Why are vibration isolation products still considered accessories?

[Blackmorec]

The problem with heat is it takes time to generate. While this is taking place, you are losing transient energy and decay in your music. These products do well to show you an improvement, but they also come at some serious costs to the energy of the music. Sometimes you don't realize this until you pull the absorptive product out of the system. I've done this with two clients recently who used isolation/absorption products under their components. After removing the products, there was an energy to the music again. The clients listed those products for sale the next day.

There are an awful lot of products out there that claim to do a good job. Some do, many don’t. There’s no doubt its important to know the difference. Also its very easy to misapply this type of tweak. For example, using isolation under an electronic component will perhaps isolate it from Its support structure but will at the same time lock in its internal vibration so its full energy is applied to vibrating sensitive components like circuit boards, clock oscillators etc.

The key thing here isn‘t heat generation or time. Its vibrational energy levels. Ideally vibration is conducted out of a component via a low impedance interface (good match in density and stiffness) into an increasing compliant medium. The heat conversion is therefore remote to the component. Any loss of musical performance in the component isn’t caused by the heat conversion process, which happens outside of the component, but rather by the presence of vibration, which as mentioned above becomes locked into the component should the isolation/absorption product form a high impedance interface with the component across which internal vibration doesn’t pass. The result is that the internally generated vibrational energy is locked within the component instead of being lead away and converted to heat. This is the reason isolation products give the results you’ve noted.

 

[tima]

The problem with heat is it takes time to generate. While this is taking place, you are losing transient energy and decay in your music.

Heat is a by-product of the work the vibration is caused to do. That work takes little time to start.

 

[wil]

Skip, I see you represent Star Sound. I have their "Rhythm" platforms under my speakers. I was able to directly compare one speaker under isolation pads (designed to convert mechanical energy to heat energy) and S.Sound platforms , which, in their words, are designed to:

"... transfer resonant energy via high-speed calculated conductive pathways to earth's ground -- maintaining vibrations a state of constant motion and in real time establishing a more efficient result by allowing a device to vibrate in a vibrating environment."

The effect was so different between these two approaches. By comparison, the isolation pads seemed to shift the tonality lower and more importantly, took some of the snap and dynamics from the speakers.

(Btw, I found a great way to compare footers/platforms under heavy speakers: Put one speaker on one type of footer and the other speaker on the other footer type and simply have someone baffle one speaker while you listen to the other. I was able to hear differences in real time without going through the exhaustive 1 hour process of changing out both speakers and having to relay on long term audio memory.)

It sounds like the Star Sound approach is similar in concept, if not execution, to what Shehno is promoting.

 

[stehno]

Stehno, Your arguments and video demonstration are interesting, but I wonder what your ultimate goal is in sharing them?

Are you trying to find a manufacturer/distributor to license your methodology to? (I recall from your last foray on this subject, Taiko Audio expressed interest in talking with you. I guess nothing came of that?)

Or are you simply trying to spread your personal truth about vibration management and illuminate us to our misguided efforts? If this is the case, why not show us pictures of your setup that aren't obscured in darkness and a detailed guide for someone motivated to try this methodology?

Hi, wil. My ultimate goals in sharing? Hopefully they don't differ too much from others in that the ultimate goal is always performance or improved performance. I mean, isn't that why we're all here - even if some of us don't realize it?

But I like to think I've a bit more to contribute. For example. In June, 2017, I installed my 3 Jena Labs line conditioners to my rack using the most extreme form of mounting yet. All said and done, and though impossible to measure, I estimate my line conditioners are now perhaps about 3 or maybe even 4 times their already excellent out-of-the-box performance levels. Results which are quite simlar to my amps and not quite so similar to my source component and very consistent since perhaps 2006 but always bettering my previous implementation methods with more extreme variations and of course using different components. Today, roughly 65% of my entire system is dedicatedly solely to extreme forms of electrical and mechanical energy mgmt. The very same two subjects others call tweaks and accessories (implying their performance is negligible) are what I consider absolutely foundational for every last playback system but the choice is ours as to whether our foundation is inferior or superior.

IOW, I'm rather confident I've acquired more than enough repeatable evidence from a performance perspective over the years showing that this very subject e.g. vibration isolation is inadvertently the sole reason why the industry cannot progress much further performance-wise except for tiny incrementals. Not only does inferior vibration mgmt strategies and methods instill performance-limiting governors on every last playback system but also on the entire industry (think limited mindsets) by keeping it closer to its infancy from a performance-perspective rather than its real potential.

At the very least I hope I caused some to think about energy's behaviors, laws of nature and which methods adhere to them and which do not. Which method works consistantly by applying the same principles to every situation involving an electronic component / electronic accessory and speaker. This in sharp contrast to the methodology that provides an infinitesimal number of "remedies" that are all over the map and that generally bring little or no gains in comparison.

Of course, it never hurts being helpful and right about a given subject. I find it so incredible how the isolationist seems to justify the most absurd and call it science, especially when it's anything but. Yet, it seems 10 out of 10 stand down because the method is so predominant, it must be science. But how can it possibly be science when it's a fact that one cannot isolate an object from all sources of vibrations simultaneously, or when successfully isolating one source that act automatically traps other sources, or when it's in complete defiance to an energy's natural behaviors, and they even get energy's direction of travel backwards to boot? That's not science, that's witchcraft if anything. IOW, it's pretty difficult to stay silent when this kinda' stuff is floating around everywhere with some even drooling over it.

I'm always open to a possible mfg'er or vendor relationship. I'd be silly not to be. But I'm not actively looking if that's what you're thinking. With regard to Taiko? After several email exchanges they informed me they were going on holiday 13 months ago and as far as I know have not yet returned. It's just as well. I tried cautioning them several times we had nothing in common and perhaps they finally believed me. After all, vibration isolation has about as much in common with resonant energy transfer as darkness has with light.

With regard to Star Sound's philosophies, yes my basic philosophies and methods are very much in the same camp as theirs. Star Sound mentored me a bit around the 2002 - 2005 time frame after they saw my first prototype in 2002 and reached out to me. The only difference is I've taken those same concepts and principles to the utmost extreme and that's where the real performance improvements can be found. Though perhaps not so practical for all components. But that's ok if indeed the components are now the accessory.

 

[stehno]

No, I think this is a bit ridiculous.



This is even more ridiculous. But, what else is new?

Don't you think it a bit imbecilic to label something ridiculous without any reasons or justifications to substantiate your position?

Then again, I suppose for somebody like yourself it is safer that way isn't it, Dave? Well, I mean so long as nobody notices.

 

[Blackmorec]

Of course, it never hurts being helpful and right about a given subject. I find it so incredible how the isolationist seems to justify the most absurd and call it science, especially when it's anything but. Yet, it seems 10 out of 10 stand down because the method is so predominant, it must be science. But how can it possibly be science when it's a fact that one cannot isolate an object from all sources of vibrations simultaneously, or when successfully isolates one source that act automatically traps other sources, or when it's in complete defiance to an energy's natural behaviors, and they get the direction of travel backwards to boot? That's not science, that's witchcraft if anything. IOW, it's pretty difficult to stay silent when this kinda' stuff is floating around everything with some even drooling over it.

There are several solutions available that provide simultaneous isolation In one direction (ground to component), while providing grounding and energy conversion in the other (component to ground). The solutions offer optimised low and high impedance interfaces according to the direction/function. Solutions are available as shelves, platforms or footers depending on the installation environment.
There are 3 problems around vibration and its control. First and foremost of course is the deleterious impact vibration has on SQ, second is making sure the correct solutions are applied so the problem isn’t exacerbated and third is picking solutions that themselves don’t have a deleterious impact of SQ. Its not witchcraft or blackmagic, just an understanding of physics and some decent engineering.
Instead of just knocking all and sundry, why not tell us something about your solution and what makes it unique? What are its features, what does it do, how does it work, why is it better?

 

[kodomo]

@stehno Can you just post a photo of it? I have read through and get your point of view but I would like to see the execution.

Sorry, I am just an architect and my mind works better visually.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Don't you think it a bit imbecilic to label something ridiculous without any reasons or justifications to substantiate your position?

Then again, I suppose for somebody like yourself it is safer that way isn't it, Dave? Well, I mean so long as nobody notices.

Back to your corners, gentlemen!

Take a break, and have a drink.

 

[Hear Here]

The thread title is simply:
Why are vibration isolation products still considered accessories?

So why can't this simple question be answered in a simply and logical way?

I'd suggest that "accessories" are "small items that owners of equipment choose to add to their kit in an attempt to improve sound quality". Some are 100% necessary such as interconnects and speaker cables, but others such as isolation devices are optional. Manufacturers usually include low cost but adaquate items such as feet and power cables because they know buyers will often have their own ideas of what may suit better than the standard offering.

Buyers of these accessories will choose them partly based on feature they are trying to change, so some will choose spikes and others isolation devices depending on the floor their speakers stand on. Other influences are hype by vendors and reviewers of products that in truth often make very little difference, but once we've spent far more than they are worth on buying them, we have to claim they are wonderful to justify our stupidity - in many cases.

Vibration isolation is a case in point. With speakers, some systems will sound better standing on spikes but others will improve with some form of isolation. There are several vendors at many price levels, but there's no denying that these are optional and that they are accessories - to be chosen by the owner armed with loads of recommendations, hype and snake oil from the vendors, reviewers and other owners of course.

So the simple answer is surely "because that's what they are".

 

[DaveC]

Back to your corners, gentlemen!

Take a break, and have a drink.

Lol, it's fine Ron... nobody takes stehno seriously.

