Vibration Management

[stehno]

How substantial do you rank your rack system?

Well, if I paid any attention to the experts with their charts and calculations demonstrating how inferior my chosen materials are, how I really don't know what I'm doing, etc. I'd rank it a 0 or 1.

But I just so happen to have a working model via much hands on experimentation. And with the humblest of systems to boot.

Folsom, no matter how I answer your question, I'm gonna get flack if I'm completely forthright. So I'll just reiterate what I said a few days ago.

Improper or inferior vibration mgmt so severely cripples the precision and accuracy of every last playback system they can only perform at a smaller percentage of their full potential. A severe performance limiting governor if you will.

Maybe this would be a better way to say it. 3 years ago, component designer John Curl (along with Mark Levinson) said in another forum that every last one of his designs and all of his colleague's designs contained at least one serious and unknown flaw that even their sensitive measuring instruments couldn't pick up. I told Curl his and others' designs contained no such serious unknown flaw, their designs were just incompete.

Hopefully, that response will suffice.

 

[stehno]

I think it's a difficult subject because the wide variety of materials and shapes that all interact differently with one another. The shapes must matter as they effect surface area of the interface. There's a good thread here on how differently cones/spikes can act depending on the materials involved. Just a spike and a flat surface can have widely varying outcomes.


Stenho, have you tried bolting the stand to the floor or even just giving it a few taps with a hammer to speed the settling process? What would you ideally prefer for a chassis material?

I've not tried bolting the rack to the floor as I don't think it will change things much, at least not with my design. And certainly not with my wood sub-flooring. I would never take a hammer to my rack. But I do put all my weight (210 lbs) and bounce a bit on the bottom shelf at each point but it too is of little value.

If you think about it, I'm already sorta bolting my components to the rack and that has made little difference to expedite the settling in process over a free-standing component. To the contrary. The more extreme I attempt to couple, the longer it takes to settle in but with far greater sonic benefits too.

At present, I'm unaware of a substitution for time.

 

[Folsom]

One of those concrete stirring devices would probably work great

Time might be the only thing that is going to allow the new paths to continually operate until what compliance there is adjusts.

And no, I have no idea how significant your racks are from that statement. I'm not sure if I could use one in my setup as is, but would give a listen if possible.

 

[stehno]

...

Just by plain physics, there is simply no chance for a single technique to be good for all.
We realized that at Stacore and combine different techniques to work for the target effects (repeatability of the sonical results is one of them).

Cheers,

Thanks for the note, Stacore.

With all due respect, I postulate that it is because of your adherence to the vibration isolation methodology that you say, "... by just plain physics, there is no single technique to be good for all."

IMO, vibration isolation is against the laws of physics, against mechanical energy's natural behaviors, and isolation is not even it's own methodology but rather it's just a very inferior version of the one true methodology: resonance energy transfer.

For example, Without hesitation I claim one can and should use the same resonant energy transfer solution i.e. materials, designs, and executions for all sensitive instruments where precision and accuracy are paramount.

Moreover, where most "isolation" products offer little performance gains, they also often times come with pro's and con's. Not so with at least superior executions of resonance energy transfer. I've been saying for at least 7 years that the benefits of resonance energy transfer are massive, they are many, and they are across the entire frequency spectrum, and they are without a single negative that I'm aware of. Just as one might assume it should be when dealing with and staying within the confines of basic laws of nature.

If, (and I believe it is so and I can demonstrate it) that is true, then that tells me resonance energy transfer must be aligned with mechanical energy's natural behaviors which implies it is well within the laws of physics.

Isolation products can never legitimately make such claims and they certainly cannot demonstrate such claims. That implies to me, along with other reasons, vibration isolation must be an invalid vibration controlling methodolgy and ultimately contrary to laws of physics - for preserving the fidelity of sensitive instruments and dealing with mechanical energy anyway.

Vibration isolation may have its place like when attempting to the whole house from shaking when a washing machine is on spin cycle and the weight is not evenly distributed within the tub. But it has no place here.

