Do equipment stands have an impact on electronics?
Mechanical grounding or isolation from vibration has been a hot topic as of late. Many know from experience that footers, stands and other vibration technologies impact things that vibrate a lot like speakers, subs or even listening rooms (my recent experience with an "Energy room"). The question is does it 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?
Keep swingin’. I hope you have a hit here. Really.
Best to you all, Dave"
Back at ya, Slick
I just wanna know about, the rooms behind your minds, Do I see a vacuum there, or am I going blind? Or is it just remains from vibrations and echoes long ago, Things like ’Love the World’ and ’Let your fancy flow’, Is this true? Please let me talk to you. Let me talk to you.
I have lived here before, the days of ice, And of course this is why I’m so concerned, So where do I purchase my ticket, I would just like to have a ringside seat, I want to know about the new Mother Earth, I want to hear and see everything, I want to hear and see everything, I want to hear and see everything. Aw, shucks, If my daddy could see me now.
It's not hard to detect vibrations. Just set a container of water on the subject and watch for ripples. It's natures natural vu meter for vibrations. Of course be careful not to spill.
mapman 13,918 posts 11-06-2016 7:43pm It’s not hard to detect vibrations. Just set a container of water on the subject and watch for ripples. It’s natures natural vu meter for vibrations. Of course be careful not to spill.
Gosh, there an echo in here? I said the same thing on this thread a couple weeks ago. I also mentioned it in the notorious similar thread that went belly up a few weeks ago, when I said, "You can see the *seismic* vibrations in the surface of the water in a glass on top of a preamp, etc..." Of course, and more to the point, the glass of water can be used to "measure" how effective the isolation device under test is by, you know, seeing the difference in the amount of ripples in the surface of the water with and without isolation. This test will also demonstrate that seismic vibrations are obviously more powerful than the so-called induced vibrations that the component might produce. Hel-loo!
And earlier on this thread I wrote,
"Funny story. A friend of mine said watch this. He was sitting in a chair on the other side of the room from his stand with a CD player on the top. Next to the CD player was a glass of water. Next, he began tapping his knee with his finger very softly. Immediately ripples appeared on the surface of the water in the glass, synchronized with the tapping."
I said I’ll tell you my name, you got to let me in You can be the sinner and I’ll be the sin I’ll take what I want and its easy to see I got everything Everything I’ll show you what I got When you tell me what you need So put ya money where ya mouth is I’ll show you what I got When you tell me what you need So put your money where your mouth is Come on, yeah Show me I’ll show you what I got When you tell me what you need So put your money where your mouth is Watch out, watch out I said yeah
"BTW- the Solid-Tech Discs of Silence arrived today. Removed one of the three springs in each of the four footers based on the weight of my Sony 5400ES player with the Svelte shelf and placed them underneath. Definitely an audible difference. I need more time to get a handle on it."
a difference for the better one assumes. Take your time.
theaudiotweak 1,404 posts 11-08-2016 1:17pm A darker soundstage no doubt. Reduction in all polarities of shear instead of just one will give a change in spectral balance. What do you hear? Tom
damage control is apparently under way. Maybe time for the big guy to check in, this time with whatever it was he has been promising. I'm still on pins and needles, scout's honor.
Should have clarfied the above with the additional words ..will reduce the amplitude of some frequencies of any device that rests on these "isolators"or others of the same type. Tom
theaudiotweak 1,406 posts 11-08-2016 3:51pm Should have clarfied the above with the additional words ..will reduce the amplitude of some frequencies of any device that rests on these "isolators"or others of the same type. Tom
Uh, hopefully the amplitude of some frequencies will be reduced. That’s kind of the whole point. ALL frequencies above the Fr of the isolating system will be reduced in amplitude. One assumes you’re referring to VIBRATION frequencies not AUDIO frequencies. Note to self: Why am I getting a bad feeling?
I am not getting thru..like in your stuff all polarities of shear are being reduced and as a result information is being reduced in the device.Your methods put a full nelson choke hold on any device whether active or passive. Tom
theaudiotweak 1,407 posts 11-08-2016 4:35pm I am not getting thru..like in your stuff all polarities of shear are being reduced and as a result information is being reduced in the device.Your methods put a full nelson choke hold on any device whether active or passive. Tom
That has to the silliest thing I’ve ever heard. Where do you come up with this stuff? I’ve asked you at least twice to explain what you mean by "polarities of shear" but so far you only repeat the same mantra over and over again. If you cannot explain it find someone who can.
theaudiotweak 1,408 posts 11-08-2016 5:02pm Good ..I am happy you don’t get it. Tom
Huh? Get what? You haven't said anything. Other than talk in riddles. Tom, don’t you realize if I don’t get it the chances are very good noone else will get it, either? I’m not sure that’s really the image you guys want to project. This is all getting to look suspiciously like you and your company are the Gang that Couldn’t Shoot Straight. So much of what you both say, after you strip away the ATTITUDE, is very weak technically. I was under the distinct impression that you guys had something BIG in the way of explanation or rebuttal or some such thing. One assumes that was just posturing.
