Atmasphere,
I've reattached the support base to the Mambo arm tower and then placed 5.5kg weight on that. I've kept the two (of the three)exposed spikes on the column and then drilled and tapped a 6mm hole at the end of the support base: so as to have a tripod of spikes that hold the whole thing about 3mm above the birch wall shelf. I've then rolled four small balls of blue tac and placed these under the four corners of the support base (the weights ensure that the blue tac is squashed firmly against the platform (or plinth!)and that the arrangement is grounded through the three spikes.
It's not the prettiest arrangement (given the old small bar bell weight that I have used on the arm tower/ supporting base) but it really works and is costless - until such time as I can obtain a more aesthetically pleasing arm tower. |
Dgob, So how do you have things set up now? What is the arm tower sitting on? |
Dear Dgob - congratulations - isn't it a grand feeling getting closer to the music and the family at the same time.
Is the feeling a little more special this time around because this upgrade cost practically nothing ?
Dear T-Bone you said - b) taking out the symposium (two isolation methods next to each other is usually worse than just one in my experience) - both of which should have improved things.
I believe my set up supports this as well my sp10 is on 4 inches of maple which itself sits on the spiked columns of the actual stand not another shelf.
Cheers Chris |
Hi Raul,
Just a little anecdote to suggest why "I would [strongly] encourage others to try" the nude Technics and decoupled arm tower. My wife has become desensitised of the joys of hifi due to the decades of constant component change and repeated play of stock test tracks that this has involved. It seemed a miracle when she both noticed and commented positively on what she heard this week. Similarly, my seven year old daughter tends to criticise my music and finds no time for jazz and classical music which, I am told, I "always play". Well last night, I was playing Peggy Lee and Ella Fitzgerald. She danced to all tracks and asked me questions about Ella and her life. I know this might not seem like much but it touched me greatly and I believe this was down to the natural and detailed way in which the records are now being presented.
Given that the changes I have made have cost me absolutely nothing so far (although I might vernture towards having a customised arm tower made - a la Halcro - at some future point), I simply cannot see why anyone would not at least try this out. |
Raul,
I cannot doubt the truth of your statement. I would encourage others to try it out but also understand if they decide to go another route.
Atmasphere,
Examples of the viscolelastic materials used for isolation and damping can be found at:
http://www.equarack.com/isolation-footers.htm
Maybe I have misused the terminology or misunderstood. If so, my apologies. |
viscoelastic doesn't sound like something you want to use as a plinth, although if you do have a rigid plinth already such a material might be good for damping. |
Whenever I feel a bit viscoelastic, I visit my chiropractor.
Have any of you guys heard of or tried the Wave Kinetics footers? I am thinking of trying some under my Slate Plinths. |
Dear Dgob/all: Theory/theorethical is only that: theory/theorethical and IMHO means almost nothing till you can prove exactly what that theory states.
All the persons's experiments/facts posted in this thread means that for each one of them what all they are hearing it is a great quality performance improvement that permited to all of them enjoy MUSIC as never before.
Good for all, congratulations!!!
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
'viscoelastic platform'?? What's *that*? |
Atmasphere,
You're right, the spikes and resultant image stabilization was a major improvement. What I should have said was that it did not bring performance back to where I had it when only using blue tac and not using the Symposium. The combination of spikes and the removed viscoelastic platform has brought major improvements in this regard but I still need to test for any trade-offs and ensure where (if anywhere) weaknesses might now lie.
Onwards and upwards |
Dgob, all elastomerics have a range of operation- a minimum loading and a maximum. Depending on where you get the elastomerics you can often get a datasheet that can be very helpful in this regard. However, I did increase the weight of the armtower to over 6kg and this brought no major improvements - save stabilizing the imaging. In my book, stabilizing the imaging is a major improvement! One of the weaknesses many 'tables have relative to analog tape is image stability. I really could not get my 'table to do that as well as tape until I installed the solid plinth (damping the original plinth, which was hollow-cast, was not enough!). |
T_bone,
Excellent and do let me know how it goes if you do try it. |
Good on you! I think getting a great result from experimentation is wonderful. I'm very happy for you that it worked. I'm going to venture out on a limb and say that you would not keep the same sound if you spiked the table and floated the armpod on the footers. I expect there is resonance in the TT you are dampening/sinking (the reason why people in plinth-world make bigger/heavier/better plinths for the SP-10Mk2), and the improvement on the armpod came from a) switching from blutack to spikes, and b) taking out the symposium (two isolation methods next to each other is usually worse than just one in my experience) - both of which should have improved things.
I expect that if you do not hear any issues with the fact that the table/platter is now theoretically resonating at a low frequency in relation to the tonearm pivot point, that the experiment has been successful. Once in position, the table itself has a great deal of inertia (in 3-dimensional space), which should help keep most of the resonance transfer in the domain of heat generation rather than low frequency movement. Remaining theoretical issues might remain just that - theoretical.
I have a couple of motors like that and some great footers made by Sony way back in the day. I could try that relatively easily if I could make an armpod. I'll have to think of a way to get one done... |
T_bone,
Yes, that's the way it's set up now. Really impressed. |
That's cool, Dgob. So many new things to try. I hadn't even thought of a wall mount shelf, but sounds like it's worth a try. Cool arm pod. How'd you make it 6kg?
T_bone: from his system pics it does look like he has the sp-10 on AT 616's and tonearm pod on spikes. |
Dgob,
Does that mean your TT is on pneumatic footers and your armpod is on spikes? |
Atmasphere,
I just recalled your referring to the fact that: "elastomerics... are more efficient if they are loaded properly!" This might answer why the removal of the Symposium platform had such a major impact. However, I did increase the weight of the armtower to over 6kg and this brought no major improvements - save stabilizing the imaging.
Whatever the reasoning (and I acknowledge that the loading was inadequate in this instance, particularly as the platform works wonderfully under the behemoth mass of the Acoustic Signature Mambo) the set up is really and truly wonderful. I remain amazed by this relatively cheap option and the gains it brings.
Nevertheless, I will still try a platter of the SAEC type at some distant point just because I have learned to never close my self off from possible alternatives and the gains that these might bring. The curent set up simply seems the best of the alternatives that I have tried and/or listened to so far.
Obviously and highly recommended. |
T_bone,
I have made a few adjustments to my system. Having now further customised my arm tower to a weight of 6kg, I also used three spikes to couple it to the platform. However, and I really have no idea why this should be, the real transformation came in removing my Symposium Ultra platform and seating everything directly on my birch wall shelf: WOW!
I can now state that having the tt and arm tower on seperate axis of isolation works. I have owned a few tt's (including the Roksan Xerxes, Roksan Xerxes 10, SME 10, Clear Audio Master Reference and Acoustic Signature Mambo)and a variety of platforms and isolation. Yet I have never had the level of performance that I am currently getting from the nude Technics SP10 MkII with a completely decoupled arm tower. The inner detail, staging, clarity, ease and frequency extention all show major improvements to what I have heard before (outside of live venues of course).
I will continue to experiment with test tracks and human and technological support to confirm or challenge my perceptions. However, I have no axe to grind here but I would hasten to say that this must be tried out. The differences are not subtle!!! |
Sorry Nandric,
My bad. Didn't read carefully enough.
Your set-up should sound wonderful I imagine. Pity you have no System pics?
Cheers |
Dear Halcro, I already mentioned spikes. They are made from
steel and are of course adjustable (+/-4mm). My specimen is
7kgr but the weight is dependent from the ordered dimensions wich should be consulted with Vidmantas (the owner of the Reed) or the (national) dealer. The Kuzma and
the pod sit on the sand filled shelf,4cm thick ,54x54 cm
large. The rack is Copulare, with 4 identical shelfs ,made in Germany (see Google).
Kind regards, |
Nandric,
Do you know the weight of that particular armpod and what do have it sitting on.....eg spikes or other? |
Dear all, I use the arm pod specialy made for my Kuzma Stabi Ref. by the Reed in conjunction with the 2A ,12''
tonearm ( www.tonearms.lt/accessories). Both the TT and the
'tower' rest upon 3 spikes and together on a sand filled rack ( Copulare). The arm pode is made from layers of steel (2x), cork (2x),granite (2x) and acryl (1x). This is
obviously an attempt to construct an arm pod wich is not only rigid but also accousticaly 'dead'. My first thought
was that this construction was some kind of overkill probable because I owned the Linn LP-12 before... But I am very happy with the result and prefer this 'combo' above
the Triplanar VII wich is on the Kuzma base.
