I agree 100%. I have had good results with tubed gear in particular. I had a fire breathing dragon of a SET amp in a previous system, and I noted that the room stayed cooler (which the stand manufacturer, Starsound Technologies confirmed in their own experiments).
Some people also claim some capacitors can be microphonic or at least their is a theoretical piezoelectrical relationship between vibration and electrical performance, but I am not an engineer and have no idea of the veracity of such claims. |
I've always found that stands with speakers on them must have zero back and forward motion, as the drivers move this way.
Any back and forward motion of the stand will be lost energy being projected into the room, being waisted by the drivers instead trying to make the stand move back and forward, even in unmeasurable amounts.
You loose micro detail and screw up your imaging. Hi George (of Lightspeed fame). That is an interesting point. I am a big fan of time/phase alignment of speakers. It would be an interesting thing to measure. |
IMO/IME its really important that that the system have the ability to not sound loud even when it really is. An orchestra can play peaks of 115db; the stereo should not add anything of its own during playback. At high sound pressure levels vibration can affect turntables, CD players and all electronics whether tube or solid state (if you think transistors are immune to microphonics you've not spent time working with them!).
So a stand with vibration control for the front end of the system (sources and preamp) is not only in the signal chain but can be considered a component in its own right. That's great feedback Ralph and describes precisely what I have experienced. Since you are an engineer and manufacturer like Geoff, any thoughts on why SS devices would be vulnerable? |
Had a few racks, homemade with nice wood and bought online, which held the equipment but offered little in sound quality improvements. Then I bought a Star Sound Sistrum rack and SP-101 platforms for my speakers. Both the rack and the speakers improved the sound considerably so that I was able to remove some traps and get great increases in clarity, transparency, and dynamics with no drawbacks. dorkwad, that is also a good observation. So less of a need for in-room energy management. That has been my experience as well. |
I believe that maple has a profound affect with electronics, more so with electronics than with speakers. Try maple before you decide. jab, do you know why maple is optimal? |
I can't say about hi-fi platforms, but maple is the preferred wood for drum shells because of it's desirable (for drums) resonance and timbre. Maple's resonance characteristic is of long sustain (when you hit a piece of maple, it rings for a long time), it's timbral character brightness. If one desires their support structure to produce no sound of it's own, I don't know why a wood known for it's long sustain and bright timbre would be a desirable material from which to build one. I am NOT saying I know why it shouldn't be used! Maybe such stands could be incorporated as system tuning devices.....nothing wrong with that concept. I know some speaker manufactures ascribe to that philosophy. |
Geoff, what an artisanal drum maker. Wow. |
Yes indeed.....I got distracted by the bling.... |
Mike, is the impact of active isolation more prominent with your TT (in other words moving parts) versus the dac? |
and at spots of musical peaks where you might otherwise cringe expecting things to get hard and edgy the music just sails thru with ease. this retains the musical flow with large scale music which tends to make you play more of it.
the more dynamic and vivid the pressing the greater the degree of improvement. direct to disc pressings seem to particularly benefit. That is interesting. That illustrates what I have always recognized in top tier systems: "dynamic ease." Loud but not loud. Full but not strained. Another conversation (or it could be part of this conversation) would be the application of active isolation or any of these energy management technologies to room engineering. I have toyed with that, and the results are compelling to say the least. |
I have played with it both ways and it tends to hiccup with either choice. They need to tweak it. |
|
|
It was tongue in cheek Geoff.... |
geoffkait
4,080 posts
10-14-2016 10:03am
czarivey
3,301 posts
10-13-2016 11:51pm
if equipment stands will have direct impact on electronics than perhaps electronics will be destroyed.
the mind is a terrible thing to have. Better lay off the bud. THC provides the ultimate in "isolation" technology for grey matter. It blunts us from the negative effects of a poorly constructed system (or from the jittery OCD mindset of the average audiofool). I find wine works well too....but not quite as well. |
But seriously, folks. I am lucky that my speakers are sitting on concrete. They sound best that way. I've tried a few intermediaries. Wood platforms, steel points, stiff felt. None helped, most made no difference.
My CD/SACD player does sound slightly better with sorbothane feet. Not so much that I'd be motivated to invest more. Am I missing out? Would a more expensive Isolation system improve the CD/SACD SQ more than the difference between sorbothane and nothing? My listening room is in our concrete bunker of a basement and have always sounded better with some form of energy management. A previous speaker (Intuitive Design Gamma Summits) used Stillpoints and later SS audio points and still later Sistrum stands and there was always a noticeable improvement. As for electronics, I have used cheap Sorbothane products (Herbies and later Equarack), Stillpoints and finally SS. Always heard improvements. It does not hurt to experiment. SS has a return policy as do many other companies. |
She has written a response to the townsend merry go round that kills all polarties of shear including the one you want to keep and use. Removes some amplitudes of frequency. Back to the beach. Tom.. Star Sound Technologies Well that should be a ringer. I am looking forward to something more meaty than glib (and almost confabulatory) ad hominem banter. |
|
That's an odd posture. What is your MO then? Are you just bored?
|
The Bio Mikro G utilizes bamboo, viscoelastic material and pure glass microspheres to mimic the woodpecker head’s bone, elastic layer and spongy layer, respectively, surrounding the bird’s brain. Without such evolutionary features, the woodpecker would surely damage his brain and or die. Walk us through the development process. Anything empirical to base these designs on? |
Geoff Kait
machina dynamica
advanced audio concepts
I expected that answer. No suspense.
It's always the same with you guys. "What about this. What about that?"
;-)
cheers Mirror mirror.... |
I prefer to keep you in suspense. I prefer not to walk you through the development process at this time. I plan on developing a page on my web site for the Bio Mikro g iso stand some time in the future.
Geoff Kait
machina dynamica
advanced audio concepts I expected that answer. No suspense. |
And you keep dodging without adding any novel data to the conversation. I suggest you encourage end users of your products to chime in. I like hearing from end users who have fiddled in this domain. So, back to the regularly scheduled programming..... |
For those interested I have quite a few technical papers on my web site.
See this page for the links to technical papers, including vibration isolation, the Clever Little Clock and even the Teleportation Tweak,
http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina6.htm I presume you are using the word "technical" loosely here. In regards to the Teleportation Tweak you state: 4. What does the Teleportation Tweak sound like? By attenuating the deleterious effects of the particular Information Field associated with the cell phone or land line phone the sound in the room becomes much closer to the sound that you would hear in an ideal world, I.e., a world without such subconscious interference that reduces the listener's sensory perception. After the Teleportation Tweak is performed the listener can more easily hear the complete and undistorted sound that his system is FULLY CAPABLE OF PRODUCING, that the system was producing BEFORE the TT. In other words, the SOUND WAS IN THE ROOM THE WHOLE TIME, he just couldn't fully appreciate the sound quality since his hearing ability had always been in a degraded state and not up to the level he always assumed it was. So maybe Michael and Bobby shared a few peace pipes. It appears as if you were an early disciple and test subject of Timothy Leary based on your somewhat schizoid mentation. Maybe I am dim, but I do not understand the paragraph referenced above. Time to call in the experts for an explanation. ;).... |
Actually it’s not schizoid. It’s just that the whole freewheeling information field/Morphic Resonance subject has been largely overlooked by audiophiles, or dismissed as hokum. It just hasn’t been discussed much. So whenever any reference to information fields pops up audiophiles tend to react as you just did, with dismay. ;-) Everything is not cut and dry in audio land. Please note quite a few of my products are based on information fields and Morphic fields. Some of these products have been around like forever. The clever clock, Teleportation Tweak, Morphic Message Labels, the Quantum Temple Bell, and Pretzel Logic Reef Knot ( a PWB product). So when I say the immediate environment affects the sound I’m not referring to room acoustics, at least not in the traditional sense. What you don’t see can hurt you. ;-)
So, how do I define the word technical? Anything to do with physical reality. Follow?
geoff at Machina Dynamic Geoff, I will readily admit that the reality behind audio is much richer and denser than we will ever realize. I am a fan of "tweaks" and woo woo because its where most of the interesting things go on in audio and is in a sense cutting edge. That being said, it is also ripe ground for sociopathic manipulators to have a field day. So, for the sake of discussion and an earnest quest for knowledge, how do you define an "information field" or "morphic resonance"? |
I'm pretty sure we've heard from all the trolls, now. Have I missed anyone? Don't forget yourself cupcake. You have had that label tossed at you on many a thread. So, for the uninitiated, what is an "information field"? |
i use information field and Morphic field interchangeably. Here is a summary from somewhere in cyberspace that I think represents a fairly good and consider overview. I have also discussed Morphic fields at some length in my explanations for the Clever Little Clock and the Teleportation Tweak.
Morphic Fields: A Summary
The hypothesized properties of morphic fields at all levels of complexity can be summarized as follows:
1. They are self-organizing wholes.
2. They have both a spatial and a temporal aspect, and organize spatio-temporal patterns of vibratory or rhythmic activity.
3. They attract the systems under their influence towards characteristic forms and patterns of activity, whose coming-into-being they organize and whose integrity they maintain. The ends or goals towards which morphic fields attract the systems under their influence are called attractors. The pathways by which systems usually reach these attractors are called chreodes.
4. They interrelate and co-ordinate the morphic units or holons that lie within them, which in turn are wholes organized by morphic fields. Morphic fields contain other morphic fields within them in a nested hierarchy or holarchy.
5. They are structures of probability, and their organizing activity is probabilistic.
6. They contain a built-in memory given by self-resonance with a morphic unit’s own past and by morphic resonance with all previous similar systems. This memory is cumulative. The more often particular patterns of activity are repeated, the more habitual they tend to become. Sounds like a description of living matter. Can you provide a specific example from nature? |
All I can say having read all this is may I please have the 10 minutes of my life I just spent reading this back? Common, we know you like it and couldn't stay away. You have had some of the best beat downs on quantum fairies....;) |
oleschool - Spock wasn't trained in abnormal psychology
gkaitt is trying to insert a notion invented by the notorious fakir, Rupert Sheldrake
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Sheldrake
it was pseudo-scientific gibberish then, and has not improved with age ouch. A+ randy Sheldrake's morphic resonance hypothesis posits that "memory is inherent in nature"[3][7] and that "natural systems, such as termite colonies, or pigeons, or orchid plants, or insulin molecules, inherit a collective memory from all previous things of their kind".[7] Sheldrake proposes that it is also responsible for "telepathy-type interconnections between organisms".[8] His advocacy of the idea encompasses paranormal subjects such as precognition, telepathy and the psychic staring effect[9][10] as well as unconventional explanations of standard subjects in biology such as development, inheritance, and memory.[11]
Morphic resonance is not accepted by the scientific community as a real phenomenon and Sheldrake's proposals relating to it have been characterized as pseudoscience. Critics cite a lack of evidence for morphic resonance and an inconsistency between the idea and data from genetics and embryology. They also express concern that popular attention paid to Sheldrake's books and public appearances undermines the public's understanding of science.[a]
Despite the negative reception Sheldrake's ideas have received from the scientific community, they have found support in the New Age movement,[25] such as from Deepak Chopra.[26][27] That's pretty amusing stuff. If Deepak signs off on it, we are good to go. My Pop was a Biochemistry professor with a PhD from Oxford. I am sure he is familiar with Sheldrake and his woo woo babblings. He has generated no data, no NIH grants or body of research to support this. He is an apologist for pantheistic woo woo plain and simple. Geoff, did these things come to you in an epiphany or did you do the subconscious copy and paste from chaps like Sheldrake? |
Morphic resonance should be detectable in the realms of physics, chemistry, biology, animal behaviour, psychology and the social sciences. Long-established systems, such as zinc atoms, quartz crystals, insulin molecules and muscle cells are governed by strong Morphic fields, with deep grooves of habit established over millions of years, and consequently little change can be observed over a few weeks, or even years, of research. They behave as if they are governed by fixed laws.
Cheers,
geoff kait
machina dynamica Okay, but one obvious source of argument is whether they are the manifestation of fixed "laws" at work (or design if you will) versus a habitual, evolutionary process. That aside, how about dialing morphic resonance into audio? Management of vibrational energy in an audio system. One of my current areas of research interest lies in nanotechnology. Small scale design (imperceptible to the naked eye) influences function. By corollary, material science (the subtext of this thread) plays a role in terms of the influence of vibration and performance, etc. |
Fascinating stuff . What's it doing in a audio forum ? Fishing for explanations as to why electronics are effected by stands. I know they are, but the why is intriguing. I know things have meandered but its still information. Audio like science meanders and yet evolves. The amusing thing is most philes seem to think mechanical grounding grounding is bs. A lot of reviewers seem to as well. Look at any older vintage review and you would often see a 30k amp sitting on a dinning room chair. Makes you wince.... |
Would you believe I copied the paragraphs from Sheldrake’s website. I never said the words were mine. In fact I said they were not mine. Hel-loo! And you ascribe to this woo woo without data? Hel-loo!???? Its just theory, but should not be presented so brusquely as fact. That is your primary weakness in the context of these debates. |
Geoff, your theories, while entertaining, are not helping the thread at this point. Try starting another thread along those lines if you wish. |
If you recall you were the one who demanded I discuss Morphic resonance. In fact you insinuated I was dodging your questions. You can’t have it both ways, silly. OK, you can proceed with your troll thread.
Yes, and the information received is not helpful due to its very nature. Next. |
Okay, okay. We all have to admit that Geoff is an evil genius and that his entire routine (and business) is a prolonged, Monty Pythonish spoof of the industry. Well done. We are all fools indeed and deserve such treatment. |
One assumes you are speaking for yourself. I am not spoofing anything. I’m as serious as a colonoscopy without benefit of anesthesia. It actually appears you are simply reinforcing the idea that your OP was nothing more than a deliberate troll. To whit, "Mechanical grounding or isolation from vibration has been a hot topic as of late." Following on the heels of the deleted thread on the same topic. If anyone is spoofing the industry it’s you.
have a nice day Your caricature of an audio business is brilliant. |
That’s precisely what the Dems are counting on, that people will think the emails have been doctored. Unfortunately it has been demonstrated they have not been doctored. Brazil at the DNC found out the hard way when she tried the "it's been doctored" defense several days ago, unsuccessfully.
Those damn Russians! |
Well we all finnally agree on something Lol. Yes! |
Lots of things get exposed all the time and nobody seems to care.
Either people are numb these days or some things are just not significant enough to loose any sleep over. Or both. Whatever it is there is lots of it going around and some will naturally find ways to profit from it.
Wikileaks for example. People either don't read or are asleep at this wheel....very sad. |
And furthermore,
(from Internet analysis of the doctoring charge by Dems)
"So why doesn’t the Clinton campaign provide some evidence that emails have been doctored, like publishing original emails? Experts pointed to political calculation. By saying the emails may be inaccurate generally, the campaign can plausibly deny certain facts that the emails reveal. If they offer proof that a particular leaked email is fake, however, that risks giving the impression that any emails they do not refute are accurate. Or they just might not want the original email to become public for any number of reasons. "It boxes the campaign into a bad spot," _______ said."
cheers
Never mind the fact that a public server was in the mix....;) |
not sure what you’re referring to. Clinton’s server was a private server set up by the guy that refused to provide testimony to the investigating committee. The issue is that her private server was not secure. AND that there were classified emails on the server. Hel-loo!
That’s what I was referring to.... |
Geoff, you are an engineer. How would you propose measuring the results of said products? |
We’ve already been through this. I’ve already answered this question. At least a couple times. Since you're so enamored of this question why don't you tell us how you would measure it.
since the previous iteration of this thread got flushed, humor us with another attempted answer (or not). I myself would approach it this way: invite Deepak Chopra and Rupert Sheldrake (what a name) over. I would have them sit in a circle on chairs isolated by springs (like something out of Austin Powers....yeah baby!) and around us would be a drum circle going full bore. We would whip ourselves in a pagan frenzy like the projects of Baal and then dive into whatever vortex of morphic resonance appeared. Once the ride was over, my knowledge of the question at hand would be complete, and I could report back with a meaningful answer. |
If I were you I would seriously going back to whatever backwater school you attended, assuming you even went to school, which I seriously doubt, and demand your money back. Education is what’s left when you’ve forgotten everything you supposedly learned in school. I hate to judge before all the facts are in but it would appear being a troll is about all that’s left for you. I attended the same backwater institution you apparently did Dilbert. You can verify the two degrees I received there by calling the registrar if you like. Maybe your powers of memory are failing you, but you have used that same tired Einstein quote on innumerable threads. Time for some new material. As for education, it only begins at the feet of Chopra and Sheldrake as they beckon us into the seething cauldron of morphic resonance flowing outwards from some epicenter of cosmic circle jerking. |
There it is! English Major! If I can make an observation: it's not really that unusual for audiophiles to make fun of things that are new to them or things they do not or cannot understand. ;-) Nope. You assume English major since my command of the language is superior to the introductory level English you learned during your first year of E-school. That is not saying much. I spent 9 years there with a emphasis on "biological sciences" if that helps. As for lampooning things I don't understand, PhD level scientists in the same disciplines as Sheldrake call him a pseudoscientist. Being a pseudoscientist and apologist for New Age woo woo is a lot easier than being an actual scientist. There is no data. Just rhetoric. |
BTW, got a notification that Andrew replied here. Unfortunately, it seems to have been removed before I could actually see it.
Too bad. I've noticed a distinct pattern with that guy and I think he's not being totally upfront with exactly who he is. I think a little disclosure is in order. Oh well. Who? |
Max Townshend uses an oscilloscope to display the effectiveness of his Seismic Isolators in a video viewable on You Tube. He gives a rap to the side of a speaker enclosure spiked to a concrete floor, then again with the speaker on his Isolators, the vibrations/resonance of the enclosure visible on the scope in both instances. The Seismic Isolators apparently not only prevent floor vibrations from entering a speaker enclosure, but also provide either damping of that enclosure or a pathway for the evacuation of vibration. I need to watch it again, as can you. Max also does a demonstration on a table top, displaying other capabilities of his Isolators. Good stuff, but not cheap! A deconstruction of Townsend (and by association Kait) from an actual Seismologist is pending. Should be a fun read. It will add actual meaningful data to the thread. |
Geoff,
I honestly can't get a hold on whether you are a mad genius scientist or a total loon.
But what I do know is that you are a MASTER troll. And I love that!
The fact that these other people keep engaging with you is total entertainment. That's part of the idea. I engage him for entertainment value alone. Nothing he says riles me in the slightest. I enjoy Mr. Kait thoroughly.... |
It’s a concept silly. you know, like the theory of relativity. Like the concept of black holes. Duh!
Scientists thought Einstein was full of it, too. The Newtonians had a brain hemorrhage. They thought Schroedinger was a crackpot. Ditto Heisenberg. Scientists must be brought around to new or contradictory ideas very very slowly. You know, they think they learned it all in school. Just because some idea or concept is controversial doesn’t necessarily mean it’s wrong. Follow? You mention some PhD level scientists who disagree with Sheldrake. I trust you aren’t trying to say that ALL PhD level scientists disagree with him. You realize, that would be kind of uh, stupid. You don't really think all PhDs thunk alike, do you? I understand that. That's true of my field as well. Things start that way. But the data eventually follows if its true. Furthermore, Einstein, Schoedinger and the like did a lot of intellectual legwork to ground their ideas. Sheldrake is not in the same neighborhood. If Morphic Resonance is not real you better alert the hundreds of customers of mine who have my products based on Morphic resonance. MR is superimposed onto your products. It is not necessarily the reason they work. |
Geez, you guys have been threatening to send in the seismologist for months. It's actually a little too late as it appears you guys don't even know the difference between isolation and damping. Besides Townshend and I between us have more than 40 years of experience in vibration isolation. Only a fool would enter the fray at this point but I guess you guys are desperate so let er rip! Lol I agree. I too have been waiting on a report from this mysterious seismologist. Robert? Tom? What is the hold up? It would anchor this thread better and save it from schizophrenic woo woo. |
