Hi again XV,
Thanks for the pic. Yes indeed, the weight is concentrated in the geom center.
When you gie me the dimensions you need, I'll try to make some simple
visualizations to see how the larger top plate would look like.
Cheers,
Minus K Isolation Platform BM-8
- Thread starter Stump
- Start date
Hi again XV,
Thanks for the pic. Yes indeed, the weight is concentrated in the geom center.
When you gie me the dimensions you need, I'll try to make some simple
visualizations to see how the larger top plate would look like.
Cheers,
The triple motor. I have never heard one. Its over 5k right? Damn expensive.
The 3 motors does sound better than one, so the triple motor in one will no doubt sound a bit better.
I am actually going to see if I can position my 3 large motors in the same config and see if it works - will look pretty stupid but you never know, it may sound better. With the heavier bn platter - the 3 separate motor config does slip at the beginning when starting whereas the single motor does not - its alk real estate of the belt touching the platter.
Hi All, interesting thread! I have a: Kii THREE digital active loudspeakers (a moderately sized monitor speaker), a Kii CONTROL digital preamp and an ultraRendu streamer (w/ LPS-1 ultracap PS). Period. I don't have a TT (sorry), nor do I have any real interest in heading down that path right now....
But since I do worry about vibration and since, basically, my entire system is built into the speakers (DACs x6, nCore amps x6), I was thinking of getting something like a pair of the Minus Ks for the speakers to hopefully aid in draining the energy from the speaker cabinets (and away from all the electronics therein). Does anyone have experience with isolating speakers with anything like a Minus K platform? I'm interested in active isolation too, but due to cost involved (I just don't have $20k + to drop on platforms at the moment) and the fact that I don't want to have to worry about how to power a brace of active platforms in a way that puts the platform under my speakers but their (likely) noisy power supplies away from the audio electronics, I think that the passive Minus K (or similar) is just a much more plausible solution for my circumstances. But that's just my currently-uninformed view, thoughts, observations, advice, suggestions, etc. are much appreciated!
But since I do worry about vibration and since, basically, my entire system is built into the speakers (DACs x6, nCore amps x6), I was thinking of getting something like a pair of the Minus Ks for the speakers to hopefully aid in draining the energy from the speaker cabinets (and away from all the electronics therein). Does anyone have experience with isolating speakers with anything like a Minus K platform? I'm interested in active isolation too, but due to cost involved (I just don't have $20k + to drop on platforms at the moment) and the fact that I don't want to have to worry about how to power a brace of active platforms in a way that puts the platform under my speakers but their (likely) noisy power supplies away from the audio electronics, I think that the passive Minus K (or similar) is just a much more plausible solution for my circumstances. But that's just my currently-uninformed view, thoughts, observations, advice, suggestions, etc. are much appreciated!
Input, check my answer to you on the Herzan thread.
Minus K not optimal any way UNLESS yr Kii's optimally load at maximum load limit.
Any need to use ballast plates negates their use for our purposes.
Mike Lavigne uses Herzan under pre and digital w no ill effects from internal electronics of the platform.
My vote is for Stacore Advanced passive isolation,
It trounces the Minus K, and handily beats the Herzan-like Kuraka active I auditioned recently.
Price midway between Minus K and Herzan.
Can't speak highly enough about what Stacore is doing here, I'm looking to invest in 7-8 platforms.
Minus K not optimal any way UNLESS yr Kii's optimally load at maximum load limit.
Any need to use ballast plates negates their use for our purposes.
Mike Lavigne uses Herzan under pre and digital w no ill effects from internal electronics of the platform.
My vote is for Stacore Advanced passive isolation,
It trounces the Minus K, and handily beats the Herzan-like Kuraka active I auditioned recently.
Price midway between Minus K and Herzan.
Can't speak highly enough about what Stacore is doing here, I'm looking to invest in 7-8 platforms.
Yes, I double-posed on both threads, since both seemed to be more-or-less related to my interests. Anyway, thanks for the feedback! First of all, 7-8 platforms, that's crazy money--I think you'll have more $$$ in platforms than I've got into my whole system! If you'd indulge me, would you mind answering a few more questions re: the Stacore? (Thanks in advance!)