Regards, |
Dgob & Banquo,
I wish you the best of luck. I may try to do something similar just to see what happens. If I eventually do, I will also try it with a single plate underneath which could be mounted on pneumatic/magnetic isolation footers. As I have repeatedly stated in these fora, I am a BIG fan of adding isolation footers underneath turntables to lower any resonance to very low frequencies. I remain skeptical that I want my arm and my turntable platter on separate axes of isolation. I cannot see how that would be a good thing as it negates everything one learns about speed stability and controlling the tracking of the cartridge in the groove. All this said, I wish you the best of luck and results. |
Banqu363,
You are not deaf - unless deafness can be spread through ICT! The use of mixed methods (pneumatic and spikes) produces a level of accuracy that I still find startling.
Sadly, I do not own a fourth AT616 and so that option is currently not available. Also, I would still need a different arm tower to sit on this as the Mambo column does seem short on mass and might not stabilize - then there's the question of the height that this would raise my tonearm in relation to the tt (but a suitable arm tower could undoubtedly address these factors - if I had a fourth AT616).
I look forward to hearing back from you on the results.
Good luck |
T_bone,
I suspect the weight will be the issue and I am in the process of addressing this.
About the potential effects of this: I am deliberatley aiming to de-couple tt from arm tower. That in short is my experiment and is not (from my limited understanding) adverse to meeting the basic laws of scientific proof. Also, and given the basis to this exercise, I really do not see that by coupling the arm tower to both the Symposium Ultra and its supporting wall shelf in any way "negates the effect of adding on the weight to the armpod."
I think that Chris and Atmasphere have already suggested the potential for varied approaches to 'isolation' and to 'damping'. Beyond that, I can only reiterate that the gains already achieved by decoupling the tt (in a manner that I know you appreciate equally) has proven as huge a success as we have previously discussed. The question (and basis to my experiment) is whether further gains are to be had though the method of damping an isolated arm tower. The isolation point seems to me proven in my initial blue tac approach and the results that I obtained there. The damping of the arm tower is where my attention currently lies. To wit, weight.
I can offer no greater certainties than that and the obvious results already obtained at this early stage. |
There's really no such thing as the complete absence of a plinth. In a typical DD table, the motor is often mounted to a chassis, usually an aluminum enclosure, like the SP10 or Halcro's TT81. And to me that's a plinth already.
The best experiment, I think, is take the motor out and place it bare naked on a platform, perhaps supported by tip-toes and might need to be held down by something (which can open another can of worms) because the start-up torque might jerk the the motor out of placement in relationship to the tonearm geometry, unless the casing for the motor is really hefty. Essentially, a comparison between yes-chassis and no-chassis. Naked motor and not so naked motor. Anyone wanna try that?
If the naked motor sounds better, then a NO-PLINTHER can wear his/her t-shirt proud.
____
|
@Chris: how did you put spikes beneath your sp10? I'm assuming there's a board in between? That is, the TT sits on the board and the board is on spikes? Or did you thread spikes directly beneath the chassis?
Hi Banquo - Each of the mapleshade footers have a dimple on top. I am using the bottom half of a two piece system. I put a dab of blue tac on the dimple.
The blue tac after setting in overnight is not going anywhere. For me to remove the footers now requires considerable force. You have to pry them off. So no threading was required.
I have a picture of the mapleshade footers in this link.
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/view_userimages.php?user_id=5181&image_id=40437
Putting another board between the sp10 defeats the purpose of this to me. It adds one more layer and one more chance of introducing resonance going up to the platter and down.
My armboard although not pretty to look at is very functional and will not move. It also holds the bracket that the tonearm cables are connected to. |
Banquo,
The point of weighing down the armpod is to couple it to the surface below (which in turn should couple it better to the TT). Putting separate AT616s under the table and the armpod separately negates the effect of adding on the weight to the armpod. At least in the SNL case the rabbi and baby were 'coupled' to the same backseat. Your proposed method suggests the rabbi is better off leaning through a window of another car alongside. If it were me (and it is not), I would suggest putting all four footers below a rigid layer to which both TT and pod are coupled.