Unfortunately we are having difficulty with timely responses due to terminology involving patent pending processes. Sorry Mr. Kait, but it’s going to take more time.
Technically weak, it is not. Patentable - probably yes.
I have read where all the technology surrounding all of your products is kept secret and proprietary so if you ever applied for patents, you would surely understand the situation we are involved with and if not, too bad.
In the meantime, we are preparing a few items you can chew on in the upcoming days.
audiopoint 48 posts 11-08-2016 5:50pm I have read where all the technology surrounding all of your products is kept secret and proprietary so if you ever applied for patents, you would surely understand the situation we are involved with and if not, too bad.
Secret and proprietary? Huh?! I have no idea where you got that from. As I’ve already pointed out, I have detailed explanations on my web site for many of my products, even the clock, Dark Matter, and the Teleportation Tweak and the Super Intelligent Chip. Hel-loo! Everybody has something to hide except for me and my monkey. Your memory might not be serving you well, I did tell one of the trolls I don't divulge how I develop certain products. That's probably what you're thinking of, not that my products are secret. Lol
audiopoint 49 posts 11-08-2016 7:20pm So much name calling going on - I guess my memory is not serving me well. A mistake on my behalf therefore I do apologize.
I did write you in when casting my vote today but forgot to include the darn monkey.
Sorry to hear about your memory. If my memory serves it’s actually you who has been doing most of the name calling. In fact if I strip away the name calling and attitude and shilling of your products from the majority of your posts here there’s really not that much left. So that would make you a liar. A liar with a bad memory. If you can’t keep up with the discussion can I respectfully suggest you find someone who can?
Nows a good time.. we both maybe in the mood. Its not the video on YouTube we see projected but the audio we hope to hear. Only one way to find out..not the numbers but the tunes. Good listening. Tom
Hello dlcockrum, regards to your post dated 11-04-2016 8:50pm, requesting opinions on Solid Tech Testing pdf file:
First and foremost, we have some concerns about this so called “independent” testing.
Solid-Tech states: ”The proof is below, 88,48% reduction at 20Hz. Have you ever seen an independently conducted vibration measurement from any other audio-isolator manufacturer?”
Sounds really impressive, but our question is how can this be considered “independent” testing? And therefore how does this test data and these claims hold any merit? We have reviewed dozens of formal third party test documents and this document has very little in common with any our company has peer reviewed over the last dozen years.
The initial problem is that this test document does not properly define the test scenarios nor does it even list the third party “independent” agency or university that conducted the testing. You pay big money for testing and the right to back the results with the facilities credentials. Typically such results will be presented for publication (by the manufacturer of the product or technology) and would clearly include the identifying information about the independent testing party, as well as their industry specific associations and accreditations.
Example: NETA (The InterNational Electrical Testing Association) or ICSA Labs who test the built-in security functions in smart phones and tablets.
Any reputable test facility or university is going to be a member of one or many of these organizations that set the industry standard for product testing and verification.
Next is a more fundamental problem of the testing itself. Beyond being poorly designed and defined, the testing data is simply incomplete.
Where is the control? What is the dependent variable? How would the object or shelf be read without Solid-Tech product in place?
Taking a measurement from the floor and the shelf is a “measurement”. Comparing two comparable scenarios where the tester changes one dependent variable and analyzes the results is “a test”. 88% reduction means nothing if you do not compare it to some second configuration. For all we know one could get the same “measurement” by placing the same equipment on the rack specified without the isolation pads or with a peanut butter sandwich… 88% reduction might be the normal. With the information provided in this “test”, you can’t argue with us. We simply do not know. You need to take TWO measurements and then analyze the difference (delta).
In our opinion, someone took the time to make this look like it is supposed to be a formal “independent” test – room temperature, equipment used, type of flooring?, etc. – but there is no information about any testing Control or constraints.
