Don't tease me, bro!
The Nimbus Sub Hertz Platform evolved into,.....?
The Nimbus Sub Hertz Platform evolved into,.....?
Component isolation
Let’s say you’re going to add isolation feet to a component with no moving parts, such as a preamp, phono stage, DAC, amp, tuner, etc.
Which one is most critical to the extent would get your attention first?
Which one is most critical to the extent would get your attention first?
73 responses Add your response
Don't tease me, bro! The Nimbus Sub Hertz Platform is no longer available! http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina24.htm Can't imagine why this didn't catch on. |
Michaelgreenaudio >>>>>Springs by themselves do nothing. They need mass to perform. The isolation devices that are based on Springs or airsprings employ mass to produce a low pass mechanical filter. It’s called mass-on-spring isolation. The objective is to achieve a very low resonant frequency for the isolating system to reduce the transmission of vibration as much as possible to the item being isolated. For an iso system with a resonant frequency of 5 Hz quite a bit of very low frequency vibration will still be transmitted since the low pass filter is relatively inefficient for those frequencies and will allow ALL frequencies below 5 Hz to be transmitted. Very low resonant frequencies can be easily achieved using this method. “Mass-on-spring” isolation is the primary method of seismic vibration isolation for audiophile iso devices and for LIGO, the project to detect and observe gravity waves, which requires extreme isolation measures to reduce background vibration to the absolute minimum, isolating the super sensitive optics from seismic vibration. My Nimbus Sub Hertz Platform, Townshend Seismic Sink, Vibraplane, Ginko iso stand, Vibrapods, bicycle inner tube, Gaia isolators and other speaker isolators - they’re all mass-on-spring devices. Anywhere a spring is used between object A and object B less vibration will be transmitted. You could even call it a damper. |
zavato: Let’s say you’re going to add isolation feet to a component with no moving parts, such as a preamp, phono stage, DAC, amp, tuner, etc. It doesn't work that way. Everything vibrates, everything, and the only way to know which one of your components improves the most is to try different things and find out for yourself. On that note, this is pure gold:
This is my chance to apologize to Michael Green. Because way back 30 years ago I was so sure stuff like this was bunk that I wrote a letter to the editor telling him to quit wasting my time with these silly Michael Green racks. I still never have tried one of his racks. But I know everything he says above is right and true, because not long after writing that letter I began trying and listening and learning and all that experience the last 30 years says what he wrote above is spot on. Including especially the part about tuning. Because while my feeling is high-fi dom as a whole has moved too far off to the fast and light end of the spectrum, that's fine. If that's what other people like that's just fine. Because with that same understanding I'm able to make my system sound spine-tinglingly fabulous, and that's what counts. Because it means you can too. So sorry bout that, Michael. And thanks! |
All my audio gear,speakers included, are on my desk beside my computer screen... There is the mechanical vibration and resonance problem I partially solved with my own device at low cost (quartz feet+granite plate+sorbothane+garnite plate+cork plate+bamboo plate+sorbothane) under my 2 speakers and under the dac and under the amp... I also damped the speakers with concrete slabs 60 pounds or more on top, with some little less slab on top of the dac and on top of the amp... i also glued sorbothane around the cone of the speakers and around the cups of my headphones to isolate the cups...The difference were very audible...The load and the quantities must be determined by listening, because like Michael Green said too much constrict the harmonics much less expand them... But more importantly than mechanical vibrations and resonance was the noise floor threshold that is too high, in any audio system, if not taking care of +EMI interference of any part of the audio system with any electronic appliance in the house or the neighbourood... The solutions in the market are generally linked to the purchase of some power supply and conditioner or isolator from the computer noise etc... Filtering the electrical line with active electronic components "clean" the sound but the price to pay is some kind of "reframing" the sound, because it is a trade-off between the component that are introduced that clean and the one to clean...The best solution for me was to use stones and crystals that are passive filtering device with no trade-off, because the floor threshold of the audio grid is not modified by the introduction of new electronical active components, then a net lowering of the total noise floor of the system follows... They are filtering passively... The upgrading effect on the audio line and on the general electrical line of the house was so astounding that nothing I purchase compared to that...The same gear I was not totally satisfied with are now so good that a "real" upgrading is impossible really under 25 thousand dollars … My system net cost is 1000 dollars... And you know what, even if I had this money I am not certain that I would buy that 25 thousand bucks new system,because when you are happy with the music for the first time in your life, you dont feel the need to upgrade...My system is not perfect, but for the price modulo these cleaning methods it is unbeatable... I read so many forums about audio, I know that most people underestimated completely the vibrations problems, but more than that the most important problem linked with the electro magnetic and radio interference between components equipment from the room, from the house or the neighbourhood..... |
