Thanks Alex
It's good to have your encouragement
Am I right in thinking you use YGs with the stock supports
Last edited:
Tweaks : A sensible investment or a waste of money?
- Thread starter Barry2013
- Start date
Thanks Alex
It's good to have your encouragement
Am I right in thinking you use YGs with the stock supports
Thanks Mike
Definitely food for thought tbut I've not been convinced by the measurement brigade in the past but he may not be one of them
Yes, 5.1 is "better" than 2 channel - it has a lot more true information, no one can deny it. However , as long as people find 2 channel more enjoyable than 5.1 IMHO this "better" looses its superiority. Unless the authors of books analyze and understand why this dilemma, I will ignore or forget about their recipes - although I can appreciate their views.
IMHO stereo and multichannel are different matters and debates on audio can not mix them.
My power cords for all gear but my Soulution amps are plain Jane (Chinese translation= Ching Chen! Ha!) specials courtesy of ddk. My cable elevators are laboratory rubber stoppers Both cost less than a meal at McDonald's and my hi fuses cost 20 bucks. I assure you nobody is putting anyone through college at those prices.
Well, my tweaks spending has converted my Zus into Wilsons. Good thing too, since the spend on both would have got me Wilsons LOL.
Hi Alex
I finally got round to removing the Stillpoint Ultra 5s from my YG Kipod Signature passives earlier today as you recommended and reverted to their stock supports.
My system has had numerous significant upgrades since they were first installed including three box Scarlatti to replace Puccini/U clock, Entreq Poseidon and Olympus Tellus, signal cables almost entirely upgraded to Apollos and five sets of Wave Kinetics replacing SSs and the Townshend Rock V has had a major service though not played so far today.
I disconnected the amp when removing the Ultra 5s so once that was done the system needed to have some recovery time as the amp (Vitus 025 SIA) is grounded to the Poseidon including negative speaker terminal grounding.
I have to say I was not prepared for the scale of the difference in the sound after the change. Happily on first swich on there were no unwelcome changes and after some hours of the Stones Aftermath DSD cd and Classical music through the Magnum Dynalab 109 it steadily got better.It is a fuller denser sound, no obvious loss of definition and transparency and more bass. Significantly different sound which in some respects I am still adjusting to, not because it is in any way inferior but different to what I have become used to.
I'm guessing that the fact that the cabinet bottoms under the woofer are now closer to the floor is aiding the bass response which in turn is changing the balance with the higher frequency sounds.
Obviously more time needed to fully evaluate the change but no complaints so far.
You succeeded in persuading me to make the change where Dick had failed so many thanks. It also has the wider benefit of making me question more closely the claimed benefits of all the tweaks out there including in this case the fashionable Stillpoint Ultra 5s. Not sure at the moment whether I will try them elsewhere in the system or trade them in for some other upgrade, but no rush.
So many thanks for your advice and encouragement and I hope your back has now recovered fully from the Relentless exertions.
Best
Barry
It is fascinating how fast the buzz about Stillpoints came and went in this forum. They were once all the rage. It seems like yesterday. I tried them once in my system and was roundly criticized for the way in which I inserted them into my system. I did not like them and was accused of not really using them properly. I guess I will never know. I wonder if my former critics still use their Still Points in their systems.
When evaluating tweaks, I prefer to listen to the system for a while with the tweaks in place, and then remove them to see which sound I prefer. I find this method more useful than comparing the sound without them and then with the tweak. It is easy to confuse a sound which is suddenly different with one that is better.
It is an interesting part of the hobby.
When evaluating tweaks, I prefer to listen to the system for a while with the tweaks in place, and then remove them to see which sound I prefer. I find this method more useful than comparing the sound without them and then with the tweak. It is easy to confuse a sound which is suddenly different with one that is better.
It is an interesting part of the hobby.
Last edited:
If you enjoy them in your system, then it is not a waste of money. If you take them off the system, you still don't waste all your money because you learnt from them understanding how to season your sound and the consequences. (The lesson could be extremely expensive though.) Should you get into them is a total different matter.
Tang
Tang
I was relentlessly criticized on the forums by the Stillpoint fanboys as well as those who stood to make $$ from the Stillpoint rage because I reported they sucked from the get go.
Funny how the ball rolls regarding the next audio savior...
Kinda like how Shunyata was hot for awhile.....
And then Master Built
And then Center Stage Footers
As always .....Caveat Emptor.....
Funny how the ball rolls regarding the next audio savior...
Kinda like how Shunyata was hot for awhile.....
And then Master Built
And then Center Stage Footers
As always .....Caveat Emptor.....
Thanks for the responses.
When I started this thread Stillpoints were not really in my mind and I had no plans to remove the Ultra 5s from my speakers so all credit to Alex.
They are clearly a good example of how easily we can be seduced by a fashionable new product which is widely lauded.
It strikes me that these products sell because we are so easily tempted by the notion of being able to get significant improvements in sound quality more cheaply than through more expensive component upgrades.
That said I am not condemning all after market products per se but I will evaluate them much more rigourously and carefully in the future.
So yes Tango you are right.
When I started this thread Stillpoints were not really in my mind and I had no plans to remove the Ultra 5s from my speakers so all credit to Alex.