These “independent” test results have not one fingerprint of a professional controlled third party test. In fact, what is to keep any company (even Star Sound) from putting together in-house tests to prove the efficiency/effectiveness of any device or furthermore, what is stopping the manufacturer from tweaking the test parameters until they got just the desired results… and then post it on their website?
This is why they call it “independent THIRD party testing”. True unbiased controlled test scenarios. In my opinion, what Solid-Tech has posted on their website is nothing more than Creative-Marketing designed to woo any non-engineer into thinking “WOW, this is great! And look it really works!! I need this!” … Creative Marketing.
Now onto the technology; this product is a damping system attempting to isolate noise that is coming from the floor, rather than the source which is the sound, voice coil and the cone of the speaker system - our choice of focus. It appears that they put the speakers or system in a room with a 70-80 db sound source and measure the movement of the speakers or objects used as a stand in for the speaker. 70-80 db is fairly loud and this seems to be shown at all frequencies.
The 20 Hz geophone sees data up to about 150 hz with a central frequency of 20 hz. They are saying that the energy comes from the sound pressure they have created from the loudspeakers. The geophone is a low pass filter as it does not react well to frequencies above about 160 Hz. The same can be said about the 70 hz and 150 hz geophones. These instruments are band pass filters where the response curve is a max at 70 or 150 hz, so again, they are just various band pass filters that show the response of the speaker to an outside compressive wave.
A more applicable test might be to record single notes (we prefer cellos) in a studio then play them through a speaker resting on Audio Points™, then repeat on another product (say MD springs) and finally the Solid Tech feet. ‘C’ scale four octaves with 6 seconds per note recording should provide enough information for any ear to hear the difference in footer systems.
In comparison, Audio Points remove an interfering polarization of shear created by the speakers. Please note, our technology and approach has nothing to do with movement of the room or compressive waves (sound) in the room so including them in this test would provide a different functioning product to compare with the two isolation spring based products.
You could add RTA charted frequency curves to the test which will assist in showing what each design is doing to the sound. No guessing what the Real Time Analyzer measurement really accomplishes as all these tests are “highly subjective” at best. You are measuring more for what sounds you will hear from the same speaker on the different feet.
Star Sound is less concerned about the deadening of the speaker relative to floor noise as our products reduce floor noise and reduce resonance as it forms in real time within and on the surface of the loudspeaker or component via rapid energy transfer to ground.
Our concern is more about the amount of resonance that continues to build up over time, layering and propagating on all smooth surfaces on and within the loudspeaker. This detrimental resonance prohibits driver functionality, signal and speed, speaker dispersion patterns and driver time alignment affecting overall “operational efficiency” of the speaker system. Isolation damped footers do not take these elements of functionality or resonance build up into account.
Not to challenge this company's testing methods alone, there are others far more creative, some with videos, charts, mechanical displays demonstrating how their products’ function based on their methodologies and theorems where any engineering team could easily prove their efforts to be nothing more than Creative Marketing tools designed to increase sales; especially when there are no results from independent or third party testing being presented. Please note: Star Sound has absolutely nothing against any business using creative marketing tactics to fuel sales.
Star Sound invested heavily in third party testing because our technology adapts, is scalable and expand in other industries so it is worth the capital investment.
Our comments here are based on our experiences involving product and technology testing.
"Taking a measurement from the floor and the shelf is a “measurement”. Comparing two comparable scenarios where the tester changes one dependent variable and analyzes the results is “a test”. 88% reduction means nothing if you do not compare it to some second configuration. For all we know one could get the same “measurement” by placing the same equipment on the rack specified without the isolation pads or with a peanut butter sandwich… 88% reduction might be the normal. With the information provided in this “test”, you can’t argue with us. We simply do not know. You need to take TWO measurements and then analyze the difference (delta)."
Funny. 88% reduction at 20 Hz is NOT normal. You guys apparently still don’t understand isolation or what a low pass filter actually is. What is not mentioned in the report - but is obviously the case - is that at frequencies higher than 20 Hz the isolation effectiveness is even higher than 88%, for purposes of discussion circa 97% at 30 Hz and 99.5% at 40 Hz. Those number are fairly typical of ANY reasonably good mass-on-spring isolation device. Furthermore, it’s as obvious as the nose on your face that the 88% reduction was compared to the case without the isolation. You guys just can’t seem to catch a break. ;-)
Funny. 88% reduction at 20 Hz is NOT normal. You guys apparently still don’t understand isolation or what a low pass filter actually is. What is not mentioned in the report - but is obviously the case - is that at frequencies higher than 20 Hz the isolation effectiveness is even higher than 88%, for purposes of discussion circa 97% at 30 Hz and 99.5% at 40 Hz. Those number are fairly typical of ANY reasonably good mass-on-spring isolation device. Furthermore, it’s as obvious as the nose on your face that the 88% reduction was compared to the case without the isolation. You guys just can’t seem to catch a break. ;-)
Neither it seems can you. Where are your measurements Einstein or is this a skill set long forgotten in the fugue state of your "education"?