1. (Unlike many here) I am looking for simplicity and ease of use as well as great sound; I've had more "tweaky" systems in the past and I've found that there is a direct and negative correlation between me fussing with my system and the amount of time I spend listening to/enjoying it. This is the main reason I have gone with digital-active speakers and I wish I could reduce my box and cable count even further to just 2 speakers and a network connection. Anyway, given people's comments on the needs of air/pneumatic isolation (re-leveling, the need for a compressor, and general pain-in-the ass-ness), I thought I ought to steer clear. One of the things that appealed to me about the Minus-K was its (apparent) set-and-forget nature. In your experience, how much fuss is the Stacore? How often do you have to pump it up and re-level it? Do you have to keep a air pump handy? Such things are, to me, to be avoided....
2. I read with interest your "A world first? Passive v active isolation platforms test" thread; very interesting and informative. I was surprised to hear all the talk about footers. My understanding of isolation technology was that the idea was to get the component(s) as close to the technology as possible, so any footer (obviously including "squishy" footers) was to be avoided. My thinking was to just place my speakers directly on the platform, sans footers. Would there be any reason not to do so?
3. After reading the "A world first?" thread, it seems like you've got experience with both the Basic and Advanced models. Thoughts on/comparisons between the two?
4. Price. My whole system is just north of 20k USD. Not at all an insubstantial amount but, let's face it, peanuts compared to some of the ultra-rigs out there. So cost is a relevant concern to me. Minus K puts their retail prices right on their website (thank the Gods someone does!), and I know how much Halcyonics and Herzans cost (too rich for my blood, esp. in pairs). Some intensive Googling got me a rough price on the Stacore... in Pounds Sterling and in Polish Zloties. Not a huge help. You've dropped some hints, but, in plain English, just how much do these things cost?!? (In Basic and Advanced dress.) Please feel free to PM me if Stacore doesn't want this info. public for some reason or if I'm stepping on any other sensitivities.
Errata.
1. I worry about the massive weight of these systems. Currently, I have my Kii's on my desktop on Ardan desktop stands (I listen in the very nearfield). 400 lbs (!) of Stacore + speakers would absolutely crush my desk. I was already resigned to going with some sort of floor stand to go under, say, a pair of Minus K's. But the massive weight of the Stacores would place considerably more demands on any stand....
2. When I said I was worried about active interaction with electronics, I wasn't talking about EMI/RFI, per se, but rather the power grid. Currently, I have both of my Kiis plugged straight into the wall (via Kubala Sosna PCs), the Kii preamp draws its power from the speakers over CAT 7 cable and the ultraRendu is "off the grid" with an ultra-capacitor-based PSU. But were I to go with active isolation, I'd have to considerably complicate my power solution... as Taiko Audio said on another thread, "[a]lso most of these [active] devices employ switching power supplies so beware where you power them from."
1. (Unlike many here) I am looking for simplicity and ease of use as well as great sound; I've had more "tweaky" systems in the past and I've found that there is a direct and negative correlation between me fussing with my system and the amount of time I spend listening to/enjoying it. This is the main reason I have gone with digital-active speakers and I wish I could reduce my box and cable count even further to just 2 speakers and a network connection. Anyway, given people's comments on the needs of air/pneumatic isolation (re-leveling, the need for a compressor, and general pain-in-the ass-ness), I thought I ought to steer clear. One of the things that appealed to me about the Minus-K was its (apparent) set-and-forget nature. In your experience, how much fuss is the Stacore? How often do you have to pump it up and re-level it? Do you have to keep a air pump handy? Such things are, to me, to be avoided....
2. I read with interest your "A world first? Passive v active isolation platforms test" thread; very interesting and informative. I was surprised to hear all the talk about footers. My understanding of isolation technology was that the idea was to get the component(s) as close to the technology as possible, so any footer (obviously including "squishy" footers) was to be avoided. My thinking was to just place my speakers directly on the platform, sans footers. Would there be any reason not to do so?
