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

[DaveyF]

Davey, here is my theory based on knowing nothing about these footers. When the footers are initially inserted under the equipment, something about their design and construction actually causes the vibrations that are meant to be drained away from the component instead are actually being reflected back into the component, in effect, compounding the problem. The stock footers either isolated or drained vibrations and there was a certain base line performance and sound. Inserting these CS footers make the sound worse because vibrations are not being isolated or drained initially. Whatever the design is, it needs time to settle. Perhaps the various mysterious materials require time to settle and reform so that their properties don't reflect back vibrational energy, but rather drain the energy away by forming a drainage path. It may be pressure, temperature, or some combination of the two, but something is probably happening with the basic form of the composition of the materials and how energy moves through it. That is my best guess, not being at all technically oriented, as to why the actually sound worse than the stock footers initially and then, after sufficient settling time, eventually work as designed and then sound better than the stock footers.

The analogy I know from construction experience is this. Imagine stacking the raw materials needed for concrete in a stack or pile. The bags or piles of aggregate (stone or sand), lime, Portland cement and water have some strength. One could stand on that and not sink far into the pile of separated materials. Now mix the batch together and try to stand on it. You would slowly sink into it because it has not formed into its final state. There is a chemical reaction that needs to occur over time. Then return 24, 48 or more hours later, and that concrete mix will support a great load. Initially, that pile of concrete ingredients is less stable than a wood column. It gets even worst when first mixed together. But over time, its function improves and eventually becomes even better at supporting a load than the wood column.

This is one potential explanation, for what it is worth. I have no real idea if my explanation has anything to do with reality, but the problem is certainly intriguing. Once that patent is awarded, we may learn more from Joe about how these footers work. For now, I have to agree with Steve, that the best we can do is to make a judgement on their efficacy based on reports from other users and then try them in our own systems to find out for ourselves. I understand why some are skeptical. I don't think there is any way around it unless one is willing to take the risk to find out.

Interesting theory. So, with that theory in mind, one could simply place a heavy object on the CS footers and leave it at that...after enough time has gone by, the footer would be 'formed'. Except, apparently these CS footers require music to be playing while they are 'forming'??? So, IOW, the application of weight alone is not sufficient to 'form' these. That is what I believe I read from Steve.
If I'm incorrect in this, and based on your theory, I see no reason why the 'forming' process couldn't occur under any heavy object...and then once 'formed' the CS could be quickly relocated to their final position under the gear to be supported. Unless, that is, they have a VERY quick recovery period....( which would not really make sense, since they apparently take days to get to their 'formed' position...and then only seconds to get 'unformed' again???)

 

[Mobiusman]

This morning I listened to some music before going to work for the first time after my surgery. The Center Stage footers had been in under the key equipment for CD playback for 3 days (for the third time since this is V3 for me) and the improvement in sound was so dramatic, despite it being the third experience with the footers, that I can say without hesitation that it exceeded the benefit from inserting a pair of MIT MAX SHD interconnects ($17k/meter) between from my Spectral reference preamp and Spectral reference power amp. At this point I judge value by overall sound improvement/dollar. Nuff Said!!!!

 

[joelavrencik]

This break in is a curious thing. How are they able to get them to sound good at shows if they only have a couple of days to allow them to break in? I had thought I read up thread that once a set is broken in, if it is moved to another component, then the break in is not the full 8 or so days but substantially shorter. Is this true? I wonder what playing music has to do with it. The component's weight and transformers being on I would think would do the trick. I assumed the footers are "settling" or compressing during this break in period. Perhaps something more radical is happening and heat from the component is important to the process.

Hi Peter

With respect to your first question, we have found that the settling process is extended when Center Stage is installed under a component that has already established a steady state of equilibrium with the surface it is resting upon. Out of the box and onto the feet, cables probably take longer to settle in.

With respect to your second question, the answer is no, this is not true. The feet do not “break in”. The feet and the component establish a state of equilibrium over time.

The answer to your next sentence is that music is vibration and the component’s circuitry experiences electromechanical deterioration when the component is turned on. Both elements are necessary for the component to settle.

Moving onward, the feet do not compress. You are correct in supposing that something more radical is happening.

And finally, heat is not “necessary”, it might be better to say that heat is endemic within dynamic systems.

Thank you!

 

[Steve williams]

Interesting theory. So, with that theory in mind, one could simply place a heavy object on the CS footers and leave it at that...after enough time has gone by, the footer would be 'formed'. Except, apparently these CS footers require music to be playing while they are 'forming'??? So, IOW, the application of weight alone is not sufficient to 'form' these. That is what I believe I read from Steve.
If I'm incorrect in this, and based on your theory, I see no reason why the 'forming' process couldn't occur under any heavy object...and then once 'formed' the CS could be quickly relocated to their final position under the gear to be supported. Unless, that is, they have a VERY quick recovery period....( which would not really make sense, since they apparently take days to get to their 'formed' position...and then only seconds to get 'unformed' again???)

It’s easy to speculate Davey but more difficult to be correct. The only way to know is to try them.

 

[DaveyF]

Steve, I am not stating that these footers do not make some kind of a difference to the presentation that one gets from their system. I do not think I have ever stated that....how could I, because as you pointed out, I have not had the pleasure of hearing these devices.
What I questioned is the mechanism behind the initial sound quality being "apparently" so poor, and then their 'awaking' to 'bloom' into something that is far better. ( ok, this may be harsh, but I think that is the way one could describe the circumstance). I dont think I have speculated anywhere as to what the mechanism is that allows the change. I have absolutely no idea as to what that could be....and apparently according to Joe L's response above, neither does Peter A.

 

[joelavrencik]

Another question...why would an isolation device...like these CS's, sound bad in the first place???
That makes no sense to me whatsoever. They should sound better than no isolation from the git go...and perhaps only get better as time goes by...although I am failing to see the mechanism that allows this to happen.

Hi DaveyF

The answer is because Center Stage is not a "classical" isolation device. Isolation devices are First Law dominant. Although the FLT is certainly inherent to CS, CS works on a principle related to SLT. I have explained the mechanism previously.

What may make the principle seem elusive is that entropic transfer is not common to the devices generally discussed on this website. If we were talking about my racks (FLT) the conversation would be 180 degrees the opposite and, therein, aligned with your supposition.

 

[microstrip]

Well Steve, in regards to ARC sounding good right out of the box...and then being muddied up, this does make some sense...from a psycho acoustic perspective. The new item is pulling all of our ‘expectation bias’ receptors...and so it sounds good....( when in reality, it probably really doesn’t, and to those who don’t have the same bias...doesn’t sound that great). However, once the piece has ‘burnt in’ and the caps have stabilized etc., the piece typically sounds better! (Hopefully,lol )
(...) (

I have experience enough with ARC burn-in to come in support of Steve opinion - ARC electronics sound quality decreases significantly after the first few tens of hours and only starts sounding great after typically 500 hours. IMHO it is not our ‘expectation bias’ receptors - I had the pleasure of checking it in my system with two equal ARC CD8 players, one taken from the sealed box, the other two years old having more than 1500 hours on it.

 

[DaveyF]

Joe, please explain to us how the 2nd law of thermodynamics has anything to do with your footer. Thank you.

 

[Steve williams]

Joe, please explain to us how the 2nd law of thermodynamics has anything to do with your footer. Thank you.

davey

once again I will suggest that the patent is pending and you are asking Joe to divulge proprietary information.

Joe has discussed the operation in the past but I am betting he will say little until his patent is granted

 

[DaveyF]

I have experience enough with ARC burn-in to come in support of Steve opinion - ARC electronics sound quality decreases significantly after the first few tens of hours and only starts sounding great after typically 500 hours. IMHO it is not our ‘expectation bias’ receptors[/I] - I had the pleasure of checking it in my system with two equal ARC CD8 players, one taken from the sealed box, the other two years old having more than 1500 hours on it.

And you know this..how??

 

[DaveyF]

davey

once again I will suggest that the patent is pending and you are asking Joe to divulge proprietary information.

Joe has discussed the operation in the past but I am betting he will say little until his patent is granted

Steve, the 2nd law of thermodynamics is well known and understood. Joe L brought this up as a reason why it impacts his product and apparently has something to do with its ability.
He stated that he explained this previously...and if so, I am now asking him how the law relates to his product.

 

[microstrip]

davey

once again I will suggest that the patent is pending and you are asking Joe to divulge proprietary information.

Joe has discussed the operation in the past but I am betting he will say little until his patent is granted

I doubt that even the patent will carry a full explanation - patents do not protect general theories or mode of operation, just the implementation. It is why a good patent attorney is a valuable asset in such processes.

But I understand Davey curiosity - I feel the same on 99% of tweaks!

 

[joelavrencik]

Steve, DaveyF is asking one question and you are providing an answer to a different question.

DaveyF asked why the footers do what they do; why do they initially make the stereo system sound terrible.