IMO, anyway.

 

[stehno]

One of those concrete stirring devices would probably work great

Time might be the only thing that is going to allow the new paths to continually operate until what compliance there is adjusts.

And no, I have no idea how significant your racks are from that statement. I'm not sure if I could use one in my setup as is, but would give a listen if possible.

I wish it was that easy, the concrete stirring device I mean. I've had a few thoughts about more instananeous gains at least for the rack anyway. But without the need anymore I doubt I'll ever get around to it.

But mechanical settling-in shouldn't be such a foreign concept. Bear in mind, Folsom, that just like mechanical settling in, we have electrical burn-in. And I have to say, based on some rather interesting discoveries / similarities, if somebody told me that there's no such thing as electrical burn-in, it's really just a variation of mechanical settling, I'd probably jump on that bandwagon.

In fact, the only two differences I'm aware of (pertaining to audio anyway) is 1) electrical burn-in has a restart memory whereas mechanical settling-in does not and 2) Once electrical burn-in has occurred, it retains that burned-in status for at least a very long time where perhaps re-installed it may need an hour or two of warm up before reaching full burn-in status again. Whereas with mechanical settling in, generally any tiny movement at any time and that object(s) must go thru the entire settling-in process starting back at square one. Hence, I leave my equipment as-is for years at a time. No buying / selling, etc.

As for giving it a listen, by eastern WA I'm assuming Spokane well, if you're ever near Portland, Oregon hit me up.

 

[Stacore]

Dear Stehno,

Since we are both manufacturers it's natural that we believe so strongly in what we are doing
that we decided to invest time and money into it and will defend it. That's why I will not further
engage in the conversation, especially as to what is better and what is not, respecting your views
and experience and whishing you all the best of luck with your ideas.

BTW, I'm an assistant professor in quantum mechanics in everyday life, so I understand physics a bit

Cheers,

 

[spiritofmusic]

Jarek, every designer or manufacturer has a point to make, discovery to reveal, line to peddle
I've found yr approach online to be refreshingly open, full of genuine enthusiasm, and non confrontational
I'm sure Stehno will provide more details over time
As it is, Im still pretty much in the dark re his ideas as to where this will all go, how complex it'll be, how pricey it'll prove, and whether his bold claims of uber sq impvts are just that, oversell, or reasonable
You've set yr stall out in a very civilised manner saying where you genuinely believe you offer performance upstick over the lab grade active gear, and it's v easy to judge if this will be the case w yr sale or return policy
Stehno will reveal his pitch over time
For myself, I know the sales attitude I go for, and which I don't

 

[bonzo75]

Jarek, every designer or manufacturer has a point to make, discovery to reveal, line to peddle
I've found yr approach online to be refreshingly open, full of genuine enthusiasm, and non confrontational
I'm sure Stehno will provide more details over time
As it is, Im still pretty much in the dark re his ideas as to where this will all go, how complex it'll be, how pricey it'll prove, and whether his bold claims of uber sq impvts are just that, oversell, or reasonable
You've set yr stall out in a very civilised manner saying where you genuinely believe you offer performance upstick over the lab grade active gear, and it's v easy to judge if this will be the case w yr sale or return policy
Stehno will reveal his pitch over time
For myself, I know the sales attitude I go for, and which I don't

+1

 

[Stacore]

Thank you guys

 

[stehno]

Dear Stehno,

Since we are both manufacturers it's natural that we believe so strongly in what we are doing
that we decided to invest time and money into it and will defend it. That's why I will not further
engage in the conversation, especially as to what is better and what is not, respecting your views
and experience and whishing you all the best of luck with your ideas.

BTW, I'm an assistant professor in quantum mechanics in everyday life, so I understand physics a bit

Cheers,

Hi, Jarek. Actually, we are not both manufacturers as I've not manufactured a thing in over 6 years though my experimenting continues. But I might consider myself a bit of an innovator.

I appreciate your comments. I've no formal background in engineering, physics, or any of the sciences. Only 15 or so years of part time experimenting.