3. After reading the "A world first?" thread, it seems like you've got experience with both the Basic and Advanced models. Thoughts on/comparisons between the two?
4. Price. My whole system is just north of 20k USD. Not at all an insubstantial amount but, let's face it, peanuts compared to some of the ultra-rigs out there. So cost is a relevant concern to me. Minus K puts their retail prices right on their website (thank the Gods someone does!), and I know how much Halcyonics and Herzans cost (too rich for my blood, esp. in pairs). Some intensive Googling got me a rough price on the Stacore... in Pounds Sterling and in Polish Zloties. Not a huge help. You've dropped some hints, but, in plain English, just how much do these things cost?!? (In Basic and Advanced dress.) Please feel free to PM me if Stacore doesn't want this info. public for some reason or if I'm stepping on any other sensitivities.
Errata.
1. I worry about the massive weight of these systems. Currently, I have my Kii's on my desktop on Ardan desktop stands (I listen in the very nearfield). 400 lbs (!) of Stacore + speakers would absolutely crush my desk. I was already resigned to going with some sort of floor stand to go under, say, a pair of Minus K's. But the massive weight of the Stacores would place considerably more demands on any stand....
2. When I said I was worried about active interaction with electronics, I wasn't talking about EMI/RFI, per se, but rather the power grid. Currently, I have both of my Kiis plugged straight into the wall (via Kubala Sosna PCs), the Kii preamp draws its power from the speakers over CAT 7 cable and the ultraRendu is "off the grid" with an ultra-capacitor-based PSU. But were I to go with active isolation, I'd have to considerably complicate my power solution... as Taiko Audio said on another thread, "[a]lso most of these [active] devices employ switching power supplies so beware where you power them from."
Hi Input, some, er, further input from me LOL.
1- ease of use, all I can say is that these platforms are all "easy" to use, but the Minus K is completely impractical unless yr Kii's are at the max loading limit.
If they're not, you'll have to bulk up with ballast plates, and in my limited experience, whatever material I used negatively coloured the outcome.
Additionally the MK has to be loaded just so the centre of gravity of supported component is just right.
For a spkr my guess is that would be easy, but for an asymmetrically loaded tt, it's a nightmare.
I wouldn't touch the MK if you need any sort of ballast plate.
The Kuraka active is pretty much set and forget.
The Stacore currently has an 85kg balanced pwr transformer on it, and I've not had to use the pump on it since the day I adjusted it for the first time.
Tbh, it takes less than 30s with a standard bicycle pump.
Pretty much set and forget, or the next best thing.
2- footers, good q.
Eliminate ALL soft footers, and rely on placing the component w chassis fully resting on the platform, or rely on hard footers (I use some Symposium pucks).
Soft footers disabled any impvts on the Stacore and the Kuraka.
3- Basic v Advanced, latter has an additional 35kg CLD platform that w Rollermodule ball bearings provides extra lateral isolation.
If you're component is over 65kg, go Basic, if it's under, go Advanced.
I'm planning Advanced under all my gear except 85kg transformer which can only use Basic.
4- Price, I can get you in touch w Jarek of Stacore, but it equates to midway btwn MK and Herzan/Accurion/Kuraka
5- The weight is SERIOUSLY crazy! But the mix of pumps, mass loading, CLD materials slate w special sauce is what it is.
Good luck w reinforcing that desk LOL.
6- I do know the crazed end of this hobby have replaced the switched mode psu's of their Herzans and Accurions w linear psu's, to good effect reportedly.
For me, my tubed preamp and psu are highly sensitive to such stuff, so passive Stacore the only way fwd for me here.
1- ease of use, all I can say is that these platforms are all "easy" to use, but the Minus K is completely impractical unless yr Kii's are at the max loading limit.
If they're not, you'll have to bulk up with ballast plates, and in my limited experience, whatever material I used negatively coloured the outcome.
Additionally the MK has to be loaded just so the centre of gravity of supported component is just right.
For a spkr my guess is that would be easy, but for an asymmetrically loaded tt, it's a nightmare.
I wouldn't touch the MK if you need any sort of ballast plate.
