Hi Ernie, The problem with the use of pods and cone devices beneath CDP's and DAC's is that they are not "voiced" for specific applications whereas the component manufacturer will typically voice their products in "normal" domestic environments such as wooden furniture and "typical" isolation stands with wood or mdf shelving on both slab and suspended flooring.Because of this and the very wide variety of suspension techniques used in source components(ranging form neoprene transport spacers to spring suspensions to rubber chassis feet)the results of cones/pods are nearly always highly specific to the individual deck. A better approach is via high performance shelving and support materials and constructions with broadband vibration damping, dissipation or evacuation. This category of isolation measures almost always will have been carefully developed and voiced to take into account the same environmental and acoustic parameters as did the cdp/dac manufacturer-A much less hit and miss proposition having more predicatble and consistant results and ultimately more effective as well. Cones and pods may then be used in conjunction with the accessory performance shelving to fine tune the tonal balance and for further energy reductions and/or compensatory effects if so desired. Best, Ken Lyon (caterham1700) GreaterRanges/Neuance
CDP isolation options for improved HF?
Following recent thread on shelf material, I'd appreciate advice on supplentary isolation/vibration devices for my old CDP (Rotel 855). I'm mulling over new digital front end options, but meanwhile want to eliminate HF roughness now evident in my new ref system, without reducing PRAT or resolution. So how do I optimize the use of this CDP until the revolution? Some have suggested that air bladder suspensions compromise timing. Is this often true? Thanks. Ernie