You are answering those questions by explaining what the footers do (how they make the stereo system sound).

Even if someone inserts the footers into his own system and hears for himself what the footers do, the why questions still remain open.

Hi Ron,

The reason is related to, but not limited to, the fundamental change in the electromechanical point of equilibrium within the component. Because CS is in intimate contact with the component, and because the principle the feet uses directly affects the internal processes of the component, and because the new state of equilibrium is so radically different than the previously established state of equilibrium, the component's internal systems initially descend into a state of chaos. "Order" is reestablished over time. This is not difficult to understand, but what I see is a struggle with acceptance. The SLT has been around since the beginning of time and explains everything from a black hole to a rusting bridge. Applying it to audio, though, is very new. The processes are different and the results are groundbreaking.

 

[joelavrencik]

It is now stable, and IMHO a very positive contribution to the DAC and my system sound. It did not affect the master tape stability and size of soundstage of the Vivaldi, but it looks it added some of the explosiveness of the Metronome system to the DCS - the CenterStage effect is created by better, more natural dynamics in sound, that brings instruments more in front of us. I am particularly sensitive to the quality and continuousness of transients. Movements of the sticks among drums are better delineated, but in a non fatiguing way. The only think I have not confirmed yet is the deep bass performance.

It is different from any change we can make to our system - my only analogy would be letting a quality class A SS system warm-up for a few days. Surely the feet that came to my system will stay - every time a play a different recording it seems to have something new.

Considering the DCS digital system I am only using the footers under the DAC , perhaps I will try a spare set under the transport.

Hi microstrip

I think what you may find, and I am certainly not telling you "what to hear", is that CS will help the speakers produce more low cycles. But they will do so without bloat. Bass should be firm, musical and well balanced within the context of the musical piece being played. Again, I do not question your assessment at all, or your ability to analyze what you are hearing. You will get the very best results with CS in the entire signal path. If, for example, the amps are left out of the process, they may struggle to "keep up with" the signal they're being fed.

But, thank you so much for joining the family. Sharing your experience is very much appreciated.

 

[joelavrencik]

I suspect it partially has some relation to why it takes a phono cartridge coincidentally about the same hours of use to settle in.

In my experience only fully rigid couplers need no settling time. Well, those and couplers where the "soft" parts are not load bearing.

Note* My experience is based on trying out a whole bunch of stuff starting with vibrapods and eventually going on to carry 3 companies that take 3 different approaches for their coupling products, TechDAS (rigid - FEA), Townshend (Highly Compliant - Sprung-Pneumatic), CMS (hybrid CLD) .

Honestly, Jack this is a different way of doing things. Different approach nets different settling process nets different results. It's new and different.

 

[joelavrencik]

Ron, you are exactly correct. I am questioning why the footers would sound bad in the first place. So far, I have seen no plausible reason for this.
Jack, no cartridges that I am aware of sound bad when new and first installed...assuming of course that the installation has some merit. While these very same cartridges may well sound better after a few hours of burn in, that is entirely attributable to the suspension settling in. OTOH, the CS footers are apparently ’unlistenable’ until some amount of break in has occurred. It is this ‘unlistenability’ that I am failing to comprehend.
With my Combax Harmonix footers inserted there is an instant increase in SQ, very noticeable and easily heard ( and they certainly don’t make the sound worse than no isolation footers at all!) Like all decent isolation devices, the better the isolation, the more immediate the increase in SQ. So, when the ‘CS’ devices initially rob the system in regards to SQ, I question why this would be....??
Steve, don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that the ‘CS’ devices don’t work well as isolation devices, since I have not heard them, I cannot say that; but as Ron pointed out...so far nobody has been able to supply any of us with a logical( or for that matter ‘scientific’) reason as to why they a) work at all ( at least any better than any other competent isolation device) and b) require the break in period that you state, while sounding terrible until that point is reached!
I hope you now can see my point....

I guess the only thing I could add to what I have said in these very recent posts is (and I don't mean to be redundant) that if we were talking about my racks or similar devices, we wouldn't be having this conversation. This website is home to First Law dominant devices and you have an experiential base that informs you as to what they do and, based on what manufacturers tell you, how and why and when they do it. This is a new concept; a new approach with different "whats, hows and whys and whens".

For whatever it's worth, I struggled with the same thing. I had to get over myself. What I found was (and I am talking about myself in this entire paragraph) is that the human mind has a very hard time imagining something with which it has no previous experience. I give a conceptual credit for CS to my son. He possesses a level of intelligence with which I have no previous experience. All I did was execute his concept.

