for a set under one component which may not have the same positive effect for whatever reason as it does under the rest of the components. I have to say though, as reports drip in, my curiosity is peaked.

 

[Steve williams]

I will try a set in a systematic fashion as you and Micro suggest. It will be interesting to try and keep track of which component is impacted most (better or worse) w/ aftermarket treatment.

I did this the first time I used the feet. In my system the effect was cumulative so on the 2nd and 3rd time I inserted them all at once as I couldn't suffer through the break in all over again. I too am interested in the conclusions of rockitman as his intent is to do the scientific approach of one at a time. In my system I found efficacy under each component. To state that everyone will experience similar effects is just unknown at this point.

For my final experiment I intend to place these systematically under the power supplies of my amp, preamp and phono stage a total of 6 more boxes as mine are dual mono with dual power supplies

 

[joelavrencik]

I agree with this approach, Christian. $1200 for a set of four is not that expensive, but it becomes $9,600 for the eight components that I have on footers excluding my turntable. Still not an outrageous amount, but I have heard tremendous improvements from cartridges costing this much more than previous cartridges. I would feel more comfortable trying one set for two weeks and then if impressed, perhaps order a few more or the complete batch.

EDIT: I should add that as tempting as the "all at once" approach is, it is possible that they are more and less effective under certain components. At this early stage of user reports, it would be a shame to try them all at once and not ever know if one spent $1,200 for a set under one component which may not have the same positive effect for whatever reason as it does under the rest of the components. I have to say though, as reports drip in, my curiosity is peaked.

Hi PeterA

It's great that you might try a set. You’re a clear thinker and a precise interpreter of the written word. Most of us, I include myself, are not able to communicate at your level. This condition isn’t likely to improve. What I’m getting at is, it would probably be better for you to hear it for yourself to eliminate the confusion of language. I, for one, would be very interested in reading a report from PeterA.

 

[Joe Whip]

I would as well although I wouldn't call $1,200 cheap either. I must say that following this thread that my hyperbole dectector has been going off a bit. I have an open mind though. It is too bad they won't be at Cap as I looked forward to seeing them and learning more.