Taiko Audio Daiza platforms.
- Thread starter Blue58
- Start date
Well, it has to have some foot (even if they are the small Taiko cylinders), the chassis cannot be directly touching the Daiza platform.
I changed my amp and initially put it on top of Daiza with its original footers. Later I removed them (they are higher than 1.5) and placed the Center Stages, well they work especially well with this amp.
I changed my amp and initially put it on top of Daiza with its original footers. Later I removed them (they are higher than 1.5) and placed the Center Stages, well they work especially well with this amp.
Attachments
Thanks for the info, that's a serious amp. I'm using the integrated T+A, PA3100HV. Great amp but not in the same league. I'm thinking of buying both the Taiko platform and center stage 1.5 together.
If you want to maximise the vibration damping properties of the Panzerholz material you should use solid footers between the Daiza and equipment sitting on top. Rubber / compliant footers would reduce this effect by partially blocking energy transfer.
Thanks for clearing that up for me. Is the lead time still 3 months on the platforms?
It varies, the Panzerholz rate of supply is limited and when we get a supply in we tend to be backlogged on orders. The lead time can be anywhere between 2 weeks and 3 months.
Hello all,
I'm new to this thread and after reading through it I have to admit I'm definitely interested in the Daiza platforms.
Similar as Spiritofmusic's system I'm using a complete Symposium setup for my devices - that means an ISIS rack with Ultra shelfs and Rollerblock Modules in the pillars - on top of the Ultra ISIS shelfs there is an additional Ultra platform and also a Quantum platform. Abd of course between platforms and devices I installed Rollerblock Modules in double stack configuration. You can see it in the attached picture.
The Symposium system works really well, but I'm also really curious about the Daiza platforms. At least they both work with the same principle of dissipating energy from the devices to the platforms.
I already read Emile's recommendation to rather not use an Ultra platform under the Daiza, but I'm also not sure if the Daiza could be a good combination with the ISIS rack with its Ultra shelfs and also with the Rollerblocks. Especially with Emile's findings that a lesser and not damped contact area is better for draining vibrations.
So the big question is if a Daiza platform could work well on the ISIS rack?
I'm currently experimenting with CS2 Center Stage footers, but they don't work well with metal shelfs. After talking with Joe Lavrencik on the CS2 thread he adviced me to try the silky bags where the CS2 are packed under the CS2 as some kind of buffer. It seems better than direct on the metal shelf but I'm not sure this is a good solution, I have to experiment more. But with the long setting time of the CS2 that's not really easy.
I also tried a bamboo butchers block from IKEA under the CS2, the big one with the three layers, but the sound was terrible without life.
www.ikea.com
But hopefully the CS2 will work better with the Daiza, at least somebody else here tried it and obviously liked it.
I'm new to this thread and after reading through it I have to admit I'm definitely interested in the Daiza platforms.
Similar as Spiritofmusic's system I'm using a complete Symposium setup for my devices - that means an ISIS rack with Ultra shelfs and Rollerblock Modules in the pillars - on top of the Ultra ISIS shelfs there is an additional Ultra platform and also a Quantum platform. Abd of course between platforms and devices I installed Rollerblock Modules in double stack configuration. You can see it in the attached picture.
The Symposium system works really well, but I'm also really curious about the Daiza platforms. At least they both work with the same principle of dissipating energy from the devices to the platforms.
I already read Emile's recommendation to rather not use an Ultra platform under the Daiza, but I'm also not sure if the Daiza could be a good combination with the ISIS rack with its Ultra shelfs and also with the Rollerblocks. Especially with Emile's findings that a lesser and not damped contact area is better for draining vibrations.
So the big question is if a Daiza platform could work well on the ISIS rack?
I'm currently experimenting with CS2 Center Stage footers, but they don't work well with metal shelfs. After talking with Joe Lavrencik on the CS2 thread he adviced me to try the silky bags where the CS2 are packed under the CS2 as some kind of buffer. It seems better than direct on the metal shelf but I'm not sure this is a good solution, I have to experiment more. But with the long setting time of the CS2 that's not really easy.
I also tried a bamboo butchers block from IKEA under the CS2, the big one with the three layers, but the sound was terrible without life.
APTITLIG butcher block, bamboo, 17 ¾x14 ¼" - IKEA
APTITLIG butcher block, bamboo, 17 ¾x14 ¼" Easy-care, easy going bamboo – a natural material that adds color and warmth to your kitchen and at the same time provides a durable surface that’s a pleasure to chop and slice on. The weight provides a stable base for cutting.
www.ikea.com
Attachments
Hey Micro,
Ive never used either of the products you mention so my answer is generic. These products are about vibration management, Vibration is a cause of noise in electronics and jitter when oscillators (digital clocks) are involved. Its detrimental affects are well known to audiophiles and the market place is packed with products designed to ameliorate vibration. And those designs are based on a multitude of different strategies and materials.
There are essentially 2 sources of vibration….external e.g seismic vibration caused by footfall, traffic, heavy work etc. and internal vibration, caused by things like AC to DC rectification, transformers etc. And here’s the first problem. You need to isolate components from ground-borne vibration while you need to couple, conduct away and ground component generated vibration.
You get products that isolate, sorbothane for example and you get products that couple, like Cardas myrtlewood blocks. But then the engineers started thinking about how to solve both problems, to isolate in one direction, while ‘coupling and grounding‘ in the other. And from this involvement, more sophisticated products began to emerge. These products generally provide isolation via spikes or in the case of Isis, rollerballs and they also provide grounding, typically by conducting internal vibration away from the component then converting it to an alternate form of energy like work and heat. The Isis rack is designed to both isolate components from seismic vibration while conducting internal vibration away from the component and converting its into heat in the internal layers of its Ultra shelves.
