Multiple Components on Active or Pneumatic Isolation Platforms

[Ron Resnick]

Who has an active isolation (Herzan, Accurion) or a pneumatic isolation (Vibraplane, Stacore) platform who has compared the efficacy of the platform when placing two components on the platform (one component on top of the other) versus one component on the platform?

Does the platform improve the vibration isolation of both components?

Does the platform improve the vibration isolation of either component less effectively than if the component were on the platform by itself?

Isolation platforms are expensive. To what extent can we pile components onto the platform and improve the vibration isolation of each component in the stack?

What is the effect of the feet of each component as you place one component on top of another? Do rubber feet reduce the vibration isolation effectiveness of the platform below?

Does the component sitting directly on the platform experience the greatest vibration isolation?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

not used pneumatic isolation at all, only active.

short answer.

except for when i stacked my Aqua CD transport on top of my Aqua Formula dac, single boxes were superior to stacked boxes when using active. one box per shelf even using passive on some had a greater net performance result than stacking multiple boxes on active. there are more effects at play when stacking boxes than just resonance isolation.

i suspect this is partly because the box to box interface is working to create it's own signature which then effects the active effect and is unpredictable......as well as the electrical interaction between the boxes.

long answer.

every situation is unique and you cannot generalize. and every system has it's own context and levels of information where one factor has a greater or less effect. and proximity to the resonance source might change how this plays out in stacking.

Edward or Emile at Taiko Audio might have the most experience with this whole question as not only have they stacked gear with active, they have measured these effects.

and finally; as we have learned, not all active is equal, and of course, not all pneumatic isolation is equal. and every rack choice (and floor situation) will result in a variation of the passive equation. so many variables that there are no absolutes.

 

[dan31]

I would imagine a single device on each isolation piece is the way to go. If you combine pieces you will have an aggregate of various sources of vibration and would be unlikely to have a full solution of these various vibration sources.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Stop trying to save cash Ron LOL.
If you can stretch to Pendragons, AS, loom of MB, you can, and should, stretch to seperate active or pneumatic platforms.

 

[Folsom]

This really depends on how well the components are coupled together.

 

[Stacore]

Dear Ron,

Not easy to draw any general conclusions and recommendations. Much depends on how the pile is kept together, if the upper piece can move freely or not, how it interfaces the lower piece, how does the platform react to the lifted center of gravity, etc etc. What I can for sure recommend if there is a need to put two pieces on one platform is to try to squeeze them side by side rather than pile up.

Cheer,

PS "Expensive" is of course a subjective term. If the price is related to the sonic benefits, properly implemented platforms may not look that expensive at all

 

[tmallin]

I agree that multiple active platforms would be the best solution, of course. I highly recommend the Minus k BM-8 or another Minus k platform more suitable to the particular needs of each component. If you have a large rack with enough vertical clearance, you could fit several vertically on different shelves.

But, as to your original question, I do have experience mounting multiple components on air suspension and active platforms, both the Active Vibraplane (the one with the automatic air pump) and the Minus k platform. In my experience, vertically stacking components which have quite solid chassis and feet (Bryston 7B SST amps, for example) works quite well, with only a small amount of degradation of the results. This was true with both the Active Vibraplane and the Minus k BM-8.

I also owned the long-discontinued Arcici Suspense Rack which used air bladders under the top shelf to isolate equipment not only on that shelf but up to four additional shelves hung from that shelf. When well-tuned--and that requires a lot of experimentation with the amount of air gap between the top shelf and its chassis--the Arcici Suspense offers audible performance quite comparable to either the Active Vibraplane or Minus k at a lower cost. If you can still find one, it is worth investigating. See, for example, this eBay ad.

Horizontal placement of multiple components is better yet--as long as you don't try to extend the horizontal platform by adding a larger shelf atop the surface of the isolation device. I tried various accessory shelves, including Target and Sound Organisation MDF models, plywood, maple, cherry, and granite. But Even using a high-tech shelf like the Black Diamond Racing carbon fiber composite "The Shelf" atop with Vibraplane with three BDR cones supporting The Shelf above the surface of the Vibraplane, the resulting sound is much closer to the results you get when using just The Shelf than it is to the sound of mounting equipment directly on the Vibraplane via the component's OEM feet. I had a custom "The Shelf" which was 48" long and which allowed mounting quite a few components directly on The Shelf surface without stacking.

I'm in the process of writing up more about my experiences over the decades with isolation devices in a new thread I'll place in Tom's Corner. And there's a new device which my preliminary listening suggests just may offer outstanding performance at a reasonable price and with very little added space or weight.

 

[microstrip]

We should notice that the Active Vibralane is a pneumatic passive isolator. The word "active" only describes an auto-leveling system that actuates occasionally - it does not act to cancel vibration.

 

[Folsom]

You know what, Ron, I'll do you one better...

Why is no one stacking Herzans for one TT?

 

[spiritofmusic]

Folsom, don't suggest that to DDK or Christian.

 

[microstrip]

(...) and finally; as we have learned, not all active is equal, and of course, not all pneumatic isolation is equal. and every rack choice (and floor situation) will result in a variation of the passive equation. so many variables that there are no absolutes.

Even worse - different components can react very differently to isolation or coupling to massive structures.

Even worse 2 - no one seems really interested in doing comparative research in these subject. Hi Rez recording and playback has reached such a degree of quality that could be a great tool for researching it. If we are curious we have to get them and listen ...

