Do equipment stands have an impact on electronics?
Agear wrote, "It is interesting that the Townsend stands seem to decouple the speakers from the room which I guess can be an advantage depending on room nodes, etc." Huh? As Townshend points out on his web site, and as I’ve pointed out as well, isolating the speakers has two advantages: (1) it prevents low frequency vibration from getting up into the speakers and affecting wiring and electronics, RCA connectors, etc. and (2) it prevents speaker cabinet vibrations from feeding back via the floor to system cabling on the floor, electronics, turntable, CD player, what have you. That’s also, by no coincidence, what my springs do for medium-size speakers and Subwoofers. |
Agear wrote, "You are in for a surprise given all the aspersion cast upon their humble "cone" based technology." I'm pretty sure no one has cast asperions on their technology or even suggested it wouldn't work. But to suggest that their technology is the only technology or offers a complete solution to the whole vibration problem is a little bit of an exaggeration. |
agear OP Geoffkait:Huh? As Townshend points out on his web site, and as I’ve pointed out as well, isolating the speakers has two advantages: (1) it prevents low frequency vibration from getting up into the speakers and affecting wiring and electronics, RCA connectors, etc. and (2) it prevents speaker cabinet vibrations from feeding back via the floor to system cabling on the floor, electronics, turntable, CD player, what have you. That’s also, by no coincidence, what my springs do for medium-size speakers and Subwoofers. To which Agear replies, "All theoretical advantages only. Again, the raison d’etre of this thread." It’s not only theoretical, silly. Vibration isolation is a very well established science. Even for advanced audiophiles it’s been well established for at least 20 years. Now that I think about it, by inference that would make anyone who doesn’t use isolation as not advanced. As I’ve oft pointed out on this forum one need look no further than LIGO for the absolute proof that the seismic vibration problem is solved by vibration isolation, that vibration isolation is not some theoretical machination. LIGO could not have succeeded without vibration isolation. Scanning electron microscopes won’t even work without vibration isolation. Geez, you’d have to be living in a cave to believe isolation is only theoretical. But I can certainly understand why you make these ridiculous arguments and "scathing insults" having dealt with the Tuning Meister himself every day for more than two years. I totally get where you guys are coming from. As I intimated the other day all of this confusion on the part of you guys could have been prevented if you had been paying more attention all this time to what others were doing and what progress was being made and avoided the pitfalls of stove piping vibration solutions. |
agear OP: "decouple the speakers from the room which I guess can be an advantage depending on room nodes, etc" Geoffkait:Depending on room nodes? Huh? What on Earth are you referring to? to which Agear replied, "Not anything to worry about with your Walkman...." That’s what I thought. You don’t even know what isolation is. Let the insults fly! |
Cleeeds wrote, "Agreed! Mind you, I'm rather certain that I've heard the benefits of vibration control in my system and because this is just a hobby to me, I'm satisfied with that. But measuring the results of isolation and correlating that to listening tests shouldn't be that big a deal for manufacturers. The absence of that documentation is what helps fuel the skeptics." We've been through this already. Manufacturers actually shouldn't be the ones making measurements for vibration control/vibration isolation, it should be some third party independent agency. Furthermore, even under ideal conditions, and with competent testers, because of the obvious variations and vagaries in vibration environments from town to town and city to city and system to system, the results of such tests would not necessarily be that helpful. As we have seen ever since the dawn of audiophiles, listening tests are not particularly reliable for anything. Besides, nobody measures cables, room treatments, CD treatments, tweaks of any kind, so why should vibration control/vibration isolation be any different? |
cleeds geoffkait: Manufacturers actually shouldn’t be the ones making measurements for vibration control/vibration isolation, it should be some third party independent agency. to which cleeds replied, "Why? Aren’t you making measurements as part of your design and manufacturing efforts? If so, why not share the results? If not, are you simply relying on trial and error?" The Government employs independent contractors to test manufacturers’ products, e.g., weapons, software, radios, etc. it wouldn’t make any sense for the manufacturer to be the one providing test results. It’s competitive so the manufacturer cannot be trusted to be honest, one assumes. I use mathematics and testing in development, usually but not always, some things are not amenable to measurements, if you know what I mean, you know, what with Mr. Clock and the Teleportation thingie. Geoffkait:Furthermore, even under ideal conditions, and with competent testers, because of the obvious variations and vagaries in vibration environments from town to town and city to city and system to system, the results of such tests would not necessarily be that helpful. cleeds paused for a moment then pulled the trigger, "Yes, perhaps. But without initial measurements to use as a benchmark, we’ll never know if there’s any truth to your speculation." Sorry but there's no such thing as a benchmark for these devices as I just explained. Truth? Speculation? You’re kidding, right? What are you, god’s gift to skeptics? |
erik_squires wrote, "It is quite possible we are approaching the real problem the wrong way. What if the real issues are not that electronic signals are being contaminated by vibrations, but that we are hearing our equipment stands resonate? Same for cables. I could see them vibrating on the floor. Maybe we need quilts instead? :)" Actually it would be quite easy to eliminate the equipment stands from the equation. I’m not particularly fond of racks or stands in general because they often do add vibration to the equation, audibly so, even If they’re very rigid. Thus removing the electronics from its rack and placing it on a real isolation device should demonstrate the efficacy of isolation. Furthermore, tube dampers must certainly operate by reducing the vibration effects on the audio signal, rather than the idea we're heating the glass vibrate instead, no? And if cables are suspended by thread and the sound improved that would seem to indicate that structureborne vibration is to blame, leaving the static electric field issue aside for the moment. erik_squires then wrote, "But lack of measurements leave this up in the snake oil and trial and error. We might as well be trepinating each other in the hopes of reducing headaches." I hate to disagree but it’s not really trial and error at this point in time, you know, twenty years after the first audiophile isolation stands were introduced. It’s probably more accurate to call it a slam dunk than trial and error. You know, 40 thousand audiophile isolation devices later. |
erik_squires @geoffkait "Then please tell me a model to mathematically describe the effects of microphonics and vibration. Lacking that, it IS trial and error and devoid of engineering." Ironically, we don’t have to model microphonics or vibration. We model the damping method or isolation method. Thus whatever vibration one has to do with we will know the effectiveness of the solution. For isolation devices for example we know that the ISOLATION EFFECTIVENESS - for whatever the local vibration environment looks like - is a relatively simple calculation based on spring rate, load and resonant frequency. So, obviously one would want to design his iso device with the lowest possible resonant frequency. Then the isolation effectiveness for any given frequency of vibration will be the highest. As I’ve said repeatedly no model can describe all vibration situations since there are wide variations in local seismic vibration (traffic, etc.), audio system characteristics - e.g., transformer noise, motor noise, speaker SPL, etc. Erik again, "Weren’t you a few pages back arguing it was impossible to use basic engineering practices to stands? Perhaps it was another camp." No, it was not me. It must have been someone else. Since I am an engineer and a theoretical physicist I tend to use engineering practices and correct physical engineering theory. Erik again, "Or we are stuck at trepination and therefore unable to develop even aspirin and ibuprofin for headache relief." No we are not stuck at trepination although this thread is starting to give ME a headache. Erik again, "I’m sure there are makers who can test their stands and make them vibrate less. What’s lacking is an explanation and model for what of these characteristics makes an audio system sound better. That’s what I mean about the loop not being closed. You can take a course in loudspeaker driver design, where you would dissect and analyze everything from an AMT to a fan-based woofer and know how to put those numbers together to explain the subjective effects of your choices in materials, magnets and coil geometry. We have no such thing for vibration control in audio. Usually around here some one responds "But we don’t need engineering...." and we go all the way back to making holes in customer’s heads for pain relief." No need for all the drama. Vibration control and vibration isolation is a VERY mature science. Not need for hystryonics. Here is a quick study page for vibration isolation from Kinetic Systems. Save the drama for yo mama. http://www.kineticsystems.com/page306.html Erik again, "They could sell a bazillion "vibration isolators" and it’s no proof to me of anything besides good marketing. Imagine even a light bulb being made today without a thorough understanding and accessibility of the sciences involved. Power, current, efficiency, materials and emitted light spectrum. Forget a light bulb, a chef’s knife has more science behind it than vibration control in audio." There are many vibration control and vibration isolation devices for audiophiles. Your job is to study up on what vibration control and vibration isolation is all about so you are knowledgeable enough to make an informed decision regarding such devices, the cost of which range all over the place. As I keep saying the most technically challenging scientific project, or at least one of them, LIGO, was forced to employ vibration isolation in order to reduce the instrument’s sesitivity enough to observe gravity waves. This is not really a case of trial and error. It’s a case of understanding the underlying physics and requirements. Although now that you mention it, TRIAL AND ERROR is actually part of the scientific method and can be quite useful. Nothing wrong with them apples. In fact a lot of things in this hobby are unpredictable Inasmuch as how they will work out in a given system, no? geoff kait machina dynamica give me a strong enough spring and I’ll isolate the world |
erik_squires wrote Remember that in audio, the FTC sets some standards, but doesn’t measure the gear. It’s up to the equipment makers to measure and make claims, and occasionally magazines test them to see how close they are to the specifications. >>>>>Really? The FTC sets standards for home audio? Id be curious to see any more info. as i already stated, manufacturers are under no obligation to either measure anything or make any claims. They can if they wish. there are some things in this hobby that are simply not amenable to measurement. See if you can name 3. >>>There are no measurement requirements or protocols for home audio. Obviously there are certain standards involved such as Redbook CD and DVD and Blu Ray. There are no standards for noise, distortion or even Dynamic Range of home systems. Standards and protocols are not legally binding AFAIK\, CDs are produced that are not Redbook for example. Where are you coming up with this stuff? Have a nice day |
agear OP 1,252 posts 11-26-2016 10:27am Geoffkait:No need for all the drama. Vibration control and vibration isolation is a VERY mature science. Not need for hystryonics. Here is a quick study page for vibration isolation from Kinetic Systems. Save the drama for yo mama. http://www.kineticsystems.com/page306.html to which Agear replied, Not when applied to audio. The LIGO nerds had to optimize one narrow variable (measurement accuracy). That was their output variable. I am still waiting to hear from you or anyone else a corollary in audio. Furthermore, even if you could lock into a given finding, would blinded audio nerds or lay people know the difference? Probably not. You could easily do a blinded season at your local audio society of your magic Walkman versus a stock unit and see what if any differences could be discerned. We all know at this point you are too scared to do that experiment. Hey, what?! No need for all the anger, dude. Sounds to to be you’re channeling Aqualung, spitting out pieces of his broken luck and everything. Can I suggest if you’re so obsessed with measurements why don’t YOU measure it? Has anyone noticed, Pseudo skeptics always demand measurements but they never actually DO any themselves. Why is that, do you think? 😍 |
agear geoffkait:No need for all the drama. Vibration control and vibration isolation is a VERY mature science. Not need for hystryonics. Here is a quick study page for vibration isolation from Kinetic Systems. Save the drama for yo mama. Huh? Kinetic Systems is the manufacturer of the Vibraplane, the biggest selling isolation stand for advanced audiophiles in the past 20 years. Hel-loo! Wake up and smell the coffee! None so blind that will not see. |
agear OP Geoffkait:Hey, what?! No need for all the anger, dude. Sounds to to be you’re channeling Aqualung, spitting out pieces of his broken luck and everything. Can I suggest if you’re so obsessed with measurements why don’t YOU measure it? Has anyone noticed, Pseudo skeptics always demand measurements but they never actually DO any themselves. Why is that, do you think? 😍 That makes no sense. The charge is directed at the industry types like yourself. Mirror mirror.....lol. Directed at industry types like me? Earth to agear - thanks for thinking of me as an industry type but I’m not sure where you guys got the idea that manufacturers are obliged to either provide data or to make claims for their products. You want to buy a new TV? You walk into the store, look at the picture quality of a few TVs, ones you can afford presumably, and pick the one with the best picture that you can afford. It's not rocket science. There is no data, no claims by manufacturers, no demands for measurements. Why shouldn’t the same be true for audio? My guess is certain people just like to argue. Or they just don’t trust their golden ears. Look within, grasshopper. |
agear Geoffkait: No need for all the drama. Vibration control and vibration isolation is a VERY mature science. Not need for hystryonics. Here is a quick study page for vibration isolation from Kinetic Systems. To which agear replied, "Not when applied to audio. The LIGO nerds had to optimize one narrow variable (measurement accuracy). That was their output variable. I am still waiting to hear from you or anyone else a corollary in audio. Furthermore, even if you could lock into a given finding, would blinded audio nerds or lay people know the difference? Probably not. You could easily do a blinded season at your local audio society of your magic Walkman versus a stock unit and see what if any differences could be discerned. We all know at this point you are too scared to do that experiment." Posters already provided at least two audio manufacturers with measurements. It certainly appears you are either unable to interpret the data or too disingenuous to admit it when you're wrong. You're excellent on the insults, not so much on the science. |
agear Geoffkait: No need for all the drama. Vibration control and vibration isolation is a VERY mature science. Not need for hystryonics. Here is a quick study page for vibration isolation from Kinetic Systems. To which agear replied, "Not when applied to audio. The LIGO nerds had to optimize one narrow variable (measurement accuracy). That was their output variable. I am still waiting to hear from you or anyone else a corollary in audio. Furthermore, even if you could lock into a given finding, would blinded audio nerds or lay people know the difference? Probably not. You could easily do a blinded season at your local audio society of your magic Walkman versus a stock unit and see what if any differences could be discerned. We all know at this point you are too scared to do that experiment." I use LIGO as an example of how mass on spring ISO systems can greatly reduce structural vibration. You can draw whatever knucklehead conclusions you wish. By calling them LIGO nerds and audio nerds one assumes you are jealous of those who actually studied physics in school or are more advanced in this hobby than you are, which judging from your own words isn't saying much. |
Agear wrote, "I have done my fair share of physics (and not at Imagination U). Do us a favor. Get out of your jammies, put the keyboard down, and do something meaningful. Recycling the same tired lines over and over is not proof of concept nor is illusions to adverbials and white papers and vintage Stereophile articles. Hello?" your fair share of physics? You don’t even know the difference between room nodes and vibration isolation. You should stick to plants. No wonder it took you 7 years to get out of school. No worries, I’m being entertained. |
wolf_garcia Half of geoffkait’s posts are re-posts of whatever he’s responding to, which I feel is a waste of pixels as what he’s responding to is already there. That said, I also feel that there’s a lot of money spent needlessly on various spiked or isolating or otherwise insanely over designed audio shelving, speaker cord holders, expensive cones, spongy decouplers (I use those…not sure if they do anything except under my speakers), and other stuff that does nothing audible. Note: Vibration touches everything anyway if its in the room with speakers, and that’s OK…really…it is... Hey Wolfie, let me get this straight. You’re an audio engineer, right? and you don’t see a problem with vibrations running amok in the room? That’s weird. Barry Diament, you know, the guy who remastered the Led Zeppelin Catalog, is the complete opposite. Here’s the intro to his article on vibration isolation, note LINK to full article follows intro. INTRO TO BARRY DIAMENT VIBRATION ISOLATION "What I’ve found is that all of our components are being substantially inhibited from delivering their best because they are subject to external vibrations. By far, the most sonically and visually degrading are those vibrations in the ground that enter the component via its feet. These seismic vibrations (the ones very low in frequency and amplitude, so tiny we don’t even normally feel them) are creating spurious signals within the sensitive circuitry of your components. These spurious signals mix with the real music and video signals to distort them, hardening the treble, thinning the bass, muddying the soundstage and annihilating dynamics. Seismic vibrations add grain to video pictures, ruin color purity and contrast and soften focus. I’m still having a bit of trouble accepting that the ocean tide or the wind or a truck changing gears 1/4 mile away has such a profound effect on the performance of my audio and video gear. What I have no trouble with is the results of isolating my gear from these effects. The performance gains in every parameter I can think of are clear, consistent and repeatable. Frequency extension into the treble and downward in the bass is improved. Stereo imaging gets better focused. The soundstage takes on greater proportions. Dynamic swings both large and small are more like real life. Overall, there is a much greater sense of the system getting out of the way, leaving the listener with a considerably increased sense of contact with the recorded event. The color, contrast, focus and purity of video signals is improved. None of these changes can be described as subtle, as they are very easy to perceive by all listeners and viewers. Best of all, the differences between sources (different recordings and different movies) are more easily discerned. This is important because recordings and movies vary in quality and the ability to perceive qualitative differences speaks of the resolving capabilities of the playback system. Seismic isolation. Those two words are the key to knowing what your components can and cannot do. The benefits extend to loudspeakers as well. In fact I have yet to find a component that doesn’t significantly benefit from seismic isolation. Some, like source components (for example CD and DVD players) and loudspeakers show the largest improvements but even power strips benefit from seismic isolation. After all, they too contain electrical signals which are subject to degradation by seismic interference." See Barry Diament’s page on vibration isolation here: http://www.barrydiamentaudio.com/vibration.htm Have a nice day geoff kait machina dynamica advanced audio concepts |
cdrc wrote, "Believe it or not, isolation is like everything else - system dependant (Sic)" That's what I've been saying. Thanks for chiming in. At this point you can consider isolation properties. Some great pics of Star Sound Technologies isolation products appear on my Auduogon virtual system here: https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/5390 uh, Star Sound makes isolation products?! Really? I just got through talking with them here and they said they have ignored isolation for the past 30 years. |
mapman Just cut to the chase and listen to a Sony walkman like Mr. Vibrations and all these problems solved except for Walkman vibrations of course. I’m picking up some bad vibrations. Uh, wait, it’s only Moopman. Beside the Walkman vibrations are the easy part, remember? Oh, never mind. Don't let the sun catch you crying. 😪 |
wolf_garcia I’m utterly unconcerned with seismic vibration, although I do have vibrapods under things and a set of groovy cones (had those for many years…they look GREAT) under my preamp to add ventilation and because they look cool. All costing me very little money. Maybe I’ve addressed this issue accidentally in my home rig, but in live concert situations using 1000 watt amps and subs, I simply don’t see that any isolation potential exists. My main beef is with claims of substantial and audible improvements from uber expensive racks and $500 metal feet. Silliness in my view, and Barry Diament seems as delusional as geoffkait, although that might be a stretch. Note that I use guitar amps that have the speakers in the box with the amp…seismic indeed. now, I not a psychologist but off the top of my head I’d guess too much boo. Either that or Wolfie watched 12 Angry Men one too many times. 😡 |
There are what, twenty or so vibration isolation stands, platforms, spring systems, mag lev for audiophiles? All the Townshend stands and footers over the years, Stillpoints, Bright Star sandbox and air spring tables, Relaxa mag lev, Solid Tech, Minus K, Vibraplane, Vibrapods, cryo’d high carbon steel springs, Ginkgo, Bio Mikro G iso stand, Nimbus Sub-Hertz Platform, Silent Running, Daruma and other roller bearing systems, not to mention turntables with integrated seismic isolation systems built in like Rockport and Basis and others. Whew! Did I miss anybody? Not to mention all the commercial products audiophiles sometimes purchase for home audio, Newport, TMC, Halcyonics, etc. And let’s not forget DIY isolation devices like bicycle inner tubes, racket ball stands, Bungee cord suspensions, fishing line suspensions. Add up all the vibration isolation devices that have been sold to advanced audiophiles and what have you got, 100,000 vibration isolation systems? Something is happening but you don’t know what it is, do you Mr. Jones? 😃 |
dlcockrum geoffkait: "Whew! Did I miss anybody?" Hi Geoff, Symposium Acoustics Svelte shelves and Rollerblocks (which do, I understand, "dissipate a polarity of shear that generates interfering energy") and edenSound TerraStone roller footers. I am enjoying great success with these products as of late. thanks for the info, Dave. It is my understanding that polarities of shear are best swept under the carpet where they can't interfere. 😛 |
agear, while that’s somewhat humorous (even though you’ve used that stale joke previously) what’s much funnier is that neither you nor the brain trust at Star Sound seem to know what shear waves are. Just more posturing and name dropping. i hate to judge too harshly but it certainly appears that at UVa the college places more weight on puerile humor than science. have a nice day |
theaudiotweak The motion of the bristles of the broom used to sweep shear under the carpet actually generates more shear. But Geoff you know that right? Tom Very good, Tom, that was almost a complete sentence. You know, the difference between my solution to the whole vibration problem and the SS solution is that mine is a COMPLETE SOLUTION whereas the SS solution is only a PARTIAL SOLUTION. in fact, by your own words, you guys PURPUSEFULLY IGNORE ALL LOW FREQUENCY VIBRATION. Dudes! Huh! What! The only good vibration is a dead vibration. An ordinary man has no means of deliverance. geoff kait machina dramatica |
theaudiotweak "But Geoff your methods kill all vibration..in your own words." exactly! now you’re getting smart. By killing all vibration with your indiscriminate design and methods you are eliminating some or all parts of motion that are needed for both speaker and phono reproduction as well as restricting operational directions in all other devices. I hope you understand...or if you don’t you can keep looking for another 21 years. Tom that’s the oldest scam going. Its actually nothing more than a regurgitation of the old Michael Green diatribe, the one that you dudes bought into hook, line and sinker, "let the vibrations free to roam, ignore seismic vibration, the audio signal itself is vibration," and other assorted rubbish. don’t let the sun catch you crying. 😃 |