They are clearly a good example of how easily we can be seduced by a fashionable new product which is widely lauded.
It strikes me that these products sell because we are so easily tempted by the notion of being able to get significant improvements in sound quality more cheaply than through more expensive component upgrades.
That said I am not condemning all after market products per se but I will evaluate them much more rigourously and carefully in the future.
So yes Tango you are right.
You definitely have to be careful w tweaks, in that you don't get one advantage at the expense of a negative somewhere else.
My first experience of that was installing the Burmester 948 conditioner, which upped the ante on detail and noise reduction, but smeared dynamics.
Entreq increased air and soundstaging in my old room, but much less dramatic in my current one.
Shun Mooks dramatically beefed up texture and bass solidity in my old room, proved to be slow and monotone in my current room.
IsoAcoustics Gaia footers under my Zus were great for bass definition and imaging, but slowed timing and leading edge.
All of these except the Entreq are no more in my system.
Those tweaks that have cumulatively enhanced tone, timbre, texture, solidity, realism, transparency and neutrality, are all staying. They've proved to be wholly positive, not negative in the least, and critically allow lps and cds to sound totally different in terms of tonal discrimination from one album to the next.
Including Sablon cables, Stacore and Symposium isolation, RevOPods spkr footers, Westwick balanced power, Oyaides dedicated lines, Furutech sockets, SR fuses and GIK acoustic panels.
For me the critical thing is, if there is an improvement e.g. enhancing bass, is it counterbalanced elsewhere e.g. slower dynamics. And is there any homogeneity imposed from one record to the next. If this is the case, no matter how attractive the improvement, it's better to pass.
Never was this so noticeable in the Gaias v RevOPods footers trial I did last month. The Gaias were really compelling out of the box. Bass was superlative. Until it became apparent that every record seemed to have the same bass player playing the same bass guitar. Switching to the RevOPods was a "cooler" experience tonally in the low end, but now you could easily pick out Jack Bruce or Geddy Lee or John Entwistle etc. And bedding the RevOPods in has allowed the bass to bloom as per the Gais, but w no imposing of monotone character.
That's my detailed take on "to tweak or not to tweak"
My first experience of that was installing the Burmester 948 conditioner, which upped the ante on detail and noise reduction, but smeared dynamics.
Entreq increased air and soundstaging in my old room, but much less dramatic in my current one.
Shun Mooks dramatically beefed up texture and bass solidity in my old room, proved to be slow and monotone in my current room.
IsoAcoustics Gaia footers under my Zus were great for bass definition and imaging, but slowed timing and leading edge.
All of these except the Entreq are no more in my system.
Those tweaks that have cumulatively enhanced tone, timbre, texture, solidity, realism, transparency and neutrality, are all staying. They've proved to be wholly positive, not negative in the least, and critically allow lps and cds to sound totally different in terms of tonal discrimination from one album to the next.
Including Sablon cables, Stacore and Symposium isolation, RevOPods spkr footers, Westwick balanced power, Oyaides dedicated lines, Furutech sockets, SR fuses and GIK acoustic panels.
For me the critical thing is, if there is an improvement e.g. enhancing bass, is it counterbalanced elsewhere e.g. slower dynamics. And is there any homogeneity imposed from one record to the next. If this is the case, no matter how attractive the improvement, it's better to pass.
Never was this so noticeable in the Gaias v RevOPods footers trial I did last month. The Gaias were really compelling out of the box. Bass was superlative. Until it became apparent that every record seemed to have the same bass player playing the same bass guitar. Switching to the RevOPods was a "cooler" experience tonally in the low end, but now you could easily pick out Jack Bruce or Geddy Lee or John Entwistle etc. And bedding the RevOPods in has allowed the bass to bloom as per the Gais, but w no imposing of monotone character.
That's my detailed take on "to tweak or not to tweak"
Last edited:
The forums are a special conduit for this kind of "fashionable new products", and the whole group think mentality only favors that.
And that's why dealers are important. We can't be "seducted by fashionable new products", so we take the time to evaluate stuff.
I like only two tweaks...Shun Mook footers, and record weights like Dalby and Shun Mook on non-suspended TTs. They work fantastic on TTs like brinkmann Balance, Bergmann, Verdier, Amazon etc...not so much if you have suspension. Also if you have vacuum hold down benefits are reduced.
Evaluating tweeks is very difficult. IMO, the question always arises as to what one is listening to...the tweek’s contribution, the expected contribution of the tweek, or another coloration that is fooling us..until that coloration is finally identified.
Taking the tweek out and returning to the status quo is usually a great way to determine what is the answer to the questions above.
Taking the tweek out and returning to the status quo is usually a great way to determine what is the answer to the questions above.
Well Ked you've stuck your head above the Parapet-I might as well join you and draw some of the incoming
!I use GDR's and their Record Weight-- I have the two versions Bill made-I like the SM thinking --they just clicked with a Synergy that appealed
I compared them to various other examples in the marketplace over the years-from TipToes to Stillpoints
Of the footers I've tried only the Goldmund Cones achieved a similar sonic presentation to the SM's
Yes I agree on the Dalby-it is excellent too.
BruceD
Similar threads
