Sublime Sound

Peter I really like the looks, I am sure that the added mass is positive for your system

Thank you Vienna. My steel plates are #304 stainless steel. I had originally specified these 14" X 18" X 1" plates in machine finish with a 3/16" reveal all around the top edge. Price quotes for the one machine shop willing to do the work was $1,100 per plate. Instead, I ordered "mill" finish or raw #304 SS plate for $235 each. I then got out my belt sander for the edges, and orbital sander for the top and bottom, and got to work. Being stainless, I simply cleaned them and then applied a thin 3-in-1 oil on the surface and they were done. Lots of work, but I did the project for a total cost of less than $900.

I also have steel plates on top of my three deflated Vibraplane units for ballast. At some point, I will remove the Vibraplanes and just place the two amps and turntable on these black painted steel plates to see how that sounds.

The mass loading seems very worthwhile.
 
  • Like
Reactions: the sound of Tao
Hi Peter I have tried 316 SS but preferred the Nitronic SS at 3cm of thickness.
in Greece the cost is way lower
 
Interesting!!! I have been mass-loading loudspeakers for years. But with loudspeakers, there is an optimum weight. The initial mass loading is great and additional mass loading continues to improve the sound until it doesn't, and in fact the sound quality deteriorates with further mass-loading. There seems to be an optimal weight.

Weight on top of the loudspeakers is fundamentally different than weight under a component. Even so, is there an optimum weight? How did you know what weight would be best?
 
  • Like
Reactions: microstrip
Probably trial and error, but it was one and done for me. All I know is that the steel plate weighs about as much as my amp. So the shelf load has roughly doubled.
 
Interesting!!! I have been mass-loading loudspeakers for years. But with loudspeakers, there is an optimum weight. The initial mass loading is great and additional mass loading continues to improve the sound until it doesn't, and in fact the sound quality deteriorates with further mass-loading. There seems to be an optimal weight.

Weight on top of the loudspeakers is fundamentally different than weight under a component. Even so, is there an optimum weight? How did you know what weight would be best?

Hello Jim, I don't know the optimum weight. It is much easier to keep adding weights to the top of a speaker until you reach a point of degradation. With an 80 lbs. plate under a component, it is not so easy. I suspect the material must be solid and uniform. Cutting different sizes and trying each one out could work, but it would be expensive and difficult unless one is set up with a machine shop or something and has some friends to help move them in and out.

I simply measured the dimensions of my component and rack and figured that I did not want anything heavier than 100 lbs or thicker than 1" for clearance. So, in my case, it was a guess as to what might work. I simply chose a size that was convenient for my purposes. I also discussed this rather extensively with both ddk and bazelio. I have no way of knowing if a slightly larger or smaller plate would sound better.

Magico now makes an all metal rack with various materials and dimensions. They must have experimented and done measurements of performance. I suspect ddk also did some experimentation when developing his The Nothing Rack.
 
Here are two photographs showing the slow evolutionary changes to my front end components and rack configuration. A while ago I had removed the Townshend Seismic Sinks and Transparent Audio power distribution box. More recently, I added stainless steel plates to mass load the rack under each of my components.

The other day I removed each component so that I could remove the unused Vibraplane from the top shelf and the birch plywood base from beneath the rack. This stuff is heavy, so I had a friend help me with the moving.

After I reassembled everything, I listened. The sound is cleaner, more resolving, and more natural. Al M. had heard it a couple of nights before and then the day after it was all put back together again. His first comment was that it sounds more dynamic now.

I like the simpler look and appreciate the improvement in sound. Removing the unused Vibraplane and plywood base plate were DDK's suggestions. He was right again. Thanks David.

DSC_1530 5.jpg

IMG_6659.jpg
 
Hi @PeterA , what do you have under the turntable now? Is that also a steel plate? Also, you appear to have small coasters under the component feet, rather than allowing the components to touch the plates directly. What affect is that having?
 
Madfloyd, owner of an excellent system including the Magico M Pro speakers and big CAT mono blocks and former frequent poster here, came by and heard my system over the weekend with Al M. Each friend had heard the system about a month ago and were decidedly underwhelmed with the various changes I had made, particularly, rotating the speakers to eliminate toe-in. I had made other changes as well like deflating pneumatic isolation and removing acoustic treatments from the room. They came over but did not respond as enthusiastically as they usually do.

About the same time, Ack and VLS came together to hear my system. Ack was openly disappointed in the sound and expressed his opinion as usual stating that I had lost all of the imaging and soundstaging that he had previously admired and appreciated. I think he described it as a "sonic mess" or something. VLS, hearing the system for the first time, was more diplomatic and seemed to enjoy the sound a bit more.

I mention all of this because I have embarked on a fairly extensive re-thinking of my system set up, of my sonic priorities, and of my various audiophile accessories. I am getting back to basics and examining fundamental principles. During this process, the sound has fluctuated pretty dramatically. At times, I am too close to it, so I appreciate the comments and advice of others, especially those with whom I have heard live music. The resulting conversations can be quite interesting and revealing. They can also lead to further experimentation.

I also recently removed the last remaining absorptive panels at the two first reflection points. This, and the changes to my rack, have resulted in what I would describe as a more natural and enjoyable sound. It is all a process, and I am learning, and I suspect the journey is far from over. Madfloyd and Al M. heard the latest iteration over the weekend, and their reaction was more enthusiastic than the last time they were here. I actually think Madfloyd enjoyed the system quite a bit, including the sound of his own cartridge on my SME 3012R tonearm.

One of the biggest improvements is now my ability to hear more distinct differences between, for instance, very slight speaker position changes and cartridge adjustments. The system just seems more revealing suddenly. There is less obscuring of information from the recording, and I am simply hearing "more" and it is presented in a more realistic way.

Madfloyd brought over his Altas SL super-cartridge so that we could all hear it in my system and also compare it to my vdH Master Signature cartridge, if not exactly directly because of the two different SME 12" arms. Now, that was a most interesting comparison about which I will report in a subsequent post or thread. I will just say here that the Atlas SL is a fantastic cartridge and I really appreciate Ian bringing it over so that I could hear it for myself in my own system. What a treat.
 
Last edited:
Really admire your efforts Peter, and your candor!
 
Room without treatment and the new speaker position with no toe-in.


View attachment 62627
I like the symmetry with the 2 chairs on the first reflexion points :cool:
If the piano is on wheels, please remove the piano from the room for a listen. You will be surprised how much different that sounds ;)
If that is not possible, place a very thick blanket and/or some cushions over the strings inside the piano and then be almost as surprised with the result with much less hassle :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: PeterA
Thank you Christoph. The first thing Jim Smith did when he came to my room was tell me how to dampen the piano. It is on wheels but we have no other place in the house to put it. There is a towel over all of the strings and it did make a big difference but I still notice a slight resonance. At one time I did have a big furniture blanket covering the whole thing, but that was really ugly and so this is one of the compromises in the room as is the low ceiling. All glass has been removed from the paintings or were covered with a towel. The historic single pane glass windows all have laminated glass for less vibration and noise penetration from the outside. The wooden louvers do seem to help with diffusion. David suggested I simply use natural things and furniture for room acoustics. More good advice in my particular situation and context.

It’s all a giant compromise but one I am willing to live with. It’s a comfortable room in a very old house.
 
Last edited:

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu