Stillpoints Ultra 6 v's Critical Mass Systems Centre Stage 2

[Mike Lavigne]

This is what I wonder. I have yet to pull the trigger on either racks or 3rd party footers, and when presented with the option to buy used StillPoints, I turned them down because my limited funds would be better spent on good racks—CORRECT?

If a good suspension rack can not take care of the isolation and/or entropy issues, then what is the point of a good rack (looking at Artesania)? Would a system (source components and/or amps/pre) STILL benefit even once placed on a good suspension rack?

Anyone compared?

many different cases can be made, many of them good, for expensive decoupling racks, verses more basic racks and finding great decoupling footers.

the biggest advantage to buying an expensive rack is the aesthetics; it looks more elegant to have gear sitting on a shelf....alone. footers and extra shelves can get ungainly. if you care much about such things. or maybe WAF type stuff.

personally; i've chosen to go with modestly priced, but still nice....basic racks (Adona...click on my system link below) and being then able to optimize each piece of gear. for instance, my Wadax gear is tall and needs 8 footers all of them adjustable, to be optimized. racks and even most footers won't really do the job. then i use active isolation shelves with some of my gear, racks don't do that kind of thing. and i need adjustability; many expensive racks are not adjustable.

i'm happy with my approach, but sometimes envy the cool looking racks and all the same footer approach.

one big issue is selling a large expensive rack will be painful; both in depreciation and finding a buyer. you better plan on owning it forever. footers are easy to sell.

 

[Steve Williams]

Assume one set of four CS feet. Place under DAC, or under preamp?

Of course, listening is paramount, but a guide toward where to start is helpful.

If your only source is digital I would start under the DAC. If you have multiple sources I would start with the preamp

 

[Steve Williams]

If your only source is digital I would start under the DAC. If you have multiple sources I would start with the preamp

The other aspect one must consider is never to use a rack that has competing mode of action than the footers you use. I chose what I did because CMS racks derive their benefit from First Law of Thermodynamics and the CS footers are based on Second Law of Thermodynamics. This results in amazing synergy.

Finally I’m a firm believer in “ only one component per shelf. Stacking components IMO is no where near as good sonically when you only use one component per shelf.

As for depreciation of the expensive racks and footers is just not an issue that concerns me. used Center Stage feet sell immediately and as far as my horizontal rack it can be taken apart and reassembled as 4 separate 4 shelf platforms. Selling it won’t be an issue but for now they are a permanent part of my system.

 

[Gjo]

The other aspect one must consider is never to use a rack that has competing mode of action than the footers you use. I chose what I did because CMS racks derive their benefit from First Law of Thermodynamics and the CS footers are based on Second Law of Thermodynamics. This results in amazing synergy.

I'm not going to buy a CMS rack as it's beyond my pay grade.

Thanks for the suggestion to install them under my DAC.

EDIT: The CS2M 0.8 turned out to be slightly shorter than the Stillpoints feet on my DAC, so rather than uninstall the DAC to remove the feet, I installed the CS2M under the preamp.

 

[AThrillOfHope]

many different cases can be made, many of them good, for expensive decoupling racks, verses more basic racks and finding great decoupling footers.

the biggest advantage to buying an expensive rack is the aesthetics; it looks more elegant to have gear sitting on a shelf....alone. footers and extra shelves can get ungainly. if you care much about such things. or maybe WAF type stuff.

personally; i've chosen to go with modestly priced, but still nice....basic racks (Adona...click on my system link below) and being then able to optimize each piece of gear. for instance, my Wadax gear is tall and needs 8 footers all of them adjustable, to be optimized. racks and even most footers won't really do the job. then i use active isolation shelves with some of my gear, racks don't do that kind of thing. and i need adjustability; many expensive racks are not adjustable.

i'm happy with my approach, but sometimes envy the cool looking racks and all the same footer approach.

one big issue is selling a large expensive rack will be painful; both in depreciation and finding a buyer. you better plan on owning it forever. footers are easy to sell.

Um. Your system. Not sure I’m worthy of you responding. Let me know and I’ll draw up the adoption papers (great package value! — I come with a wife and four kids!).

Seriously, great advice: racks are a resale nightmare that are a one-size-fits-all response to mutually exclusive idiosyncratic components. Footers target each specific issue and then are adjustable.

Your darTZeels seemed to be on butcher block material without footers. Is that correct? It seemed to validate my make-shift “racks” for my monos consisting of 1.5” thick granite slabs supported by isoAcoustic “pads” (between floor and granite). No footers yet on the amps. This is where I’m at: waiting for racks. But maybe I should upgrade my footers (currently using inexpensive ISO-Pucks on preamp, DAC and Innuos).

You are inferring to put money into, say, Critical Mass (for example) decoupling footers (and vary them), and get more modest racks. Better value, more performance (if done correctly).

It seems. Thank you for your valuable insights and guidance.

And those papers can be ready in minutes. Just give the word.