The Kuraka active is pretty much set and forget.
The Stacore currently has an 85kg balanced pwr transformer on it, and I've not had to use the pump on it since the day I adjusted it for the first time.
Tbh, it takes less than 30s with a standard bicycle pump.
Pretty much set and forget, or the next best thing.
2- footers, good q.
Eliminate ALL soft footers, and rely on placing the component w chassis fully resting on the platform, or rely on hard footers (I use some Symposium pucks).
Soft footers disabled any impvts on the Stacore and the Kuraka.
3- Basic v Advanced, latter has an additional 35kg CLD platform that w Rollermodule ball bearings provides extra lateral isolation.
If you're component is over 65kg, go Basic, if it's under, go Advanced.
I'm planning Advanced under all my gear except 85kg transformer which can only use Basic.
4- Price, I can get you in touch w Jarek of Stacore, but it equates to midway btwn MK and Herzan/Accurion/Kuraka
5- The weight is SERIOUSLY crazy! But the mix of pumps, mass loading, CLD materials slate w special sauce is what it is.
Good luck w reinforcing that desk LOL.
6- I do know the crazed end of this hobby have replaced the switched mode psu's of their Herzans and Accurions w linear psu's, to good effect reportedly.
For me, my tubed preamp and psu are highly sensitive to such stuff, so passive Stacore the only way fwd for me here.
Thank you again! I thought that the crank on (most) Minus K platforms was to adjust the loading--I thought that they were (adjustably) mass agnostic. Is this wrong? In any case, my thinking was that the 15kg Kii THREEs are almost a perfect match for the MK 25BM-10 (... 1kg too heavy, but still within limits?).
Furthermore, I agree with you: I think that the very symmetrical and compact THREEs would be much, much easier to balance than a TT; that's honestly not a principal concern of mine. Sorry about the terrible photo quality, everything I shoot looks like it's from a washed-out, dark and depressing parallel universe, but this picture should give people an idea of what I'm working with. (Those wondering if the glass tabletop rings... it's not great.)
I am planning to buy in December or January and so I am just starting to do research now. The MK looked (and still does look) like it ticked a lot of boxes but, spirit, I am worried that you are pushing me down a much more expensive, complex and difficult path. Notwithstanding, you've been a great help thus far; advice/observations from anyone with experience with similar devices under speakers remains very desirable!
My friend, I don't quite know how to break this to you, but I believe that you are the crazy end of this hobby.
Input, yep guilty as charged.
For me, vibn isoln is a "final frontier" upgrade/system completion for me.
I have a component synergy that still really pleases me, room acoustics and pwr grid that allows the synergy to fully express itself, in fact no desire to box swap any more.
But with an 18x38 Victorian wooden flr (within an overall 35x50 roof span), flr borne vibrations are a real thing, and the only area left for me to address that involves major expense.
I would have LOVED IT had I been able to stop at Stacore-ing the tt, but installing the Basic under the transformer was, well, transformative.
As was trial under cdp.
And then pre.
And so w tt, phono, cdp, pre, pre psu, monos X 2, and transformer to get isolation, well now you know why I'm driven to 8 platforms.
I would dearly wished to have settled on MKs if the trial had wked out, but alas it didn't.
All I can say, is thank goodness the Stacore beat the Kuraka active, if we're talking about excessive spend.
---
Re the MK crank handle, nothing to do w loading alas, it's just there for balancing duties.
Optimum loading mandatory.
I'm not optimistic going over the limit is going to work, the advice I had was that the MK had to be at the limit, not below, not above.
But I could be wrong here, do chat w them.
FWIW, even though the MK "looks" like good vfm, I found £2.5k for in effect one uber spring and two plates of steel desperately unappealing and anticlimactic.
Twice that gets a more cutting edge design in the Stacore w mass loading slate, modern take on Vibraplane, CLD slate w/special sauce, and additional Rollerblock isolated CLD top plate.
For me, vibn isoln is a "final frontier" upgrade/system completion for me.
I have a component synergy that still really pleases me, room acoustics and pwr grid that allows the synergy to fully express itself, in fact no desire to box swap any more.