 

[Alrainbow]

Ten bucks I get flamed for this post but it’s really needed here. To me any vibration drain or iso should be an accessory. Why as it alters the sound. So it should be used to tune our system.
all we do after power cords and interconnects is to further tailor the sound. remove a cover , turn it on it’s side , place a brick or even a water melon all alter the sound. On a tube or ss amp if you used a dummy load toy can hear the music in many Areas
The output transformers , transistors, tubes , even psu transformers all play our music as we use them. this is one reason a rack matters.
Take a tube amp or preamp and use rings or even better place it outside or in its own acoustically iso box transforms what it sound like. I found this out by accident lol. rehabbing old amps and such. I heard music thought it was the dummy loads and yes some sing too. but even a metal can transistors do play music. speakers are even worse using footers and the like. Many models change by just placing a stAck of Heavey books. While better made models are effected less it’s a effect to some degree in just about all.
Enjoy flaming me now

 

[ddk]

Hi, wil. My ultimate goals in sharing? Hopefully they don't differ too much from others in that the ultimate goal is always performance or improved performance. I mean, isn't that why we're all here - even if some of us don't realize it?

But I like to think I've a bit more to contribute. For example. In June, 2017, I installed my 3 Jena Labs line conditioners to my rack using the most extreme form of mounting yet. All said and done, and though impossible to measure, I estimate my line conditioners are now perhaps about 3 or maybe even 4 times their already excellent out-of-the-box performance levels. Results which are quite simlar to my amps and not quite so similar to my source component and very consistent since perhaps 2006 but always bettering my previous implementation methods with more extreme variations and of course using different components. Today, roughly 65% of my entire system is dedicatedly solely to extreme forms of electrical and mechanical energy mgmt. The very same two subjects others call tweaks and accessories (implying their performance is negligible) are what I consider absolutely foundational for every last playback system but the choice is ours as to whether our foundation is inferior or superior.

IOW, I'm rather confident I've acquired more than enough repeatable evidence from a performance perspective over the years showing that this very subject e.g. vibration isolation is inadvertently the sole reason why the industry cannot progress much further performance-wise except for tiny incrementals. Not only does inferior vibration mgmt strategies and methods instill performance-limiting governors on every last playback system but also on the entire industry (think limited mindsets) by keeping it closer to its infancy from a performance-perspective rather than its real potential.

At the very least I hope I caused some to think about energy's behaviors, laws of nature and which methods adhere to them and which do not. Which method works consistantly by applying the same principles to every situation involving an electronic component / electronic accessory and speaker. This in sharp contrast to the methodology that provides an infinitesimal number of "remedies" that are all over the map and that generally bring little or no gains in comparison.

Of course, it never hurts being helpful and right about a given subject. I find it so incredible how the isolationist seems to justify the most absurd and call it science, especially when it's anything but. Yet, it seems 10 out of 10 stand down because the method is so predominant, it must be science. But how can it possibly be science when it's a fact that one cannot isolate an object from all sources of vibrations simultaneously, or when successfully isolating one source that act automatically traps other sources, or when it's in complete defiance to an energy's natural behaviors, and they even get energy's direction of travel backwards to boot? That's not science, that's witchcraft if anything. IOW, it's pretty difficult to stay silent when this kinda' stuff is floating around everywhere with some even drooling over it.

I'm always open to a possible mfg'er or vendor relationship. I'd be silly not to be. But I'm not actively looking if that's what you're thinking. With regard to Taiko? After several email exchanges they informed me they were going on holiday 13 months ago and as far as I know have not yet returned. It's just as well. I tried cautioning them several times we had nothing in common and perhaps they finally believed me. After all, vibration isolation has about as much in common with resonant energy transfer as darkness has with light.

With regard to Star Sound's philosophies, yes my basic philosophies and methods are very much in the same camp as theirs. Star Sound mentored me a bit around the 2002 - 2005 time frame after they saw my first prototype in 2002 and reached out to me. The only difference is I've taken those same concepts and principles to the utmost extreme and that's where the real performance improvements can be found. Though perhaps not so practical for all components. But that's ok if indeed the components are now the accessory.

Dear Stehno,

I agree with your supposition about the negligible effect of floor born vibrations on electronic but it's a different story when it comes to speakers and sound waves. Sources are affected differently by floor born vibrations, many none at all, then we have to see how much vibration we're dealing with. I see many so called vibration/isolation/resonant management accessories, cat litter boxes or other chachkis conditioning electricity and ions in room as tweaks because they're mostly crap. At best they do nothing and at worst they bring lots of harm to the sound, IME the majority fall in the latter category. You can add myriads of acoustic tampons to the latter group too. I doubt anyone thinks of a properly designed rack or properly engineered power grid as tweaks, it's a different category of products than the tweaks. That said I come back to @wil's question, what is the purpose of your posts? Because you're not sharing anything! For years you've been doing the same thing over and over again, you inform everyone about your amazing discoveries but offer nothing aside from a blackened video or an out of focus dark pic when pressed. You also write cryptically, " In June, 2017, I installed my 3 Jena Labs line conditioners to my rack using the most extreme form of mounting yet", what does installed to mean? This isn't sharing, it's frustrating if anything at all. I don't know about others and their reaction but initially you made some interesting points but 71 posts later I still don't know what you're on about, it's boring and repeat of all other threads. Are you really ready to share whatever product it is you're talking about?

david

 

[stehno]

Dear Stehno,

I agree with your supposition about the negligible effect of floor born vibrations on electronic ...

Appreciate the notes, david. Well, ummmm, at least this first line anyway.

... but it's a different story when it comes to speakers and sound waves.

How so? And why? Do you know this for a fact or are you just assuming this is true?

Sources are affected differently by floor born vibrations, many none at all, then we have to see how much vibration we're dealing with.

How so? And why? Do you know this for a fact or are you just assuming this is true?

Also interesting that you open your post by agreeing with my supposition on the negligible effects on floor-borne vibrations and then essentially do an about-face in the very same sentence.

Why are speakers are any different from electronic components? Are not crossovers, internal amps, and drivers also electronic components? Are not all sources electronic components? Do not all capture similar if not the same unwanted energy? Why the need to discriminate? Regarding my video of various types of authoritative bass, did you not read that my subwoofer and rack are both tightly coupled to the same sub-flooring and just 2 feet apart from one another? Isn't that a huge no-no for the isolationist?

I see many so called vibration/isolation/resonant management accessories, cat litter boxes or other chachkis conditioning electricity and ions in room as tweaks because they're mostly crap. At best they do nothing and at worst they bring lots of harm to the sound, IME the majority fall in the latter category. You can add myriads of acoustic tampons to the latter group too.

Agreed. BTW, I’ve no idea what chachkis conditioning is.

I doubt anyone thinks of a properly designed rack or properly engineered power grid as tweaks, it's a different category of products than the tweaks.

Ok, I'll bite. What in your opinion constitutes a properly designed rack and properly engineered power grid? Regardless, whether superior or inferior electrical or vibration managing-type products, they always have been and at this rate for perhaps the next 50 years will remain in the “accessory” category primarily due to their all-over-the-map (willy-nilly?) executions and very limited performance results.

That said I come back to @wil's question, what is the purpose of your posts?

I'm pretty sure I answered wil’s questions above about purposes / goals sufficiently.

Because you're not sharing anything! For years you've been doing the same thing over and over again, you inform everyone about your amazing discoveries but offer nothing aside from a blackened video or an out of focus dark pic when pressed.

Not sharing anything? Hmmm. The topic of this thread was why vibration isolation products are still considered accessories only and was prompted by Tima's comments in another thread about isolation solutions and results being rightfully all over the map. So I listed the isolationists' primary tenets / principles and then substantiated my supposition that floor-borne vibrations (the lynch pin to the entire isolation methodology's purpose for existing) have little / no impact on sonics. And if they did, then my rack, so rigidly mounted to the sub-floor with a sub only 2 ft away, should feel the full brunt of any such negative impact and sound like crap.

How is that not sharing anything?

Did I not also share an alternative and hopefully greatly improved performance concept, method, and principles? If so, am I not throwing perhaps the biggest stick in high-end audio's spokes? I think I've shared more than enough in numerous categories to at least raise one's radar a bit saying something's amiss about this topic or that. IOW, the performance-limiting governor induced by poorly managed resonant energy so severly impacts most every other performance aspect that perhaps any significant performance-related topic in high-end audio can trace its cause / origins to this one universal problem. How is that not sharing anything? If I'm right, does that not potentially open a huge door to greater performance levels?

If I stop here and if true, haven't I already shared far more truths about performance than perhaps any other? If indeed resonant energy induces the biggest performance-limiting governor and if indeed vibration isolation is the poorest of band-aids, am I not sharing the biggest news from a performance perspective? Maybe a better question is, why are so many so content with the status quo performance-wise? I've also shared pics here and there over the years and have gone into specifics at times but as usual it falls on deaf ears.

So other than spoon-feeding, please tell me how I've fallen short of your mark.

You also write cryptically, " In June, 2017, I installed my 3 Jena Labs line conditioners to my rack using the most extreme form of mounting yet", what does installed to mean? This isn't sharing, it's frustrating if anything at all.

Others rest their components on a platform but as mentioned here and elsewhere, my components are mounted to my racking system with a previously unheard of tremendous compressive force. If your sister-in-law weighed 333 lbs, it would take 3 of her to equal the compressive force I induce on my amps, 2 of her on my source, and 1 of her on each of my line conditioners. How is any of this cryptic?

I don't know about others and their reaction but initially you made some interesting points but 71 posts later I still don't know what you're on about, it's boring and repeat of all other threads.

Funny how you say I make some interesting points. Sorry, david, but I either provided an excellent example that floor-borne vibrations induce little / no sonic harm or I did not. If I did, that's what should be very interesting. Not my making some cute little ancillary points. And yes, for those content with the performance status quo, I suspect it would be boring.

I'm not talking specific products but rather inferior vs superior concepts and methods and principles and hopefully some common sense. Every once in a while I’ll post a video of an in-room recording to help substantiate my claims. Sure in-room recordings cannot capture the entire gestalt of a playback presentation but for those with most any basic listening skills should easily pick up on a lack of shortcomings while retaining much of the in-room presentation’s musicality and/or fidelity. But again, it seems to fall on deaf ears.

BTW, if I bring up a subject every so often, so? How many times have the collective we beat the same horse to death (other topics) in the forums perhaps hundreds of times over the years that go nowhere? IMO, those dead horse topics are so frickin’ predictable, I Love Lucy reruns are probably more informative. That is the opposite of a performance-oriented industry. Or are you implying you would prefer those having perspectives outside the status quo refrain from participating?

Besides, it’s not like you or for that matter the industry is going anywhere fast at least not from a performance perspective. But please feel free to skip my threads / posts offering different perspectives offend, frustrate, or bore you. No doubt another new and exciting hi-rez vs redbook, analog vs digital, tube vs ss, ad nauseam pick your poison thread is right around the corner to get your adrenaline flowing - yet again.

Are you really ready to share whatever product it is you're talking about?

david

No. It's not about product, david. It's only about concepts and methods that are diametrically opposed to the 30-year old status quo. Besides, I'm really not into spoon-feeding you or anybody else. Then again, if you wanted to commission me to build for you a playback system resulting in perhaps an unmatched level of musicality, I'm sure you'd reach out to me.

 

[kodomo]

Dear Stenho, I remember that we have talked before as I was interested in your ideas. I still have found one photo in my disk, maybe it was from our conversation or from another topic you have put up here or somewhere else. Is this still your solution or did you develop it further? I just share this as it will bring more light to your ideas and may get more people to understand them.

 

[stehno]

Dear Stenho, I remember that we have talked before as I was interested in your ideas. I still have found one photo in my disk, maybe it was from our conversation or from another topic you have put up here or somewhere else. Is this still your solution or did you develop it further? I just share this as it will bring more light to your ideas and may get more people to understand them.

Hi, kodomo. That was my very first prototype of this design in 2009. All remains the same except that over the years I've greatly intensified the compressive forces on components to their assigned shelves and as of 2010 I've been using my own custom spikes/points which are vastly superior to those in the picture. The rack in this picture is also the exact same unit I use in my listening room today though it's now orange. So yes, it still remains my solution today along with some further development. But I would say with further development, this same unit's performance is now multiple times its original.

BTW, the picture does not really do my over-engineered designs justice as my machine shop calculated that each shelf should be able to sustain 2000 lbs.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[ddk]

Appreciate the notes, david. Well, ummmm, at least this first line anyway.



How so? And why? Do you know this for a fact or are you just assuming this is true?



How so? And why? Do you know this for a fact or are you just assuming this is true?

Also interesting that you open your post by agreeing with my supposition on the negligible effects on floor-borne vibrations and then essentially do an about-face in the very same sentence.

Why are speakers are any different from electronic components? Are not crossovers, internal amps, and drivers also electronic components? Are not all sources electronic components? Do not all capture similar if not the same unwanted energy? Why the need to discriminate? Regarding my video of various types of authoritative bass, did you not read that my subwoofer and rack are both tightly coupled to the same sub-flooring and just 2 feet apart from one another? Isn't that a huge no-no for the isolationist?



Agreed. BTW, I’ve no idea what chachkis conditioning is.



Ok, I'll bite. What in your opinion constitutes a properly designed rack and properly engineered power grid? Regardless, whether superior or inferior electrical or vibration managing-type products, they always have been and at this rate for perhaps the next 50 years will remain in the “accessory” category primarily due to their all-over-the-map (willy-nilly?) executions and very limited performance results.



I'm pretty sure I answered wil’s questions above about purposes / goals sufficiently.



Not sharing anything? Hmmm. The topic of this thread was why vibration isolation products are still considered accessories only and was prompted by Tima's comments in another thread about isolation solutions and results being rightfully all over the map. So I listed the isolationists' primary tenets / principles and then substantiated my supposition that floor-borne vibrations (the lynch pin to the entire isolation methodology's purpose for existing) have little / no impact on sonics. And if they did, then my rack, so rigidly mounted to the sub-floor with a sub only 2 ft away, should feel the full brunt of any such negative impact and sound like crap.

How is that not sharing anything?