dlcockrum geofkait: "God helps those who help themselves". to which dlcockrum replied, "Sorry, this is not biblical and akin to blasphemy." No disrespect to you intended Geoff, No offence taken, Dave. The wikipedia discussion of the phrase, God helps thise who help themselves, is provided below for your info. The phrase "God helps those who help themselves" is a popular motto that emphasizes the importance of self-initiative and agency. The phrase originated in ancient Greece and may originally have been proverbial. It is illustrated by two of Aesop’s Fables and a similar sentiment is found in ancient Greek drama. Although it has been commonly attributed to Benjamin Franklin, the modern English wording appears earlier in Algernon Sidney’s work. The phrase is often mistaken as a scriptural quote, but is not stated verbatim in the Bible. However, there are many verses which underscore believers’ duties to work both for themselves and their families, such as Proverbs 6:10-11, 12:11, 12:24, 13:4, and I Timothy 5:8. have a nice day |
agear Here are Barry's words of wisdom here: http://www.barrydiamentaudio.com/vibration.htm What kind of spurious signals and how was it measured? Anyone? Mommy, why is the sky blue? 😳 |
agear What kind of spurious signals and how was it measured? Anyone? geoffkait:Mommy, why is the sky blue? 😳 to which agear replied, I would not expect a technical answer from you at this point. but you're not technical remember? you weren't even able to follow the technical data that's already been presented, including the isolation effectiveness data that a fifth grader would be able to follow. |
agear: What kind of spurious signals and how was it measured? Anyone? to which atmasphere replied, "That should not be hard to do. Place a preamp on the stand to be tested. Run the volume up with a shorted input (phono would be best). Subject the preamp in the stand to a 20Hz tone measured at 90 db at the front panel of the preamp. Observe for the change, if any from the output." Uh, atmasphere, agear was referring to the Barry Diament isolation system, you know, the roller bearings and air spring thingie. One trusts you don’t actually think your suggestion applies to isolation devices. cheers, geoff kait |
atmasphere "Sure- why not? Same test, just using the Diament system. If you did this all with a sweep tone, it would be possible to show the strengths and weaknesses of the ’isolation’ system under test." By subjecting the preamp front panel to a sweep tone how would that test the isolation device? I’m getting the feeling we’re not on the same page. In the case of a preamp on an isolation stand wouldn’t the proper place to apply a force be the bottom of the isolation device? You know, to gauge how well the isolation device rejects vibration coming up from the floor. Vibration produced by Acoustic waves in the room and induced vibration are another story. Sound Anchors did something very much like this- only they bounced a laser off the surface of the loudspeaker that was mounted on the speaker stand that they were testing. The less noise that the reflected laser beam showed the more effective the stand. They were doing that a good 25 years ago. There were no speaker isolation stands 25 years ago. Not in the literal sense of the word, anyway. 25 years ago vibration isolation was not even a gleam in some audiophile's eye. Using the laser as you described would not give a sense of how much energy from the speakers was being fed back into the front end electronics via the floor. I’m getting that feeling again we’re not on the same page. |
This is what Tom wrote initially, theaudiotweak The amount of reflected signal refracted back into the signal path is what's most important. The signal path is all solid materials including their boundaries with other solid materials. You cannot measure refraction with a laser as described. You say refracted and reflected. And more importantly what on Earth are you even talking about? How does your post address what atmasphere wrote regarding lasers and speaker stands? |
From Ethan winer's article on vibration isolation: "One fact that isolation proponents miss is sound transmits mostly through the air. Another fact is competent loudspeakers have sufficiently rigid cabinets that don't shake and vibrate very much." Houston, we have a problem. Everyone, quick, fasten your seat belts! |
Agear wrote, "How was the laser "noise"measured? Again, it tells you little about output variables pertaining to speaker performance and/or electronics as Geoff intonated Tom used the word refracted when I’m reasonably sure he meant reflected. You can see how much or how little the reflection of the laser beam jumps around on one of the walls. This laser reflection method is actually not far removed at all from how LIGO works, inasmuch as in LIGO a laser beam travels down a very long tunnel kilometers in length and is reflected back precisely from a mirror at the far end of the tunnel. Then the laser beam travels back to the original end of the tunnel and the influence of any gravity waves can be seen on an optical screen. Unlike LIGO, however, using lasers on speakers to measure their motion doesn’t necessarily indicate the speaker stands’ isolation effectiveness. The stand could be simply transferring energy to the floor more effectively than nothing at. AND in doing so actually making the sound worse! I’m quite sure you didn’t mean to use the word, intonated. |