I do stand by my previous comments, of course. But if you'd like to walk me through a few of the basics, where I fall short in my thinking, etc, I'm all ears. And I promise to be a gentleman just as you've already demonstrated here.

And thanks for your demeanor. It's refreshing.

 

[microstrip]

Jarek, every designer or manufacturer has a point to make, discovery to reveal, line to peddle
I've found yr approach online to be refreshingly open, full of genuine enthusiasm, and non confrontational
(...)

+2!

 

[spiritofmusic]

Tbh, unless Stehno comes up w compelling reasons to go down his route, Jarek and his Stacore Adv product remains in Pole position (pun fully intended) to get my support re dedicated isoln, at least of tt
Stehnos suppositions remain v interesting, but theories and a few photos aside, I still have no real overview of what he's providing
Added to the fact he's not in current manufacturing mode, I look twds his proposals
I'm liking the performance v price ratio of the Minus K, but it's proving a bugger to get install to be "set and forget", and despite its impressive specs ie isoln good to 0.8Hz, passive pneumatic springs Stacore Adv and active piezo electric Herzan-like Kuraka look more user-friendly
Re Stehno's ideas, I would v much like to investigate further
Certainly w most of my components sounding great and no desire to upgrade in a hurry, room acoustics, power and cabling fully sorted, vibration management is my "last frontier" potential upgrade
I've had good results from Symposium, both racks and RollerBlocks, promising results from the Accurion i4Large trial under tt some years ago, dramatic (but for me, wrong) results from Ulra5s, and first good, then not so good, results w Shun Mook Diamond Resonators
So I have a reasonable set of data points to call on further investigations

 

[KlausR.]

IMO, vibration isolation is against the laws of physics, against mechanical energy's natural behaviors, and isolation is not even it's own methodology but rather it's just a very inferior version of the one true methodology: resonance energy transfer.

So according to you all those companies who design and manufacture industrial vibration isolation devices, Newport.com for instance, don't have a clue, and their customers don't have a clue either. Which laws of nature precisely do isolation devices offend?

Still waiting for your explanation why steel should provide better draining than wood when the laws of physics clearly show that this is not the case?

 

[DaveC]

I wish it was that easy, the concrete stirring device I mean. I've had a few thoughts about more instananeous gains at least for the rack anyway. But without the need anymore I doubt I'll ever get around to it.

But mechanical settling-in shouldn't be such a foreign concept. Bear in mind, Folsom, that just like mechanical settling in, we have electrical burn-in. And I have to say, based on some rather interesting discoveries / similarities, if somebody told me that there's no such thing as electrical burn-in, it's really just a variation of mechanical settling, I'd probably jump on that bandwagon.

In fact, the only two differences I'm aware of (pertaining to audio anyway) is 1) electrical burn-in has a restart memory whereas mechanical settling-in does not and 2) Once electrical burn-in has occurred, it retains that burned-in status for at least a very long time where perhaps re-installed it may need an hour or two of warm up before reaching full burn-in status again. Whereas with mechanical settling in, generally any tiny movement at any time and that object(s) must go thru the entire settling-in process starting back at square one. Hence, I leave my equipment as-is for years at a time. No buying / selling, etc.

As for giving it a listen, by eastern WA I'm assuming Spokane well, if you're ever near Portland, Oregon hit me up.

For electrical burn-in I think it is partially mechanical as simply moving a cable will require it to settle for a bit, and then shipping through the mail is even worse. I'd guess the wire moves a tiny bit in relation to it's insulation. It still helps a lot to burn a cable in though, recovery after shipping is very quick compared to starting from square 1 on a brand new cable.

 

[KlausR.]

For electrical burn-in I think it is partially mechanical as simply moving a cable will require it to settle for a bit, and then shipping through the mail is even worse. I'd guess the wire moves a tiny bit in relation to it's insulation. It still helps a lot to burn a cable in though, recovery after shipping is very quick compared to starting from square 1 on a brand new cable.