Did I not also share an alternative and hopefully greatly improved performance concept, method, and principles? If so, am I not throwing perhaps the biggest stick in high-end audio's spokes? I think I've shared more than enough in numerous categories to at least raise one's radar a bit saying something's amiss about this topic or that. IOW, the performance-limiting governor induced by poorly managed resonant energy so severly impacts most every other performance aspect that perhaps any significant performance-related topic in high-end audio can trace its cause / origins to this one universal problem. How is that not sharing anything? If I'm right, does that not potentially open a huge door to greater performance levels?

If I stop here and if true, haven't I already shared far more truths about performance than perhaps any other? If indeed resonant energy induces the biggest performance-limiting governor and if indeed vibration isolation is the poorest of band-aids, am I not sharing the biggest news from a performance perspective? Maybe a better question is, why are so many so content with the status quo performance-wise? I've also shared pics here and there over the years and have gone into specifics at times but as usual it falls on deaf ears.

So other than spoon-feeding, please tell me how I've fallen short of your mark.



Others rest their components on a platform but as mentioned here and elsewhere, my components are mounted to my racking system with a previously unheard of tremendous compressive force. If your sister-in-law weighed 333 lbs, it would take 3 of her to equal the compressive force I induce on my amps, 2 of her on my source, and 1 of her on each of my line conditioners. How is any of this cryptic?



Funny how you say I make some interesting points. Sorry, david, but I either provided an excellent example that floor-borne vibrations induce little / no sonic harm or I did not. If I did, that's what should be very interesting. Not my making some cute little ancillary points. And yes, for those content with the performance status quo, I suspect it would be boring.

I'm not talking specific products but rather inferior vs superior concepts and methods and principles and hopefully some common sense. Every once in a while I’ll post a video of an in-room recording to help substantiate my claims. Sure in-room recordings cannot capture the entire gestalt of a playback presentation but for those with most any basic listening skills should easily pick up on a lack of shortcomings while retaining much of the in-room presentation’s musicality and/or fidelity. But again, it seems to fall on deaf ears.

BTW, if I bring up a subject every so often, so? How many times have the collective we beat the same horse to death (other topics) in the forums perhaps hundreds of times over the years that go nowhere? IMO, those dead horse topics are so frickin’ predictable, I Love Lucy reruns are probably more informative. That is the opposite of a performance-oriented industry. Or are you implying you would prefer those having perspectives outside the status quo refrain from participating?

Besides, it’s not like you or for that matter the industry is going anywhere fast at least not from a performance perspective. But please feel free to skip my threads / posts offering different perspectives offend, frustrate, or bore you. No doubt another new and exciting hi-rez vs redbook, analog vs digital, tube vs ss, ad nauseam pick your poison thread is right around the corner to get your adrenaline flowing - yet again.



No. It's not about product, david. It's only about concepts and methods that are diametrically opposed to the 30-year old status quo. Besides, I'm really not into spoon-feeding you or anybody else. Then again, if you wanted to commission me to build for you a playback system resulting in perhaps an unmatched level of musicality, I'm sure you'd reach out to me.

Honestly stehno I have no interest in circular back & forth argumenting. My point wasn't that you shouldn't repeat a topic but that you start something and then tell us about your great insight, experience and accomplishments but never show anything specific to back it up. Let me assure you that I have no interest in your spoon in my mouth, my question is why hint at something that you're not willing to show or share. You don't even say what your tight coupling method is for your sub, screwed down, spiked, coned, balled, mass coupled, something else? What type of floor? No one knows what coupled means in your scenario but we're supposed to agree based on some strange video. Please show us an implementation of one these superior concepts.

As far as the difference between speakers and electronics go, it's rather obvious. Speakers and source components like CD and record players have mechanical moving parts that floorborn vibrations can interfere with their operation which amps, preamps, dacs, etc. don't.

Every once in a while I’ll post a video of an in-room recording to help substantiate my claims.

I'm sorry but a dark shaky peephole video from somewhere else in a room, ie different location from the system proves nothing aside from the fact that your 200 gram phone isn't properly installed. I'm even unclear if you're saying that floorborn vibrations have no effect on audio components or your structure is so effective that there's no impact from floor vibrations to the sound?

Please understand that I'm not attacking or putting you down in any way in fact I'm quite interested in the topic. All I'm trying to point out is that you have an interested audience and as a member of that audience you shown or proven anything.

david

 

[wil]

Stehno,

Here's what is frustrating, in my opinion, to the people reading this thread:

You are sharing a vibration control concept that is interesting to a number of people here and you state that your motivation is to share your concept, which you claim would revolutionize audio performance. So, this begs the question, assuming you are not presently trying to commercially market or patent your technique, why don't you go the next step in effectively communicating your idea and technique?

If I we're interested in opening people's eyes to my revolutionary technique, I would not concentrate on sharing my idea on an audio forum, or posting a video, which really doesn't provide enough information to be meaningful (to me anyway). I would figure a way to demonstrate my system loaded into the clamps and then the same system on a more conventional rack. Invite a couple of respected people in the business to come and witness/listen.

This would of course be a lot of trouble, but in the interest of standing the audio industry on its' ear, why not go for it? With all due respect, it appears your present efforts at communicating your ideas are not going anywhere.

 

[stehno]

Honestly stehno I have no interest in circular back & forth argumenting. My point wasn't that you shouldn't repeat a topic but that you start something and then tell us about your great insight, experience and accomplishments but never show anything specific to back it up. Let me assure you that I have no interest in your spoon in my mouth, my question is why hint at something that you're not willing to show or share. You don't even say what your tight coupling method is for your sub, screwed down, spiked, coned, balled, mass coupled, something else? What type of floor? No one knows what coupled means in your scenario but we're supposed to agree based on some strange video. Please show us an implementation of one these superior concepts.

Hi, david. Sorry for my delay as I've been on vacation. I too have little interest in any arguments but you bring up some good points / questions.

I have shared an implementation or two in time past. But seriously, it really has more to do with the concept than anything. Once you understand the concept, there's usually multiple ways to implement - so long as one stays within the basic principles.

I've tightly fastened 4 of my custom spikes/points into the standard threaded taps at each of the sub's 4 corners plus I have about 80 lbs. of steel and copper plates sitting on top of the sub to further improve the sub's tight coupling to the sub-floor. The more mass loading the merrier.

As far as the difference between speakers and electronics go, it's rather obvious. Speakers and source components like CD and record players have mechanical moving parts that floorborn vibrations can interfere with their operation which amps, preamps, dacs, etc. don't.

The seemingly obvious isn't always true. Have you checked the divorce rate in the US lately? To me, vibration isolation is over-the-top obvious. But I suspect that's also its number 1 problem. In fact, I suspect it's so seemingly obvious and logical / common sensical, nobody ever bothered to question its basic principles. I certainly never set out to question it. At least not until I was well down the resonant energy transfer path.

If floor-borne vibrations have little / no impact on sonics, I'd venture they'd also have little / no impact on motors and power supplies at least from a sonic perspective. Especially since motors and PS themselves induce their own vibrations. Moreover, since I've yet to knowingly experience any example of floor-borne vibrations impacting sonics, I care not about floor-borne vibrations so I consider their supposed destructive harm as mythical or folklore. That implies I also don't care about the 1.2M earthquakes annually registering at 2.3 or greater throughout the earth even though the earth is constantly shaking. IOW, when the isolationist claims to hear improvements "when isolating from floor-borne vibrations" I've little doubt they are hearing differences / improvements. But I also have no doubt that if said improvements are genuine, the source(s) of vibrations that are now better managed are anything but floor-borne induced.

In contrast to your example here, I only care about creating a superior / efficient exit path for ALL internally-generated vibrations including those from motors and power supplies. Again, energy seeks first to travel away from its point source (electronic components (including motors and PS), speakers (including internals), etc) and I wanna' do all I reasonably can to make that happen most expediently. IOW, whether component or speaker internals, the cause is the same and the remedy is the same and life is simple in contrast to being all over the map - per Tima.

I'm sorry but a dark shaky peephole video from somewhere else in a room, ie different location from the system proves nothing aside from the fact that your 200 gram phone isn't properly installed. I'm even unclear if you're saying that floorborn vibrations have no effect on audio components or your structure is so effective that there's no impact from floor vibrations to the sound?

Understood. My iphone is installed on a lightweight aluminum tripod. It being excited by bass impact really just visually emphasizes what the little mic is unable to fully capture. In-room is actually far more impressive.

It's impossible for me (or perhaps anyone) to confirm but to the best of my knowledge, there is zero sonic impact from floor-borne vibrations. So long as we do not confuse vibrations with shock and impact - which is an entirely different subject that has nothing directly to with high-end audio. But to play it smart, I generally say "little / no impact".

In no way am I saying my structure is impervious to floor-borne vibration. Quite the contrary, I'm saying that my structure is so rigid, so tightly coupled, and so congruent to the floor that if anything, it should be more susceptible to floor-borne vibrations than perhaps any other structure. BTW, did you happen to notice that my green structure looks much like a tuning fork? Don't tuning forks resonate rather easily? Can you see now why I offered up my demo video of variations of authoritative bass together with my subwoofer just 2 ft away also so tightly coupled and congruent to the floor?

Bear in mind also, that as far as perhaps anybody knows, isolation got its start in high-end audio because some enthusiast way back when held a party with a guest dancing in front of their TT that caused the stylus to jump 14 grooves, confused shock and impact with vibrations and vowed to ensure that would never happen again. Or something similar and the narrative has never been seriously challenged since.