 

[AThrillOfHope]

Not necessarily "CORRECT". If you have limited funds (like me) I recommend that you do the cost comparison between a premium rack, and a well designed, inexpensive, basic rack like the Salamander Archetype with an isolation platform on top and isolating spike cups (e.g., Herbie’s Audio Lab Cone/Spike Decoupling Glider) under each of the rack’s spikes. Note also that neither a rack nor an isolation platform necessarily obviates the need for isolation/tuning feet. It is not an "either-or" if you are serious about isolation. "Cream of the Crop" isolation platforms like SRA may both isolate and drain/tune internally generated component resonances. Mid-tier and high value racks on the other hand typically only isolate and need help from platforms and/or footers in order to dissipate internal component resonances. I was getting superb isolation (see photos) from an inexpensive Salamander Archetype rack with custom isolation feet under each of the rack's spikes and an old Townshend Seismic Sink 3D air platform (that I bough used) on top. Yet the addition of first ASI Top Line feet (1st photo), replaced later with the extraordinary Dalby Audio Lignum Vitae feet (2nd photo) between my sacd player and the air platform resulted in significant increases in clarity and articulation. Note that if you look at the Audio Exotics website you will find photos of isolation platforms and/or feet being used on top of even world class, cost no object racks.

Out of curiosity, what racks were you considering?

Your response echoes that of Mike Lavigne‘s. Isolation gear is just as critical a component of your audio as any other. Seems footers and racks need to be tried out first before commitment.

I have been seriously considering Artesania, their mid-level suspension Prestige, or even their Exoteryc if I have to get aunt-body three level configuration for space efficiency (which means I can only get one and so I figured it would be best to get the next level up).

Do you have any experience with Artesania? Only heard good things.

But again, you use diverse models based upon specific components synergy, it seems. Which, like Mike Lavigne, makes so much sense.

Thank you for the confirm that my amps still need footers, even if I get racks.

 

[Golum]

Having several of their products i would reccomend that you also look into this direction rack and footers wise:

HIFISTAY

 

[AThrillOfHope]

Having several of their products i would reccomend that you also look into this direction rack and footers wise:

HIFISTAY

Thanks for this excellent lead. They look great (especially the black and copper Dag Momentum monos on the copper trimmed racks).

Will research these. Again, thanks.

 

[PYP]

Your response echoes that of Mike Lavigne‘s. Isolation gear is just as critical a component of your audio as any other. Seems footers and racks need to be tried out first before commitment.

I'm wondering whether folks think vibration control for solid state is different than for tubed-based gear. Having had a tubed preamp many years ago, it was evident that tubes were very vulnerable to vibration (no surprise there). Does solid state require less or different vibration mitigation?

 

[AThrillOfHope]

I'm wondering whether folks think vibration control for solid state is different than for tubed-based gear. Having had a tubed preamp many years ago, it was evident that tubes were very vulnerable to vibration (no surprise there). Does solid state require less or different vibration mitigation?

Certainly you are asking the greater group at large here, since I am no experit.

That said, I'll share my opinion anyway. Seems that SS takes longer to warm up than tubes. What this says about susceptibility to vibration, I have no clue. But there should be an inference or connection on some level. Is one more susceptible to RF than the other, for instance? My amateur perspective thinks that tubes would be more fragile, being hollowed glass that begs to be rattled--much like cables are effectively broadcast antennae for RF and the like.

I put my tubed preamp under some decent footers recommended on this forum, and it certainly did not get any worse. And my emotions want me to believe the sound improved (my wife tells me it did, and she is as critical of music and audio as a mother-in-law is of the in-law spouse).

Every SS amp I've seen in stratospheric systems is on a rack, usually suspension. Probably vibration is vibration and signal is signal and you want to separate them, period.

 

[LL21]

I'm wondering whether folks think vibration control for solid state is different than for tubed-based gear. Having had a tubed preamp many years ago, it was evident that tubes were very vulnerable to vibration (no surprise there). Does solid state require less or different vibration mitigation?

For my own limited experience, I have found that power supplies seem to benefit most from isolation (SS and tubed and not necessarily one more than the other). Interestingly, the Zanden Transport has been the LEAST affected by good isolation...presumably because they expressly and obsessively factored that into the original design.

Having moved the tubed preamp to SS, I still find benefit from isolation. And the kind of isolation (at least for me with limited experience) seems to be more around the design of the particular unit than anything else. (ie, where do you place the feet underneath, or if you are using a damper like an HRS damping plate or an Artesania damping plate, then where does it go, etc...)

Interestingly, fwiw, when Robert Koch (founder of Robert Koda) happened kindly to stop in for a visit he was very complimentary of the way we applied isolation below and above his reference monos amps (Class A SS). And the principles we applied when listening/trialing isolation was exactly what we did with the tubed equipment.

 

[Mcbrion]

Do the Critical Mass require the use of 4 feet, or could one expect to hear results using three of these?