agear OP 1,223 posts 11-10-2016 12:47am Geoffkait:Funny. 88% reduction at 20 Hz is NOT normal. You guys apparently still don’t understand isolation or what a low pass filter actually is. What is not mentioned in the report - but is obviously the case - is that at frequencies higher than 20 Hz the isolation effectiveness is even higher than 88%, for purposes of discussion circa 97% at 30 Hz and 99.5% at 40 Hz. Those number are fairly typical of ANY reasonably good mass-on-spring isolation device. Furthermore, it’s as obvious as the nose on your face that the 88% reduction was compared to the case without the isolation. You guys just can’t seem to catch a break. ;-)
To which agear replied,
"Neither it seems can you. Where are your measurements Einstein or is this a skill set long forgotten in the fugue state of your "education"?"
Uh, the 88% reduction is the measurement, troll. As are the other percentages in the report. Besides, the isolation effectiveness for a given iso device of known Fr can be easily calculated (or estimated if you know what you're doing) for any frequency of interest. And the Fr for these spring type devices can be easily determined using the second hand of a watch. Hel-loo! Can I make a suggestion?: if you wish to be an effective troll go back to school. Speaking of which have you given further consideration to marching yourself back to UVa and demanding your money back?
Geoff Kait Machina Dynamica give me a stiff enough spring and I’ll isolate the world
Finally! Someone was smart enough to copy my original Nimbus Sub Hertz Isolation platform design; Nimbus used a single vertical air spring with a lateral support spring system - a series of small springs. The difference being the Nimbus used only ONE spring total, whereas other systems are forced (due to the technical difficulty of using one spring) to use multiple springs (to obtain sufficient lateral support) which raises Fr of the iso system. The best Fr achievable with multiple vertical springs is about 3 Hz. Which it’s bad, but it’s not anywhere near as good as 0.5 Hz. The reason 0.5 Hz is important is because the peak Earth crust motion is between 0 Hz and 2 Hz. That’s why the Nimbus Unipivot at 0.5 Hz Fr is still the best, even 20 years later. Hel-loo! Addendum: for speakers the Fr of the isolating device is not critical since the lowest frequency that needs to be isolated is what, 25 or 30 Hz?
The noise coming down and out from any component or any speaker is greater than the background noise coming up from the Earth toward that same component. Of course the component needs to be resting on a device like our Audiopoints which funnell energy away from the resting device and to a higher mass below. Our point shapes accomplish this feat of nature much like a venturi which speeds air flow or a nozzle on a fire hose. The increase pressure exiting from the tip will resist any energy trying to enter the the tip end. Our Audiopoints are not a spike and operate with simplicity of design and function. Tom Star Sound.
theaudiotweak "The noise coming down and out from any component or any speaker is greater than the background noise coming up from the Earth toward that same component. Of course the component needs to be resting on a device like our Audiopoints which funnell energy away from the resting device and to a higher mass below. Our point shapes accomplish this feat of nature much like a venturi which speeds air flow or a nozzle on a fire hose. The increase pressure exiting from the tip will resist any energy trying to enter the the tip end. Our Audiopoints are not a spike and operate with simplicity of design and function. Tom Star Sound."
Stop shilling for a second and listen to what I said. Even Mapman said it. The ripples on the surface of the water in the glass on the top shelf are produced by seismic vibration, not vibration from the component. That’s why, when the component is isolated, the ripples vanish. Just because you guys have always ignored seismic vibration doesn’t make them go away.