theaudiotweak Speakers sit on speaker stands. They have boundaries. Energy is reflected on the external surface you see and energy is also refracted thru one material boundary into an adjacent material and its boundary. The laser will not give a read of the refraction waves that travel thru the solid material. But you can hear the influence of the refracted signal. Tom Thanks for clearing that up, Tom 😄 |
mapman "So like most things effectiveness of products depend on the context used and magnitude of the problem (floors with "give" versus inert rigid floor) which varies greatly It all depends as usual. Measurements or not." eggs akley! That’s what I’ve been saying all along - Hel-loo! The seismic type vibration varies so much from location to location and even floor to floor, type of floor, local traffic, Earth seismic activity, etc. that trying to extrapolate or generalize measurements of a particular isolation device in a particular installation is probably not possible. There are too many variables. You’d have more luck trying to solve three simultaneous equations in four unknowns. As I have also stated repeatedly the ball park performance of most isolation devices can be easily calculated from very simple equations. Performance such as percent of transmission that was provided for one of the isolation devices earlier in this thread. There is also the technique of mounting both the component and the isolation stand itself to consider and how much damping to apply to them. No one ever said it’s simple or black and white. I suspect that when an isolation denyer comes up with negative results there is an excellent chance it’s a simple case of self fulfilling prophecy. Besides, there are many reasons why anyone can obtain negative or null results for certain audiophile devices. Shall we explore them? geoff kait machina dynamica |
Ethan Winer wrote, Okay, one more, I can’t resist: "We had an interesting incident near Humboldt State University. A new cell tower went up and the local newspaper asked a number of people what they thought of it. Some said they noticed their cell phone reception was better. Some said they noticed the tower was affecting their health. Think about how much more pronounced these effects will be once the tower is actually operational. The ability of the human brain to convince itself of just about anything is not to be underestimated." --Brian Dunning But no one is saying there can never be placebo effects or other types of psychological phenomena in audio or any other field. Your problem is that it’s a logical fallacy to argue that those psychological phenomena conveniently explain *everything* you happen to be skeptical about or whatever. |
ethan_winer 9 posts 12-14-2016 4:00pm No, the burden of proof is on those making the claim. Logic 101 teaches that you can’t prove a negative. That’s illogical, Captain. Actually, in the real world the opposite is true. In a court of law the defendant is not required to prove the plaintif’s case. It’s up to the plaintif, you know, the one bringing the charges, in this case the charge that the device in question is a hoax or fraud, who’s actually got to prove his case. So far all we’ve got from the isolation denyers is a lot of angst, drama and who shot John. |
atmasphere Geoffkait:There were no speaker isolation stands 25 years ago. Not in the literal sense of the word, anyway. 25 years ago vibration isolation was not even a gleam in some audiophile’s eye. Using the laser as you described would not give a sense of how much energy from the speakers was being fed back into the front end electronics via the floor. I’m getting that feeling again we’re not on the same page. "This statement is false. Sound Anchors was making stands for exactly that purpose prior to 1991. We showed with them at CES in 1993." Unless the Sound Anchors had springs in them they weren’t real isolation stands. The first three real isolation stands were Townshend’s Seismic Sink, the Vibraplane and the Bright Star air bladder thingie. I'll make an exception an add the Bright Star sandbox contraption to the list. |
What’s also hilarious is that Ethan actually was measuring the wrong thing. The very low frequency vibration, the seismic type vibration, forces the room and the whole building to move - and everything in it! So, when sitting there looking at the speakers, or trying to measure their motion relative to the floor using a laser or whatever they don’t appear to move. But they are moving. Just not relative to the floor. Not only that but the motion of the building is in SIX directions, not just up and down (one direction). I suspect Ethan didn’t think about measuring rotational motion. |
atmasphere wrote, "He also maintains that signal moves through a cable via photons. And says he worked for NASA. I’m sure you’ll give him as much credence as I do." Uh, all electromagnetic waves are comprised of photons, silly goose. Even radio waves and X rays. Maybe it’s time for you to give some thought to going back for a science refresh. What I said is I worked for NASA. I worked for NASA when you were still wearing bell bottoms and struggling to get your GED. You get a D on science and A on snarkiness. |