For example, I'm now using three Stillpoints under one component and, if I try out the CMs I'd like to experiment with the same number of CMs as Stillpoints, so must there be four in order to evaluate them correctly? I find isolation/vibration control to be a fascinating subject. What is equally fascinating is the exact placement of devices: I've seen people just toss footers under a component with no regard with the exact placement and then claim "it made the bass tighter but didn't do much else," when my experience is that precise placement determines an end result just as much. I certainly found that to be the case, when, after having had Tube Traps for years, I pushed one down the wall a small distance just to dislodge a coin that had fallen underneath, forgot to move the trap back, and discovered a short time later that the record on the Versa Dynamics turntable had improved noticeably - in a musical way, not the soundstaging or the imaging. Just the music itself. And it took a day or two of remembering my exact movements that afternoon for the "AHA" moment to come, and I suddenly realized the 'trap had been the only thing that was different. From then on, I realized that everything had to be precisely placed (I think Enid Lumley stated the same thing in several of her articles in the '80s).

So, will three CMs suffice or do you only get that magical result if you have four? I wanna know before I go out and buy them. I'd hate to get three and not get similar results to those mentioned by others. It would also help folks to know these things. Roy Gregory, who wrote one of the first Stillpoints reviews, succinctly stated that you could get good results with 3 of them, but putting the fourth one into the system changed the equation noticeably.

 

[Cellcbern]

Do the Critical Mass require the use of 4 feet, or could one expect to hear results using three of these?

For example, I'm now using three Stillpoints under one component and, if I try out the CMs I'd like to experiment with the same number of CMs as Stillpoints, so must there be four in order to evaluate them correctly? I find isolation/vibration control to be a fascinating subject. What is equally fascinating is the exact placement of devices: I've seen people just toss footers under a component with no regard with the exact placement and then claim "it made the bass tighter but didn't do much else," when my experience is that precise placement determines an end result just as much. I certainly found that to be the case, when, after having had Tube Traps for years, I pushed one down the wall a small distance just to dislodge a coin that had fallen underneath, forgot to move the trap back, and discovered a short time later that the record on the Versa Dynamics turntable had improved noticeably - in a musical way, not the soundstaging or the imaging. Just the music itself. And it took a day or two of remembering my exact movements that afternoon for the "AHA" moment to come, and I suddenly realized the 'trap had been the only thing that was different. From then on, I realized that everything had to be precisely placed (I think Enid Lumley stated the same thing in several of her articles in the '80s).

So, will three CMs suffice or do you only get that magical result if you have four? I wanna know before I go out and buy them. I'd hate to get three and not get similar results to those mentioned by others. It would also help folks to know these things. Roy Gregory, who wrote one of the first Stillpoints reviews, succinctly stated that you could get good results with 3 of them, but putting the fourth one into the system changed the equation noticeably.

Three Dalby Audio isolation feet are “Magic” and surpass all Stillpoints models I’ve heard. If you are considering CMS you might also want to consider Dalby.

 

[Steve Williams]

Center stage are sold in sets of 4. Joes original R and D did have 3 to start. However he found adding a 4th raised the SQ exponentially rather than by an extra 1/4. As a result they have been sold in sets of 4 since they were released over 4 years ago and yes positioning them properly is paramount to their performance

 

[PYP]

Center stage are sold in sets of 4. Joes original R and D did have 3 to start. However he found adding a 4th raised the SQ exponentially rather than by an extra 1/4. As a result they have been sold in sets of 4 since they were released over 4 years ago and yes positioning them properly is paramount to their performance

Are there general "guidelines" for positioning?

 

[Steve Williams]

Are there general "guidelines" for positioning?

anywhere around the stock footers without touching the stock footer. Must be certain all 4 CS footers are well adherent to the underside of the component. If not use the shim(s) supplied

 

[Mcbrion]

Thank you, Steve.
I went back and found some other articles about the Center Stages, and, it seemed that every article advocated the use of four. It was not explained in some of the older articles that it came in a set of four, instead of "X dollars per footer."

I did reach out to a dealer in a nearby state and he explained they only come in sets of four now, so that clears that up! Jonathan's (Valin) review in TAS ended with the cost per footer, which is why I wondered if they could be purchased individually (not that anyone could do anything with 2 footers, for example, unless they had a VERY skinny power distributor or component), but it was not clear in the article that they are bundled in sets of four.

Thank you for the (quite) immediate response, given I tend to write my responses during the midnight hours! I wasn't expecting that my question would even be noticed for a day or so!

 

[Steve Williams]

The only Center Stage footers that can be bought in 3’s or 4’s is the LS Series for speakers. Having said that I still use 4 LS footers under each of my speakers

 

[Cellcbern]

Home - WELLFLOAT English HiFi Board, Vibration, WELLFLOAT, Audio

ZERO DISTORTION – BEST HIFI ISOLATION PLATFORM FROM JAPAN SINCE 2009. HiFi Board to control vibration.

wellfloat-global.com

No idea how they are designing it...looks vaguely like a Stillpoints Ultra 6 or 7...though bigger.

FYI: https://patents.google.com/patent/JP7104389B1/en?oq=7104389

 

[Cellcbern]

How many of the Wellfloat Babels does one need under a component? At 17.5cm I would have thought at least 3, and occasionally, 4. At 5K each that is 15K per piece of equipment for isolation?

FYI: Apparently just one with optional platform: