Do equipment stands have an impact on electronics?
Regarding the floating turntable I'm pretty suspicious. The pictures all look like hi res concept images to me. There's no credible discussion of the project risks and no information on prototypes. The slick video puts me off and is the turntable an animation or is it real? there's no scene of the man and the platter together for example anyway wish them all the best but I'll hold off on investing in this one |
mapman Some things are best left to the experts to solve Yes, but even top end equipment is built to a price point and after market solutions to these problems can be beneficial -- case in point changing the rubber ring tube dampers on ARC kit to Herbie's dampers (see this thread) -- this is a $500 change on a typical ARC top end tube amp (at retail) and likely many times more than the cost of the rubber rings Secondly the manufacturer (with some rare exceptions) does not know the circumstances of where/how the equipment may be racked hence the validity of numerous footers and supports such as being discussed in this thread So many reasons to believe that even a well designed and vibration thought out device can be further optimized |
Did anyone ever compare the two really strong products mentioned above side by side? Let me elaborate on what one may experience. Clearly the Townshend and Sistrum Platform are two totally different approaches to vibration management. The technologies are opposite one another and SO are the Sonic Results (highly subjective to end users of course). The products do ‘not’ sound similar as if someone is comparing subtle differences between two good amplifiers. In this case, the differences are extremely audible and will easily provide you a favorite choice. Robert/audiopoint-- if you would be so kind as to send me a pair of Sistrum Platforms sized for a Magico Q3 I'd be delighted to perform the comparison and report back -- just an open offer. My experiences moving from the Magico Q3 spikes (into wood flooring on concrete in an urban, highly traffic and construction affected room) to the Townshend podiums are on record. I would agree that the difference moving from spikes to the spring based platform was not at all subtle, one sounded like real instruments while the other sounded like a PA system but I'm open to other approaches to the same end |
Hmmm, there seems to be a lot of interest in this comparison and some speculation as to what the results might be. Personally I'm not in any rush to attempt this as the thought of trying to get 250lb of Magico Q3 up onto the Sistrum spikes scares the hell out of me. Spiking Q3s alone is easy as you install each spike at a time, and installing the Townshend podia was also easy as I could manhandle them onto the platforms and then slide across (these are used sans spikes) but the Star Sound platforms would need me to get them onto upward facing spikes, no easy task without help. Seems I will need one of you round to give me a hand Anyway FWIW my speculation is that the impact would be similar to the effect I found moving from Magico spikes (themselves carefully designed and contoured in a similar manner to the SS spikes). Contrary to what others have speculated the apparent effect of moving to the Townshend podium from spikes was to lower the perceived bass -- mainly through the complete elimination of floor borne bass transmission. The reality is that the same level of air borne information was coming through but without the overhang and boom of the floor borne transmission the quality of the bass was much improved, and the sound of for example Heather Masse's double bass now mirrored that I experience live. Bear in mind also that the Q3 cabinets are "quite" solid and well designed they should have no problem dealing with and managing resonances contained within the cabinets. Also the speculation that the drivers are somehow pushing back on and moving (via the sprung base) a 250kg mass seems far fetched -- there's actually a discussion of specifically this point on the Townshend site if you care to look it up My concern then with an ideal energy channel approach such as SS deliver is where is all of this energy going? Into my floor (wood on concrete) and then dumped into my listening chair? I hope not. I can see how a full SS room where energy is then channeled out of the room would work but simply dumping energy into an uncontrolled room/floor seems problematic Anyway while this may be an interesting comparison it may be some time before I have the time (and the extra pair of hands) to try it out -- in the meantime I'm having too much fun with my system as is and not worrying about why it works 😉 -- my next addition is going to be a new cartridge but that's another story |
Further to the speaker room interface I wonder if my room, being an Art Noxon design intended to be sound isolating (i.e with bass traps and damping built into the walls) may be less conducive to a SS type "grounding" arrangement in so far as the excess energy has no easy path to ground and hence causes problems in the room. Geoff's point about speaker induced floor borne vibration affecting the sound of the cables is certainly very well taken, isolating my main (30') interconnect run on Shunyata supports (springs again - actually rubber bands) had a profound effect One thing I did not get with the Townshend supports was a reduction in bass transmission outside the room. Bass is the one sound that leaks out to my wife in the room above and it seems it does so via the window surround rather than the floor, floor would probably be the path for leakage down but as the room is at the ground level this is not relevant. I suppose SS would not recommend their setup for speakers in a high rise 😏 |
Agear -- are you bent on simply ignoring all evidence to the contrary and pimping SS above all else? As I and many others have observed and attested to these effects are far from theoretical, they are real and the impact of addressing them (via suspended or spring solutions) is real and profoundHuh? As Townshend points out on his web site, and as I’ve pointed out as well, isolating the speakers has two advantages:All theoretical advantages only. Again, the raison d'etre of this thread. |
Nope. There is no evidence for any of this stuff and thus the point of the thread. There are apparently "engineers" involved with some of these products but no data whatsoever, just pseudoscientific intuitive and fights of fancy (and youtube videos) You are obviously not trying very hard to unearth this evidence? Here are several examples using your preferred method (accelerometers) supporting two of the items I use in my system 1) Shunyata Dark Field Elevators for cable isolation http://www.shunyata.com/images/technical_features/dfss-chart.jpg 2) Grand Prix Audio racking systems -- which include a variety of isolation methods including ball/cup feet exactly to deal with floor borne vibration (Apex footers) http://www.grandprixaudio.com/research http://www.grandprixaudio.com/products/apex#product-features And for a more insidious problem here is a technical discussion of vibration induced jitter in CD playback http://www.industrial-electronics.com/DAQ/optical_discs_digital_data_and_vibrational_jitter_effects.html None of this is mumbo jumbo, it’s all established science -- two minutes of online research turns all of this up -- personally I thought this thread had morphed into more of a discussion of how to address these issues rather then whether they were worth addressing |
Erik -- I have nothing to add to your comments, best take them up with Shunyata directly. My point was mainly to surface some instances of data on even the most "implausible" of vibration related effects (e.g. on cables and on electronics) and point to data discussing the potential causes, which is not hard to find despite agear's attestations to the contrary |
Erik -- from your lack of critique of my third link (the discussion of jitter) do you thereby accept that this is a meaningful, and meaningfully measured, effect? Agear -- If so perhaps this is enough to put your original question to rest, to whit The question is does it [i.e. vibration effects] have merit when it comes to electronics and if so why? Are there plausible explanations for their effect on electronics or suggested measurement paradigms to document such an effect? i.e. we have a demonstration that vibration matters in regard to electronics, and that this effect can be measured (at least for disc players) Maybe then we can all go back to sleep ps I would be listening to my hi-fi but unfortunately I accidentally pulled the power on it and it takes 48-72 hours to settle after that which stinks, maybe we can have a new thread on why it takes a system such a long time to settle electrically 😉 |
Mr Winer -- if you had taken the time to read the full thread you would have seen discussion of test data showing the effects of vibration on jitter in CD playback. While we can have a discussion as to whether this is audible it seems there is no discussion as to whether the effect of vibration is real http://www.industrial-electronics.com/DAQ/optical_discs_digital_data_and_vibrational_jitter_effects.html ps as a complete aside I was amused by the following in the WSJ today - if science is struggling to tell us how to brew a cup of coffee is it any surprise we have difficulty measuring the reproduction of music http://www.wsj.com/articles/milk-or-sugar-in-your-low-viscosity-liquid-dynamic-scientists-seek-the-perfect-cup-of-coffee-1482164994 |
@agear regarding the 7th harmonic. Two minutes on google will turn up ample references from piano tuning, design of wind instruments and so on. Here’s a basic one to get you started http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Music/harmon.html#c1 |
Do some of your own research @agear Nelson Pass on amp design and harmonics https://passlabs.com/press/audio-distortion-and-feedback |