 

[joelavrencik]

Davey, here is my theory based on knowing nothing about these footers. When the footers are initially inserted under the equipment, something about their design and construction actually causes the vibrations that are meant to be drained away from the component instead are actually being reflected back into the component, in effect, compounding the problem. The stock footers either isolated or drained vibrations and there was a certain base line performance and sound. Inserting these CS footers make the sound worse because vibrations are not being isolated or drained initially. Whatever the design is, it needs time to settle. Perhaps the various mysterious materials require time to settle and reform so that their properties don't reflect back vibrational energy, but rather drain the energy away by forming a drainage path. It may be pressure, temperature, or some combination of the two, but something is probably happening with the basic form of the composition of the materials and how energy moves through it. That is my best guess, not being at all technically oriented, as to why the actually sound worse than the stock footers initially and then, after sufficient settling time, eventually work as designed and then sound better than the stock footers.

The analogy I know from construction experience is this. Imagine stacking the raw materials needed for concrete in a stack or pile. The bags or piles of aggregate (stone or sand), lime, Portland cement and water have some strength. One could stand on that and not sink far into the pile of separated materials. Now mix the batch together and try to stand on it. You would slowly sink into it because it has not formed into its final state. There is a chemical reaction that needs to occur over time. Then return 24, 48 or more hours later, and that concrete mix will support a great load. Initially, that pile of concrete ingredients is less stable than a wood column. It gets even worst when first mixed together. But over time, its function improves and eventually becomes even better at supporting a load than the wood column.

This is one potential explanation, for what it is worth. I have no real idea if my explanation has anything to do with reality, but the problem is certainly intriguing. Once that patent is awarded, we may learn more from Joe about how these footers work. For now, I have to agree with Steve, that the best we can do is to make a judgement on their efficacy based on reports from other users and then try them in our own systems to find out for ourselves. I understand why some are skeptical. I don't think there is any way around it unless one is willing to take the risk to find out.

Hi PeterA

I REALLLLY wish you would get enough for a signal path. You're an artist with words and I would LOVE to read your post.

 

[mountainjoe]

I have a feeling the footers sounding really bad out of the box is overstated. I'll know for sure when I get my sets. Joe says much the same thing about settling time for the filter shelves and while they do improve over time as the layers settle they were never "unlistenable". I chalk this down to Joe being more cautious. It's the same way for carts and suspension. MMs and high compliance MCs settle in faster but man missing bass surely happens with mid and low compliance carts. A few hours the bass is there probably because the carts are now tracking better but more like 50+ for everything to really gel and get the grittiness out too. It would take forever on the AF1 until I realized that with the vacuum system in play the cart suspensions weren't getting flexed so I now run them in with vacuum off. It's not a case of being bad but rather having them at their best. It is common for me for example to lower the VTF over time when the suspensions are no longer too stiff from being brand new or being unused for very extended periods of time.

My (limited) personal experience is that the degradation in sound quality was much more apparent with new CS footers placed under my DAC. When I placed a set of footers under my preamp and phono stage, there was an immediate (though subtle) improvement and while there was some degradation in midrange clarity over the first few days, it was nothing like what I experienced with my DAC.

My point is, I think this settling process and its sonic trajectory during that process depends on the type of device under which the footers are placed. This makes intuitive sense to me as DACs are very different beasts compared to analog preamps and phono stages. They subsequently have different relationships between vibration (either intrinsic or extrinsic) and the resultant sonic impact.

Perhaps Joe can comment on this particular aspect of the settling in process.

Cheers, Joe

 

[Steve williams]

I give a conceptual credit for CS to my son. He possesses a level of intelligence with which I have no previous experience. All I did was execute his concept.

FWIW, Joe's son is a Phd in electrical engineering and a veritable genius. I can honestly say I've never known anyone with a doctorate in EE

 

[joelavrencik]

Joe, please explain to us how the 2nd law of thermodynamics has anything to do with your footer. Thank you.

I VERY RESPECTFULLY apologize, but I don't know how to respond to this now that would be different than what I've said previously. I guess I don't understand what you want me to say. But, if you think of the SLT in simple terms, energy dissipates from its point of concentration, and then you think of entropy as a building up (or concentration) of energy that results in disorder, it would be foreseeable that the direct transference of any partial amount of the concentration would be advantageous to the functionality of a thermodynamic system. That's how it relates. But, as I have said, there is definitely the FLT aspect too.