Is there evidence that cable parameters change because of e.g. shipping, and is there evidence that cable parameters change after burn-in?

Klaus

 

[DaveC]

I think with turntables you have to cover a wide range of frequencies including very low ones from footfalls while with other components we're only concerned with higher frequencies. A system that will isolate a tt from a single impulse (footfall) on a flexible wooden floor must use isolation afaik... but please correct me if that's wrong. At a certain point in the frequency range the solution for reducing vibratory energy changes so I'm not sure that tts and solid state electronics should be treated the same way?

Despite what people feel about Stenho's explanations I'd still keep an open mind. I've heard many times people going from more traditional isolation based footers to products like Star Sound and greatly preferring the latter. I've personally experienced isolation based on soft viscoelastic material sound really bad.

I think this is a good thread and I hope everyone will keep posting.

 

[CGabriel]

Dear Stehno,

Since we are both manufacturers it's natural that we believe so strongly in what we are doing
that we decided to invest time and money into it and will defend it. That's why I will not further
engage in the conversation, especially as to what is better and what is not, respecting your views
and experience and whishing you all the best of luck with your ideas.

BTW, I'm an assistant professor in quantum mechanics in everyday life, so I understand physics a bit

Cheers,

Jarek,

While I understand your desire to disengage from this specific thread, I would encourage you to continue to share your knowledge and experience with the population. It is always beneficial to hear from someone with a core design philosophy who has translated that into a commercially successful product line. I personally believe that design philosophies are important but execution and implementation effectiveness may be more important to the success of a product. To use speakers as an example, I have experienced great sound qualities from two diametrically opposed points of view on cabinet design philosophy. One design advocates an acoustically inert goal for the cabinet while the other design attempts to design the cabinet as a musical instrument allowing vibration to move quickly through the cabinet. And conversely, I have experienced examples from each design perspective that were not particularly attractive. I do agree with steno that more attention and research is important to understand the impact of vibration on the performance of audio equipment. I sounds like he has a design philosophy that he believes in based on years of research. I can understand if he wants to protect ideas that he may consider proprietary but if he has truly given up on making them a commercial success, it would be nice if he shared more about his racks and ideas.

 

[DaveC]

Is there evidence that cable parameters change because of e.g. shipping, and is there evidence that cable parameters change after burn-in?

Klaus

I posted some effects of burn-in but it's far from proof. Most things wrt cables are simply observations.

The chart below is before/after using a cable cooker on my UPOCC copper litz wire. I suspect the large surface area of the wire/enamel interface creates a much larger burn-in effect vs conventional wire. Subjectively, the burn-in effects with the litz wire are extremely audible and I received comments about this regularly, but they stopped after using the cable cooker.

The chart shows close-up (3-4" from the center of the concentric mid/tweeter driver) but in-room fr of Pioneer S-1EX speakers.

 

[KlausR.]

I do agree with steno that more attention and research is important to understand the impact of vibration on the performance of audio equipment.

As I've said before, the first step of such research would have to be to determine whether there is a problem or not. Once the existence of the problem has been demonstrated, one can start investigating solutions. In this case one could, for instance, connect the system to the speakers with wire long enough to reach into the room next to the listening room, play a tune with system and speakers in the listening room, measure and listen blind, move the system to the other room, measure and listen blind. With system and speakers physically separated the effects of airborne vibrations should be eliminated.

Have such tests ever been performed to see whether or not vibration of amps etc. is really a problem?

Klaus

 

[Mike Lavigne]

As I've said before, the first step of such research would have to be to determine whether there is a problem or not. Once the existence of the problem has been demonstrated, one can start investigating solutions. In this case one could, for instance, connect the system to the speakers with wire long enough to reach into the room next to the listening room, play a tune with system and speakers in the listening room, measure and listen blind, move the system to the other room, measure and listen blind. With system and speakers physically separated the effects of airborne vibrations should be eliminated.

Have such tests ever been performed to see whether or not vibration of amps etc. is really a problem?

Klaus

well.....er....hummmmm.

discovering you have a problem, solves the problem.