Your method may work in practice, but it will limit the improvement you get and increase distortion in other ways. First, if you put ONLY the TT on 616s and leave the armpod spiked, AND that is an improvement, it indicates the footers worked. If only the armpod was on footers, and the table were not, and that also improved things, either you have a separate component-led problem to the first one or you have the same problem of resonance coming into everything from below. If your tonearm is resonating, you need to fixt that separately. If it is resonance from below, you want your tonearm and table on the same decoupling platform or the different load presented by armpod and table vis-a-vis their respective isolations will cause weird distortions. |
By the way, in the real world there is no such thing as "complete (mechanical) isolation", which is why I take the position that I take. So when someone claims to have built an 'acoustically dead' plinth, claims of death are exaggerated? Or what does that phrase mean? Really, I don't know. Is it something separate from isolation? If one can create an acoustically dead plinth for one's turntable (as a whole), then mutatis mutandis why couldn't one create separate acoustically dead plinths for TT chassis and tonearm? Does that mitigate the concerns regarding coupling? Or is that a method for coupling? Too many concepts; too little knowledge (on my part). |
By the way, in the real world there is no such thing as "complete (mechanical) isolation", which is why I take the position that I take. |
Of course, to chauffeur Garrett Morris' and the baby's relief, the rabbi was successful. I guess I will go back to maintaining radio silence. We now return you to our regular programming. |
The arm pod I'm having made is roughly the diameter of the AT 616. When I get my TT back, 3 616's will go beneath the TT and 1 beneath the pod. Hopefully it works out. Before, I had the TT and arm board sitting on different isolation systems: TT on 3 AT-605 footers and arm on Herbie's tenderfoots. Sounded good to me--but maybe I'm hard of hearing.
Incidentally, while my TT is in the shop, I've been borrowing a Sony 2251. It sounded woeful at first. I almost gave up and on a lark put the tenderfoots beneath it. Much, much better. Pretty good table overall, in my amateur opinion.
@Chris: how did you put spikes beneath your sp10? I'm assuming there's a board in between? That is, the TT sits on the board and the board is on spikes? Or did you thread spikes directly beneath the chassis? |
Atmasphere,
Thanks again. I'm going to load up the arm tower as soon as I find a local engineer able to undertake this for me.
On frequency extention, I'd hasten to add that I am playing this set up at very high volumes and the quality needs to be heard to be appreciated. So as I said, I think for everything to click into place I will follow your, Chris and Henry's suggestion of building a heavy arm tower. The gains I already have with the current approach to decouplling makes this a more than worthwhile endeavour.
Grateful for all your kind suggestions and contributions. |
Chris/Halcro,
Thanks for your suggestions and I will look into having a heavy arm column produced that may work better with the spiked option. The weight limitations with the Mambo column could be where the problems lie and it'll be fun (and, hopefully, rewarding) to try this out. I'll let you know as soon as I can sort this out.
On the issue about both the TT and arm tower being on spikes I think Chris has hit the nail on the head. If you are seeking complete isolation, the different methods are secondary. The question resides in how effective both methods are at controlling resonance and vibration.
Henry, if you get a chance to try out the AT616 footers you might be surprised - I was. This also offers you the potential to truly decouple arm-column and TT, which was where I came in, as it were. Lewm, I hope that answers your scenario. |
Dgob, Decouple all that you want. My point was or would have been that it is perhaps not wise to use very different mounting systems for the tt and arm pod, e.g., spikes on one and AT feet on the other. In that situation, the two separate devices are almost sure to have a different response to external sources of vibration, and, in keeping with my private belief system, we do not want the arm/cartridge and the groove on the LP to be moving in different directions, whilst the stylus tries to do its work. Surely you can see that this might not be a good idea. This reminds me of the old SNL commercial spoof, where the rabbi tries to perform a circumcision in a car driving over a rough road. |
At low volume levels its not that hard to get a 'table to sound good. Its at high volumes where the rubber hits the road. IMO, the turntable should be unassailable at any volume. I found that once I had sufficient mass and rigidity in the plinth, that that helped, but I also have the 'table perched on an Ultra Resolution Technologies platform, which is one of the best passive platforms I have seen, unfortunately no longer available (and stupidly expensive when they were!).
The platform is in turn set up on a Sound Anchors stand that is custom-built to accommodate the platform. In turn the stand is mounted on 3 Aurios-Pro bearings.
My point is that it is hard to really know what is the plinth in all this. The only decoupling that occurs is the platform itself and then between the platform and the stand, that is my 'suspension' so to speak. The platform is quite heavy, rigid and inert as it is a sandwich of a special grade of marble, high tensile steel and a military-grade constrained damping layer.
Vibration and resonance can be quite insidious in a turntable, so with respect to the anti-vibration platform, the platter and now (in the case of this thread) the arm tower, it is likely that it would be really difficult to go overboard on the whole thing.
Points in use under the platter and arm tower, while being mechanical diodes so to speak, are not actually perfect diodes. Like elastomerics, they are more efficient if they are loaded properly! So if the load on them is underpar, they simply will not work so well. Load up that arm tower! Get some mass on it, so the points can do their job. |
Halcro,
I have experimented with weights on the arm columns and with vtf variations. So far, not adequate. However, the fun continues...