| Post removed |
I'm not sure whether anything without moving parts requires isolation. Why would it? Can resonances actually convert into electrical signal? If so, can we hear them? Some parts, absolutely. The ringing I described in the phono stage was most likely due to ceramic capacitors. The physical rapping causes movement inside affecting the distance of the plates to one another. The problem I have is that we don't really measure how vibration affects solid state appliances, but it could be done. Speaker isolation and eliminating the motion of speakers is an entirely different beast, and can be very effective. The cause/effect here is simple and clearly audible. Best, E |
| Post removed |
The signal itself is subject to mechanical vibration. That’s why isolating apparently inert objects results in better sound and why isolating, i.e., suspending cables and power cords results in better sound. Furthermore, objects that appear to be inert actually are not (rpt not) inert. For example capacitors vibrate and transformers vibrate. There is no getting around it. That’s why a wise man loosens or removes the bolts holding the transformer to the chassis and isolates the circuit boards from the transformer and isolates the transformer from the chassis or removes and relocates the transformer. Furthermore seismic vibration moves the entire building structure so, even if there was such a thing as a completely inert component, which there isn’t, it would still be moving right along with the building’s motion. There’s no getting around it. |
I'm not sure whether anything without moving parts requires isolation. Why would it? Can resonances actually convert into electrical signal? If so, can we hear them? I know Naim Audio have long employed various isolation strategies to reduce the effects of vibration in their pre-amps but they were almost unique in this regard. I recall that the circuit board on their 32.5 pre was mounted on top a piece of sponge. @erik_squires, Townshend Audio have purported to provide some scientific evidence to back up their speaker isolation stands. My guess is that the benefits of isolation diminish rapidly with solid state devices where there is a lot less rattling about, and even then any benefits are perhaps only apparent with extremely low level unamplified audio signals (pre-amps or earlier). Michael Green's post was interesting and I'm tempted to agree with his findings, especially those regarding high and low mass. However, as I'm also tempted to believe in life after death, a little scientific rationale would be most welcome. Until then it just remains a matter of faith, nothing to get too hung about. Besides, as @elizabeth pointed out it's no big deal to experiment with Sorbothane or similar even for those less critical areas. |
Without going into the stratosphere, I always do power amps or integrated amp first, either tube or transistor - no difference. That's, after turntable and speakers. Phono stage first will get you nowhere, so will the dac. Preamp maybe but I don't see why start there. Power cords on the amps are also my first move regarding this part of system assembling. Power amps by definition are bad, better start there. |
I can give an example of how to throw the system off the balance while using exactly the same components in the chain, in this case interconnect cables. I usually run the signal as follows: from Goldring 1042 cartridge thru Nottingham arm's wiring harness to Acoustech phono stage thru Tchernov Reference MK II cable to Nakamichi 682 ZX deck thru Purist Audio Neptune cables to Redgum RGi120 integrated thru Purist Colossus fluid speaker cables to Michael Green Audio Rev80 speakers. If I put Purist Neptune cables between phono and deck, and put Tchernov cables between deck and amp I create out of tune sound which is while still pretty good is much worse than the other way around. Whatever other or additional explanations might be, two things come to mind - first, I interrupt the Purist chain, and second I believe Nottingham's wire and Tchernov wire somehow work better together, so in fact I might do double interruption. When not interrupted those two segments - Nottingham/Tchernov and Purist/Purist work fine. I also have Purist Dominus RevB power cord on the integrated and Purist Aquila on the PS Audio regenerator everything is plugged in. |