Please understand that I'm not attacking or putting you down in any way in fact I'm quite interested in the topic. All I'm trying to point out is that you have an interested audience and as a member of that audience you shown or proven anything.

david

I'm confident that some of the in-room recordings I've shared here and elsewhere should easily demonstrate to at least a few there's something special going on. As for you. Have you ever found yourself trying to read between the lines of a product review by an questionable reviewer?

In-room recordings can't quite tell all so you might find other in-room recordings with similar fidelity though I doubt it. I also seriously doubt one with reasonably discerning ears would find any shortcomings from my in-room recording examples.

If you think I've not shown or proven anything, might it be that you've not given the matter much than a token of your attention? Have you tried reading between the lines a bit?

For example. Have you considered how frequently you hear this level of musicality from an almost 60 year old redbook recording purchased from Walmart for $5.99? Or playing at 101db which in itself should be quite a challenge for many a playback system? Or my 2 components though musical enough only retail for $4k? Or an unheard of 65% of my entire system's costs dedicates solely to electrical and mechanical energy mgmt? Or my subwoofer being just 2 ft away from the rack? And nothing is intentionally isolated from anything?

How about my sharing this concept which flies smack dab in the face of everything we think we know about vibrations (and other matters) in perhaps the most respected high-end forum where cost is often times no object and higher intellect is seemingly a dime a dozen? Or my using just an iPhone XR with a single and tiny Shure MV88 condenser mic? Who in their right mind would even attempt such a demo? Isn't that a pretty big matzah ball I'm hanging out there for anybody to chop off? I certainly wouldn't share any of this unless I was confident what I'm sharing.

Other things to consider might be the tremendous preservation of timbral accuracy, overall detail, musicality, bass definition (though limited by the little mic), lack of congestion, breakup, or flattening out on more torturous cuts, the volumes of ambient info previous hidden (a demo of this one characteristic alone is enough to demonstrate "the room" being the most important component and demonstrate multi-channel is superior to 2-channel is really just more folklore), the dynamics (I'm using a passive volume attenuator), etc. And of course we must always always consider our own abilities to discern what we hear.

Have you ever tried or even just considered some of these things? Have you considered why those with supposedly SOTA-level playback systems don't jump right in with their own in-room recordings to put me in my place once and for all? Shouldn't that be all too easy if what I'm saying is false? It's all about performance, right?

For better or worse I guess I'm putting the vibration isolation method on trial and taking into consideration what all is at stake (for everybody) here, don't you think if somebody could, they would shut me down in a heart beat? How about isolation product mfg'ers? If anybody should be able to correct me, shouldn't any one of them easily be able to audibly demonstrate how off base I am? Ever consider the possibility that they don't because they can't? Or might it be that some of those vendors are just as lost as anybody? Some might indeed attempt to sway with their scientific verbiage (words are always cheap in high-end audio) and graphs (also cheap) but I'll bet dollars-to-donuts not a one would attempt a defense using an in-room recording in this thread.

Like I said, sometimes we have to read between the lines a bit.

 

[stehno]

Stehno,

Here's what is frustrating, in my opinion, to the people reading this thread:

You are sharing a vibration control concept that is interesting to a number of people here and you state that your motivation is to share your concept, which you claim would revolutionize audio performance. So, this begs the question, assuming you are not presently trying to commercially market or patent your technique, why don't you go the next step in effectively communicating your idea and technique?

If I we're interested in opening people's eyes to my revolutionary technique, I would not concentrate on sharing my idea on an audio forum, or posting a video, which really doesn't provide enough information to be meaningful (to me anyway). I would figure a way to demonstrate my system loaded into the clamps and then the same system on a more conventional rack. Invite a couple of respected people in the business to come and witness/listen.

This would of course be a lot of trouble, but in the interest of standing the audio industry on its' ear, why not go for it? With all due respect, it appears your present efforts at communicating your ideas are not going anywhere.

Appreciate the thoughts and suggestions, wil, though I've heard most of them numerous times before. However, I'm not actively marketing anything. So for me anyway, I've no intention of performing any type of gymnastics to alter the status quo.

But there are many beliefs and dogmas and folklore in high-end audio including some that are downright silly. And though I usually try to ignore many of them, it can be frustrating so I sometimes prefer to take a stand for what I consider to be true.

Besides, one need not look very hard to realize some-to-many are far less interested in real performance than what we're led to believe. Even though they'll never admit it.

But thanks for the suggestions.

 

[Gregm]

How about my sharing this concept which flies smack dab in the face of everything we think we know about vibrations (and other matters) in perhaps the most respected high-end forum where cost is often times no object and higher intellect is seemingly a dime a dozen?

Hi Stehno -- do I understand correctly: the idea is to clamp the components on a rigid structure, itself coupled to the floor -- thereby syncing & giving the total structure additional mass?
As opposed to liberating components from (extraneous), floor borne vibrations