But with an 18x38 Victorian wooden flr (within an overall 35x50 roof span), flr borne vibrations are a real thing, and the only area left for me to address that involves major expense.
I would have LOVED IT had I been able to stop at Stacore-ing the tt, but installing the Basic under the transformer was, well, transformative.
As was trial under cdp.
And then pre.
And so w tt, phono, cdp, pre, pre psu, monos X 2, and transformer to get isolation, well now you know why I'm driven to 8 platforms.
I would dearly wished to have settled on MKs if the trial had wked out, but alas it didn't.
All I can say, is thank goodness the Stacore beat the Kuraka active, if we're talking about excessive spend.
---
Re the MK crank handle, nothing to do w loading alas, it's just there for balancing duties.
Optimum loading mandatory.
I'm not optimistic going over the limit is going to work, the advice I had was that the MK had to be at the limit, not below, not above.
But I could be wrong here, do chat w them.
FWIW, even though the MK "looks" like good vfm, I found £2.5k for in effect one uber spring and two plates of steel desperately unappealing and anticlimactic.
Twice that gets a more cutting edge design in the Stacore w mass loading slate, modern take on Vibraplane, CLD slate w/special sauce, and additional Rollerblock isolated CLD top plate.
Hi Input,
I'm Jarek of Stacore. Thanks fo your interest in us.
From my experience I can say that decoupling the speakers is definitely
a step worth investigation and experiments. Proper decoupling does
bring some clarity to the sound the speakers/system/source is able to produce.
The articulation is improved, so is micro and macro dynamics to name just a few potential benefits.
As for the mass, yes we are deliberately heavy at 70kg Basic and 95kg Advanced
and this is a high quality mass, which, as spirit pointed, is a part of the damping/decoupling
mix we are using. The platforms need a solid, stable support in order to work their best.
We experimented once putting stand monitors directly on their stands on our Basic platforms
with very good results. Regarding the pricing, please drop me a PM.
Thanks,
I'm Jarek of Stacore. Thanks fo your interest in us.
From my experience I can say that decoupling the speakers is definitely
a step worth investigation and experiments. Proper decoupling does
bring some clarity to the sound the speakers/system/source is able to produce.
The articulation is improved, so is micro and macro dynamics to name just a few potential benefits.
As for the mass, yes we are deliberately heavy at 70kg Basic and 95kg Advanced
and this is a high quality mass, which, as spirit pointed, is a part of the damping/decoupling
mix we are using. The platforms need a solid, stable support in order to work their best.
We experimented once putting stand monitors directly on their stands on our Basic platforms
with very good results. Regarding the pricing, please drop me a PM.
Thanks,
Hi XV,
Was making visualizations for a customer and recalled you. Here is how Advanced with a 650x500mm
plate would look like. Just an idea.
XV,
Yes it will work ok (70kg is a bit higher than 65kg max we specify for the bearings but we have an idea how to deal with it).
The platform will be softer (=lower natural frequency) with the heavier load and *in theory* will decouple slightly better.
In practice we have not experienced any really noticeable performance variations. In any case, we could supply an extra
30kg load plate made of the same CLD as the platform to be used with the 40kg weight.
Cheers,
Yes it will work ok (70kg is a bit higher than 65kg max we specify for the bearings but we have an idea how to deal with it).
The platform will be softer (=lower natural frequency) with the heavier load and *in theory* will decouple slightly better.
In practice we have not experienced any really noticeable performance variations. In any case, we could supply an extra
30kg load plate made of the same CLD as the platform to be used with the 40kg weight.
Cheers,
Hey Shane,
Most interested to hear what you think. Will you try the Minus K with and without your Ultra 5s? Most curious if you do...which do you like best:
1. No isolation
2. Ultra 5
3. Minus K
4. Ultra 5 on top of Minus K
5. Minus K on top of Ultra 5?...probably not adviseable?
Most interested to hear what you think. Will you try the Minus K with and without your Ultra 5s? Most curious if you do...which do you like best:
1. No isolation
2. Ultra 5
3. Minus K
4. Ultra 5 on top of Minus K
5. Minus K on top of Ultra 5?...probably not adviseable?
Agreed, those are all great questions. It's my understanding that the Minus K should work better the closer the active device (in this case, the TT) is to the technology (a point with which Minus K reps agree). But of course I emphasize the word "should;" the proof is in the testing and listening.