So now you introduce a Daiza platform. Essentially the Diaza does the same job as the Ultra platform shelf, grounding and converting the internal vibration. The sound of the Daiza and Ultra Platforms is going to be different according to the spectrum of the vibration that is absorbed by each vs. the spectrum of what is reflected back into the component. So is the Daiza compatible? Well the first thing to say is that in this application, the Daiza is redundant unless it replaces the Ultra platform, which doesn’t seem very sensible. So there’s no good engineering reason to use a Daiza along with the Ultra platform, as already stated, they‘re both doing the same job. From a subjective standpoint the Daiza will change the sound, as it changing the vibration’s frequency spectrum.
I use a Finite Elemente Pagoda Master Reference racks, which like the ISIS is designed as a complete solution for both types of vibration. In my case additional products that work with my rack are those that help couple the component to the rack shelf. I would guess that the same would be true for the Isis rack…..rather than duplicating energy absorbing shelves, I would experiment with various coupling devices between components and the Isis’s Ultra shelves. You may find that Panzerholz blocks give you a subjective improvement by increasing the effectiveness of the Ultra shelves.
Hi Blackmorec,
many thanks for your detailed considerations. You're right, both the Daiza platforms and the Symposium rack and platforms share the same background with isolating from floor borne vibration and draining the component's vibration. And I'm aware that a Daiza upon an Ultra platform is probably not good. But to put a Daiza on an Isis rack instead of an Ultra platform could be interesting. I'm very curious about the difference in sound, if it could add to the Symposium sound or if it's effect is detrimental. I guess I have to try it myself.
I can imagine from what I read about the Daiza that the naturalness and the timbre could get even better as with the Symposium system alone due to the resonance shift. But it also could get worse if the two systems can't complement each other.
And thanks for the interesting thought about the Panzerholz blocks instead of Rollerblocks.
This gentlemen ended up removing the Symposium Ultra in exchange for a second Daiza, he needed the additional height due to short interconnects, FWIW.
As of today, due to changing market conditions, we will only be able to supply Daizas in a 483*450 size at a 32% price increase.
Understood market conditions affect pricing. Is there an update on lead time?
We should get a new supply in in about 4 weeks, accurate shipping estimations however appear to be problematic this year.
He says, among other things:
"...The goal with isolation is predictability, consistency, and repeatability. And with audio isolation, neutrality- no resonances in the audio bandwidth, and even well below. This is noise and vibration control 101. I find it odd that so many audiophiles are confused about it."
I have a suitable set of EVPs I will place under my MSB Ref dac to listen (it's not on Daiza). If I like how that sounds compared to inverted carbon cones on a carbon platform, my usual go-to application, I will order the correct size EVPs (4x4 HD) and test under the Extreme which is on a Daiza.
I revisited this topic as part of my on-going evaluation of system performance, best practice, and potential marginal gains (I'm a cyclist). Cheers...
...related, but technically OT in Daiza thread. After 4-5 hrs. of listening, I find no deficiencies in SQ after replacing carbon cones with EVPs under dac. Sounds terrific, actually. No smearing, muddiness, etc. as sometimes described for "soft" footers.
I will order up 4 - 4x4 HD EVPs for the Mighty Taiko Extreme, and report back.
I will order up 4 - 4x4 HD EVPs for the Mighty Taiko Extreme, and report back.
That's certainly a reasonable-enough sounding goal. But I'm curious where the predictabilty, consistency, and repeatability enter in. If you're talking about the EVP's, it seems they offer 4 models dependent on object's weight range i.e. 38-56 lbs, 57-113 lbs, 114-190 lbs, and 171-285 lbs. Those seem like pretty broad ranges to me. Moreover, potentially every component and speaker design is different to varying degrees of construction, materials, internal components, wiring, voltages, connecting techniques, fastener types, reinforcements, etc, even combinations thereof, and therefore potentially interacts and reacts differently from a resonance/isolation perspective. Then there's the object the component is placed on which could range anywhere from the floor to grandma's antique coffee table to the premier racking system available today which also will potentially interact differently with different components.
Anyway, given these potentially wide-ranged variables, it seems odd that one would use terms like predictability, consistency, and repeatability... or unless I missed it, without at least some qualification.
What exactly does neutrality mean and who among us knows for a fact we've reached that point or even heard it, how was that accomplished, what equipment, and by what standard? Or might he be implying that all playback systems using his product will sound neutral regardless of equipment?
No resonances in the audio bandwidth or even well below? I thought everything resonated and it's actually against the laws of physics to completely isolate an object from all sources of vibration simultaneously? Might he be implying he's only completely isolating a single vibration source? If so, how might that be accomplished and what about the other sources? I'm also curious what is and isn't being measured here and how. Also, are industry-accepted standards followed when measuring? Does anybody know if such a standard even exists?
What noise? Noise regarding many high-end audio topics is usually synonymous with distortions. Distortions are potentially both audible as well as inaudible. In fact a few, including me, suspect that the noise/distortions inducing the most harm are of the inaudible kind. The kind that actually impacts a playback system's noise floor threshold. Is he talking noise rising up from the sub-flooring induced by a speaker's sound and/or resonance? I was always under the impression that speakers and components generate sound hence, they are the objects impacted by noise/distortions rather than flooring systems?
What is vibration control 101? I think I'm aware of a few preconceived narratives but I'm unaware of a vibration control 101 type facts. Especially if one claims zero / no resonances when we know that's impossible.
Confused about what?
Similar threads
