We'll, now that the train has left the station.....a few comments if I may on Center stage footers.
Anti-vibration tools have been a useful adjunct for audiophiles for many years. My own experience has been translated mostly from the laboratory bench to my home listening environment by trial and error. When I was a young postdoctoral fellow, and long before they were modern laboratory tools to control vibration, I used a make-shift contraption from springs, foam rubber and tape to control vibration in a high-performance liquid chromatography apparatus that almost buzzed off the bench unaided. Controlling vibration allowed for a 100X improvement in sensitivity and detection of a tiny amount of a chemical in eye fluid that I otherwise could not measure in the undamped HPLC gear. Thus I learned first hand the benefits of anti-vibration gear to reducing background noise to let a signal become more identifiable.
Fortunately, anti-vibration equipment for laboratory equipment has come a long way in the past 3 decades. When I ran a research lab for a large pharmaceutical company, we used a plethora of pneumatic and piezoelectric benches to reduce vibrations from a wide variety of equipment that included electron microscopes to spectroscopy instruments. However, having a virtually unlimited budget for such gear was a luxury I did not have at home for audio equipment. Although I am certain that the Herzan and TMC devices discussed in this forum are the “real deal” as supported by transmissibility vs frequency plots that show as much as 100-1000 fold reduction of vibration in the region of 1-20 Hz and often beyond, most of us mere mortals are unable to allocate $10+K for the best of these devices. However, there are many of us that incorporate $1000 devices such as the venerable Vibraplane that work quite well for specific applications (i.e. turntable support) although they must be tethered to an air pump which can be a sonic nuisance if located in one’s listening room. Although useful and affordable, it is impractical to put a Vibraplane under every piece of gear if for no other reason that the base is larger than most audio racks and shelves. And those pumps are not truly innocuous (mine is a located a floor away).
When it came to finding self-sufficient, free-standing devices to reduce component vibration from my audio gear, I would often use trial and error methods to select devices that ranged from classic tip toes (in multiple varieties from metal to plastic to carbon fiber) to absorbent materials such as sorbothane to rubber mats to see which worked best under a given piece of gear. I am sure I am not the only audiophile who had a box of assorted goodies lying in a closet somewhere from which to choose.
So now comes along another footer with a fancy name “Center Stage” that I was asked to try under my gear. As you surely know by now they are made by Joe Lavrencik, the manufacturer of CMS racks. They apparently use a skillful combination of materials to derive benefits that surpass those of other conventional footers in a way that is neither disclosed nor explained. Don’t look for transmisibility vs frequency plots either. They aren’t available. But since they come from a credible manufacturer of audio racks that are well reviewed by a wide circle of publications and users alike, I figured, OK, why not try them? After all, their installation is effortless (just stick them under your gear) and if I didn’t like them, they can be removed as easily as they were installed.
So how did they sound? Or put more accurately how did my system sound with them in place? Before coming to a final impression, I unfortunately had to suffer the phenomenon we know collectively as “break-in”. Huh? Am I saying that a puny little footer needs time to acclimate under the gear that is supports before the system sounds its best? Unfortunately, that is the case. To be clear, I hate break-in. Some of it I understand (with cables, I get that it takes time for different metal surfaces to anneal) and some it (actually, most of it) I have no understanding of the voodoo that occurs during the break-in process. But one thing is clear. These things take some time to sound their best. In fact, the manufacturer states clearly that you should not expect optimum performance for several days. Yes, days. Lavrenchik also goes so far as to tell you that your system will likely sound worse initially, but then provides a note of optimism by telling you that your patience will be amply rewarded. He is right on both counts.
Initially, my system sucked with the footers in place. I used them under my VTL pre-amp, Meitner DAC and transport, and ASR phono stage. It was ugly at first. Unlistenable actually, particularly in the bass. I wanted to remove them after 2 days but persevered only because I promised I would do the experiment correctly and keep them in for at least 7 days. I’m glad I persevered because at day 4, something positive happened and the sound started to go beyond the speakers for the first time since their installation. By day 5, the soundstage was in full bloom, extending well beyond the speakers, with impressive depth as well. And by day 7, the bass finally popped. I shook my head in astonishment. The sound was actually superior to my starting point, which BTW, wasn’t too shabby to begin with. But the revelations did not stop there. At day 10 there was yet another incremental improvement, and now I'm starting to use words like "miniature space machines" to describe their benefits. Downside? Well, yes in the sense that you may have to tweak a few things here and there to derive the optimum sound stage with them in place. For example, I had to move the inside edge of my Gotham subs forward about 1 cm to regain optimum time arrival of the low bass with that of the Alexandrias. Not really unexpected or traumatic perhaps, but still, I didn't anticipate performing a slight phase adjustment tweak on my subs as a result of installing mere footers.
So what’s the bottom line? I neither understand how they work, and honestly do not care. I have no measurements to guide me either. Even for a scientist like me, those would be a “nice to have”, not a “must have”. But work they do. The proof is in the listening. They clearly improved the soundfield of my system like any good footer should do, but they did so in a way that was better than what I was using in my current set-up. The validation of their performance was put in high relief when I had to remove them to return them to the manufacturer as the units I had initially were not final production units. That was very telling. I missed them immediately and was therefore eager to get the units back permanently. (Absence makes the heart grow fonder as they say.) So that's the bottom line. They are cost effective. They are easy to install. They work well. What else do you want? I guess you could always choose to spend 10K for an active piezo device under every piece of audio gear, but I'll pass on that option when there's a far more cost effective way to reduce pernicious vibrations in my system that doesn't lead to divorce court.