 

[Ron Resnick]

not used pneumatic isolation at all, only active.

short answer.

except for when i stacked my Aqua CD transport on top of my Aqua Formula dac, single boxes were superior to stacked boxes when using active. one box per shelf even using passive on some had a greater net performance result than stacking multiple boxes on active. there are more effects at play when stacking boxes than just resonance isolation.

i suspect this is partly because the box to box interface is working to create it's own signature which then effects the active effect and is unpredictable......as well as the electrical interaction between the boxes.

long answer.

every situation is unique and you cannot generalize. and every system has it's own context and levels of information where one factor has a greater or less effect. and proximity to the resonance source might change how this plays out in stacking.

Edward or Emile at Taiko Audio might have the most experience with this whole question as not only have they stacked gear with active, they have measured these effects.

and finally; as we have learned, not all active is equal, and of course, not all pneumatic isolation is equal. and every rack choice (and floor situation) will result in a variation of the passive equation. so many variables that there are no absolutes.

That all makes good sense, Mike. Thank you very much.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I agree that multiple active platforms would be the best solution, of course. I highly recommend the Minus k BM-8 or another Minus k platform more suitable to the particular needs of each component. If you have a large rack with enough vertical clearance, you could fit several vertically on different shelves.

But, as to your original question, I do have experience mounting multiple components on air suspension and active platforms, both the Active Vibraplane (the one with the automatic air pump) and the Minus k platform. In my experience, vertically stacking components which have quite solid chassis and feet (Bryston 7B SST amps, for example) works quite well, with only a small amount of degradation of the results. This was true with both the Active Vibraplane and the Minus k BM-8.

I also owned the long-discontinued Arcici Suspense Rack which used air bladders under the top shelf to isolate equipment not only on that shelf but up to four additional shelves hung from that shelf. When well-tuned--and that requires a lot of experimentation with the amount of air gap between the top shelf and its chassis--the Arcici Suspense offers audible performance quite comparable to either the Active Vibraplane or Minus k at a lower cost. If you can still find one, it is worth investigating. See, for example, this eBay ad.

Horizontal placement of multiple components is better yet--as long as you don't try to extend the horizontal platform by adding a larger shelf atop the surface of the isolation device. I tried various accessory shelves, including Target and Sound Organisation MDF models, plywood, maple, cherry, and granite. But Even using a high-tech shelf like the Black Diamond Racing carbon fiber composite "The Shelf" atop with Vibraplane with three BDR cones supporting The Shelf above the surface of the Vibraplane, the resulting sound is much closer to the results you get when using just The Shelf than it is to the sound of mounting equipment directly on the Vibraplane via the component's OEM feet. I had a custom "The Shelf" which was 48" long and which allowed mounting quite a few components directly on The Shelf surface without stacking.

I'm in the process of writing up more about my experiences over the decades with isolation devices in a new thread I'll place in Tom's Corner. And there's a new device which my preliminary listening suggests just may offer outstanding performance at a reasonable price and with very little added space or weight.

Thank you, Tom!

 

[Folsom]

Come on, imagine a tower of Herzan's to get your TT to height... The reduction in vibrations would be very impressive. It would be better than a single, obviously. As much as it seems like a joke, it's not really if you needed seriously reduction.

Ron is probably tuning out my posts. But as I said earlier and others have reiterated, if you can couple your equipment really well, then you can stack them on a Herzan. On the other types of platforms I would say yes and no. You don't want to create sway, so you have to think about how mass is distributed.

 

[Stacore]

Come on, imagine a tower of Herzan's to get your TT to height... The reduction in vibrations would be very impressive. It would be better than a single, obviously. As much as it seems like a joke, it's not really if you needed seriously reduction.

Stacking same suspensions, be they active or passive, is a potentially dangerous idea. They can start fighting each other (go into beat oscillations) rather then cooperating ("cleaning" one after the other).

Cheers,

 

[spiritofmusic]

The greatest danger in stacking platforms is the emptying of one's bank account.

 

[Folsom]

Stacking same suspensions, be they active or passive, is a potentially dangerous idea. They can start fighting each other (go into beat oscillations) rather then cooperating ("cleaning" one after the other).

Cheers,

I thought about that, but I don't believe that's possible with the Herzan.

 

[LL21]

Just curious...has anyone compared the major Artesania, HRS full racks, SRA dedicated units to the major actives? There are a lot of posts about various comparisons...but i cannot recall seeing one where someone compared 'big boy' to 'big boy' (ie, HRS full rack system vs a series of actives or a suite of dedicated SRA stands to all actives). Thanks for any insights!

 

[Ron Resnick]

I think a direct comparison of very heavy and very expensive stands (e.g., CMS versus HRS) is, like a direct comparison of giant speaker systems (e.g., Rockport Arrakis versus VSA Ultra 11), in the class of direct comparisons which, though interesting and illuminating, that is never going to happen.

Only Tang, with CMS and Stacore stands, is even theoretically in a position to make such a direct comparison, but the difficulty of swapping the turntables in the stands makes a direct comparison practically impossible. Perhaps swapping lighter components like phono stages or line stages could be used to assess directly the efficacy of different very heavy stands.

Danny Kaey just reported on the improvements to the sound of his system going from a lighter weight conventional stand to a heroically heavy HRS stand and platforms, but there was no direct comparison to a true competitor (e.g., CMS or Stacore) to the heavy HRS system.

Herzan/Accurion versus Stacore Basic certainly is a doable comparison.

Big CMS or HRS stand versus Herzan or Stacore platform on a modest stand is a doable comparison.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Kuraka, the Japanese equivalent of Herzan, measuring at least equally as well, was well and truly beaten by Stacore. I had the chance to buy an ex-demo Kuraka at 50% off, and still went w the Stacore despite it costing me more.