Atmasphere, do take my suggestion seriously. |
Lewm,
I don't think there was anything annoying about your opinion. Honestly! The key issue here is one of decoupling and if you review this thread you should see why the experimentation. |
Hi Henry- you stated and I agree with this concept based on what I am hearing so far.
"I believe both turntable and arm pods should be 'coupled' in the same way ie all spikes.
I don't believe you should have spikes on the arm pods and pliable footers on the turntable OR vice versa."
Both my sp10 and ET armboard are on spikes. However.
I am also thinking if you are able to isolate the Platter/motor and armboard "properly" then this should not matter "as much" ?
If someones specific combination works in their system/kit it should be evident in what you hear - which is what matters not the concept.
This project has provided me with very neutral,distortion free sound - meaning to me no pronounced highs or lows, followed by what I have found to be a very strong desire to... and be able to - turn up the db as Dgob stated in an earlier post and enjoy the music immensely. Isn't this last sentence the PROOF "for me anyway" if certain projects are heading oneself closer toward "shangri la" in this hobby ?
My listening since implementation has been at a higher db. I'd like to go higher still but my family doesnt allow it. I need to spend more $$ first isolating my sound rooom better :).
Curiosity killed the cat - I put a wanted ad out for those AT616's and someone from Denmark replied and well I now have a set coming to me to try out this theory different feet on TT and armpod/board. I want to hear how it changes things up. Will let u know.
Hi Dgob
How heavy is the Acoustic Signature arm board that you are using and I am curious what type of center clamp you are using on your sp10 ?
My ET 2.5 armboard weighs more than the sp10 itself.
The next one will be made of brass and I will ensure it weighs more still. I feel the weight on the spikes is critical for isolation.
Dear Thuchan - thank you very much for your cartridge recommendations for my ET 2.5 arm.
Cheers Chris |
Dear Henry, We agree on something! That's exactly what I was trying to imply to Dgob without being annoying. |
Dgob,
As Lew and Ralph intimate, I believe both turntable and arm pods should be 'coupled' in the same way ie all spikes.
I don't believe you should have spikes on the arm pods and pliable footers on the turntable OR vice versa.
Assuming you are conforming to this, I still have some doubts about the weight of the aluminium Acoustic Signature arm pod being 'effective' enough on spikes?
As Dertonarm and Atmasphere stated, the greater weight applied to the spikes the better?
Regardless of all this, it may be that the spikes on the arm pod is giving you a 'better' isolation/coupling and just requires you to become used to the better flow of information.
Perhaps a recalibration of the loadings on those familiar cartridges may help?
Good luck and please keep us informed of the experiments? |
Atmasphere,
PS: I still hold some interest in trying the metal sandwich platter. So if you fancy pulling your finger out about designing one (that I could import to England), do give me a shout off-line;~) SAEC just wont work, financially at present! |
Atmasphere,
Thanks again. The funny thing is that the spikes do not offer the level of rigidity that I need. They do however offer grounding. The mix of methods that I am currently using is producing very interesting results but I still need time to explore the accuracy and pros and cons of this (decoupling) approach.
I'll give ffedback once I'm certain. |
Lewm,
Yes. I'm using this as an exercise in decoupling and I've now gone back to using a combination of viscoelastic sheeting, blue tac and spikes under the arm column. Early days but so far, so good... |
How cool is this thread?? |
Dgob, any resonance in the arm tower will be a coloration. If the feet prevent the tower from coupling to the base of the platter bearing, that too will be a coloration. |
Dgob, Do you have your arm pod on the spikes and your tt on AT feet? If so.... |
Halcro,
I'm having difficulties with the spiked stand-alone arm column. In my system, it definitely increases the bottom end and lower midrange but I feel it does so excessively. The cost of these elevations seem to be a loss of air/acoustic layering and refinement. However, they gave greater impact on certain percussive instuments and so I need to find a middle ground.
I'm still playing with this and will try a mix of the spikes and blue tac approaches to see if I can tune in the necessary accuracy in tone and staging.
The fun continues... |
@Ct0517: the guy I bought my AT 616 from is selling the smaller AT 636 right now. May be worth getting if you don't want to wait for the others to show up. |
Thx for the responses - I use three as well - spiked mapleshade spikes and am very happy with them. Will look out for the 616's to try out when they come up for sale. |