Well, I don't think the man is asking about this kind of extreme tuning that Michael is talking about. I certainly wouldn't tune for every recording just as I don't adjust VTA for every record but fine tuning the complete system to achieve the best possible compromise is worth the effort and a true audiophile endeavor. But first the system must be complete, both active and passive components. In a sense, there are no passive components, cables and power cords are also very active. How to achieve the system completeness ? Well, I don't have an answer, you got to experiment, to listen and to have audiophile instinct. System is complete when if you insert any new components in it, as good as it might be by itself, the sound you get is off the balance and out of tune, in other words - worse overall even if it might be better in certain aspects. |
Hi zavato All audio parts are moving. Audio itself is motion as it interacts with the four fundamental forces. This why I like to say vibratory tuning instead of isolation. On this forum you’re probably going to see 4 camps. 1) vibratory tuning 2) springs 3) dampening 4) mass loading The reason I start my post this way is because it’s easy to lump these together if you are not very experienced in "voicing" your audio signal. When you start down the vibratory control road one of the first things you’re going to learn is "your audio chain is interconnected". I’m not talking about wire, I’m talking about the Audio Code (audio signal) itself. What you do to one part of your system affects the whole. It affects the whole, because the audio code is a continuum of motion (force interaction). If you look up the "four fundamental forces" it breaks this down. In other words, you’re not so much treating a component as much as you are treating the actual audio signal traveling through the component. If you look at your system as a series of conduits connected carrying the audio signal it’s easier to manage the sound, and that’s what you’re trying to do "manage the sound" (vibration). There’s a few tips I’d recommend thinking about. First, when you dampen vibrations you’re also dampening part of the audio signal. At first listen you might think things are tighter sounding but after you play a few recordings you will discover you have selectively removed part of the music content and the system will sound strained (smallish squeezed) on some recordings. Second with dampening, what ever your using to dampen with, this material’s character will be introduced to the audio code. This holds true with the AC, electronic audio signal and your acoustics. In audio the phrase "you are what you eat" is exactly what happens. Everything you use as a material with your system adds to the chemistry of the sound you hear. Another tip. Low mass frees the sound high mass squeeze the sound. The more weight and compressed mass your system has the more squeezed the signal will sound. The lighter mass you have, the more open the sound will be. Both of these can be good or bad depending on how you use them or what you want to hear. Most audio systems to me sound very squeezed so I get rid of as much of the weight and mass that I can to start with. From that point I apply variable tuning to parts of the conduits using controlled mechanical transferring as a means of adjusting the signal. Others like Geoff Kait will use spring (isolation). He and I kind of have a difference in the absolutes of the term isolation but we both believe in springs, we both use springs. If Geoff comes up he’ll explain his idea on spring control. So these are just some basics to tuning your mechanics up. Main thing is to keep in mind that the signal is made up of fundamentals and harmonics. Squeeze these harmonics too much and you will squeeze the sound, open them up too much and your sound will become mostly air. Finding that balance can be done to give you a general sound or you can even tune per recording if you want to go that extreme (you’d be surprised how many do). My suggestion is to explore both tuning a springs and lean away from dampening. However the more experience you gain on your own and from others will help you make your own method work for you. I've used all of the above because I tune for many people besides my own listening. Michael Green |
Also agree with @erik_squires . A component doesn't need to have moving parts to cause vibration. There's internal vibration as well as acoustic caused by sound waves. As stated, anything with tubes needs isolation and sometimes needs damping using a weight or material on the top of the chassis. And SS components with large torroidal transformers can suffer from vibration. |
+1 @inna . Each component may need a different footer or isolation solution. And it usually requires experimentation. There are many threads in the archives, some recommending an isolation platform plus footers. In the case of certain components like a TT, it's best to use cones or hard footers to drain vibration into a hardwood platform such as maple. |
| Post removed |
First, anything with a tube. Next, in order of gain, so phono stage. TBC, it's a real shame there isn't more research and evidence into vibration and solid state devices. Some gear will be more susceptible to microphonics than other gear just by part selection, construction methods, etc. That being said, the worst bit of kit I ever had was a cheap phono preamp and it would ring like a bell if you rapped on it. Much else is probably overblown. |