I ve owned the Minus K with three turntables--my observations are:
A: You MUST get the operating weight as close as possible to the total bearing figure of your MK platform--ie say 100 Ib version --then 90Ib up will perform best.
B: I would not put the TT direct on the MK metal top--I found a slab of Silestone( NOT Slate) or Air dried Maple worked superior to the bare MK surface placement.
C:The MK --as voiced in past threads can be quirky to set in a Balanced position --due to the semi central placement of the spring loaded point--but can be smoothed with patience and diligent adjustment.
D:I tried the Stillpoints as pictured and found them to add an"aggressive metallic" aspect to the sonics that I found troublesome--so I moved them on.
Re the footer Q'--well you can pick ya Poison--we all hear different and favour points of playback in various subjectives--- I do suggest trial carefully --as I found with the Stillpoints my original impression was
hey!-- these are detailed clean precise/etc/etc--but they fatigued and became wearisome in short period--take care here.
So what did I use as well under the TT's?--Marigo Feet-VGood, Combak T-210's--VGood,SMook GDFeet--excellent-- of course you may go "au naturale"and use the supplied ones.
All TTs I've had here were non suspended.
All in all the MK's are excellent units--that have been "seconded" for TT isolation Audio use--they originally came to the fore when Library of Congress selected them
for use under Simon Yorke's modified S10's.
Personal observations only and agree YVMV
Good Listening,
BruceD
Hey Lloyd
The Stillpoints have replaced the old feet under the Technics table - so they stay where they are. 5's added space, some clarity and calmness over the stk feet.
Sonically, early days when comparing to my DIY compressions spring isolation platform so will refrain at this point.
Hi BruceD and co. please correct me if I am doing something wrong.
The Minus K leveling is very imprecise and sensitive imo. you level it to a 120gm record, then put a 180gm record and the vertical position goes below the mid mark. Put a 90gm record and the level goes towards the top mark - Is it really that sensitive with the payload and impact on the vertical level? with no record on the platter - the level goes right up to the top and bumps so is touching the high point.,.
Virtually impossible to level vertically perfectly as every record is a different weight. The level seems to drift a bit too so far. My table is around 43kg with the max Minus K weight 48kg
Whenever you take a record off - the platform moves up and bumps up top with a thud or two. This is a pita to say the least.
So far, sonically its excellent - usability - its kinda sucks.
The Stillpoints have replaced the old feet under the Technics table - so they stay where they are. 5's added space, some clarity and calmness over the stk feet.
Sonically, early days when comparing to my DIY compressions spring isolation platform so will refrain at this point.
Hi BruceD and co. please correct me if I am doing something wrong.
The Minus K leveling is very imprecise and sensitive imo. you level it to a 120gm record, then put a 180gm record and the vertical position goes below the mid mark. Put a 90gm record and the level goes towards the top mark - Is it really that sensitive with the payload and impact on the vertical level? with no record on the platter - the level goes right up to the top and bumps so is touching the high point.,.
Virtually impossible to level vertically perfectly as every record is a different weight. The level seems to drift a bit too so far. My table is around 43kg with the max Minus K weight 48kg
Whenever you take a record off - the platform moves up and bumps up top with a thud or two. This is a pita to say the least.
So far, sonically its excellent - usability - its kinda sucks.
Wow, I had no idea it is so sensitive. I have not heard this kind of report before about the Minus K. How does one put a level on the turntable platter to confirm that the platter is level? I imagine that the weight of the level itself will throw it all off unless you find the absolute center of the distributed weight and place the level in that exact spot. It sounds too finicky to be a practical solution to turntable isolation.
you build the Minus K into the turntable from the ground up......Dohmann Helix 1
at the tip top of passive approaches one needs to get creative to get the result.....or maybe Stacore.
Last edited:
Similar threads