Wrong.. we will soon post a video. You have been wrong for more than 20 years. You should get a medal to wear with a spring attached. Greater forces from above keeps the background noise out. Tom
theaudiotweak 1,412 posts 11-10-2016 10:49am Wrong.. we will soon post a video. You have been wrong for more than 20 years. You should get a medal to wear with a spring attached. Greater forces from above keeps the background noise out. Tom
You guys have become The Gang that Couldn’t Shoot Straight. I can always tell when you're lying. When you open your mouths.
theaudiotweak 1,412 posts 11-10-2016 10:49am Wrong.. we will soon post a video. You have been wrong for more than 20 years. You should get a medal to wear with a spring attached. Greater forces from above keeps the background noise out. Tom
Gk get your details correct. I said water will show vibrations. I did not say the source is seismic. Could be the gear itself, people walking on the floor, from speakers, nearby appliances. Whatever. These are all possible variables but each case is different. Only way to know is to try. Also just because vibrations are present does not mean the sound will be affected. The only way to know these things in each case is run tests and see and hear.
Like his comments on another thread that mentions our new Platter Ground for records. He has no clue how it works yet makes comparisons to other platter devices when in fact it is totally new and unique . The Platter Ground is a 21st century version of the original Audio Point specfic for use on vinyl. Tom Star Sound.
mapman 13,945 posts 11-10-2016 3:14pm Gk get your details correct. I said water will show vibrations. I did not say the source is seismic. Could be the gear itself, people walking on the floor, from speakers, nearby appliances. Whatever. These are all possible variables but each case is different. Only way to know is to try. Also just because vibrations are present does not mean the sound will be affected. The only way to know these things in each case is run tests and see and hear.
Huh? What I said was when you isolate the equipment you will see the ripples in the water disappear. That means that it actually is the seismic type vibration that’s producing the ripples. If you can’t see that it’s too bad. If you had been paying attention you would understand that by seismic vibrations I mean any type of low frequency vibration coming up from the floor. But not acoustic waves (airborne vibrations) or vibrations induced by the equipment, e.g., motors, transformers, whatever.
Footfall, Earth crust motion, ocean tidal forces, subways, traffic, speaker vibration feeding back to the electronics - all of those things I include in "seismic type vibrations." You may substitute the phrase "structureborne vibration" for "seismic type vibration" if you like. In any case, when you see the ripples in the glass of water disappear - now try to follow me here - that’s a sign that the problem is almost entirely the vibrations coming up from the floor, NOT the vibrations induced by the component or the airborne ones. Follow?
theaudiotweak 1,414 posts 11-10-2016 3:40pm Like his comments on another thread that mentions our new Platter Ground for records. He has no clue how it works yet makes comparisons to other platter devices when in fact it is totally new and unique . The Platter Ground is a 21st century version of the original Audio Point specfic for use on vinyl. Tom Star Sound.
I was actually not referring to your product on the other thread scooter but thanks for the shameless plug, anyway. The platter may be 21st century but you remain firmly in the 20th century.
We couldn'find a secure method to hold a spring in place (you know their always in a motion of their own) so we had to develop new technology. Thanks for confiming what methods not to use. Your 41 years of misuse wasn't required. Tom
VIbrations are vibrations except some can be eliminated and some not. You have to identify the source and determine if can be removed or not. If so, remove it. If not, tehn do what one will to deal with it as needed.
We can agree on that. If teh source is the earth's seismic activity, it is what it is and one can determine whether they need care or not.
mapman "VIbrations are vibrations except some can be eliminated and some not. You have to identify the source and determine if can be removed or not. If so, remove it. If not, tehn do what one will to deal with it as needed.
We can agree on that. If teh source is the earth’s seismic activity, it is what it is and one can determine whether they need care or not."
Sorry, but IMHO that’s quite an oversimplification of what this particular thread is really all about. I don’t agree that we should be so dismissive.
Let’s summarize, shall we? We have two points of view - one that ignores seismic type vibrations and claims the only source of vibration that matters to the sound is the induced vibration from the component, including vibration resulting from the mechanical acoustic waves striking the component. The other side of the argument, I.e., your humble scribe, is that all vibration is BAD for the sound, *especially low frequency structureborne vibration. The simple glass of water experiment perfectly demonstrates how powerful the seismic type vibrations actually are. Yet, I also address induced vibration in my designs and philosophy. See the difference? Of course anyone is free to ignore anything. I just happen to think that's uh, ignorant.
So, actually it’s not helpful to the discussion nor does it move the discussion forward to use expressions like, "vibration is vibration" or "it is what it is." Obviously there are folks who don’t consider everything or try to fix the numerous problems we know exist in high end audio. But hiding one’s head in the sand is not really a smart option IMHO. Are we supposed to be contented cows?
If seismic vibration is actually not an issue for high end audio how come at least 10,000 audiophiles have bought Vibraplane isolation stands? It’s not logical, Captain.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
