Robert, why not give it a rest? I have already been through all of your so-called arguments, demands for proof, diatribes, dismissals and shilling with your former buddy. Like him you cannot actually generate a technical attack because well, quite frankly you’re not technical, not in the slightest. Like him it always comes down to its either your way or the highway. I personally find your diatribes repetitive, uneducated, and self serving to the extreme. They simply attack your competitors and pump up your own products. Maybe it’s time to call this thread DONE and stick a fork in it.
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?
1,146 responses Add your response
theaudiotweak 1,424 posts 11-15-2016 12:04pm How can interfering energy from within escape your bandpass filters ? Is the filter decay time faster in one direction than the other? What the ding dong are you talking about? I've already explained to you numerous times it's not a bandpass filter. You guys need to get your act together big time. Have you no shame? Have a a nice day |
In our humble opinion, the Townshend technical comparison and videos are “Creative Marketing” tools supported by audio theory and are lacking any proof from third party independent testing: 1. Comparing $0.90 cents worth of some kind of "typical" generic spike to an approximate $3,000.00 isolation product clearly puts the test and results in the favor of the host company. This would be like Star Sound comparing a Rhythm Platform™ next to generic springs which would not be a reasonable comparison or fair to the listenership either. This test or proof of effectiveness is reduced to marketing before the first physical tap on the speakers takes place. 2. There is a level of noise displayed on “both” monitors before the experimentation of jumping and taping begins. Those noise levels are never analyzed to see what the differences are at the outset (between the cheap spikes and the ultra expensive product) in order to establish a ‘Control’ factor for the comparison. 3. Does anyone ask why they have to physically have to rap the cabinet or jump up and down to excite motion in the environment in order to get their 'desired' result? Do people do this when listening? Why not pulse the speaker system with frequency and high volume? So many more questions... 4. Then there is the technical data, charts and mechanical motion models. We will refrain from exploring those inefficiencies because this is not an equitable comparison. This ‘proof of effectiveness’ appears to be anchored on comparing two methodologies where one is heavily favored to the isolation spring side of marketing and gives the newest technical advancement and competition that our company is involved in - a bad rap. NOTE: No two spikes or coupling devices are nearly the same in mechanical function and sonic performance AND one should note that before deciding coupling or decoupling is the way to go. Mass and Geometry play an extremely important role in mechanical grounding via high speed resonance transfer designs and products. The generic spikes used in this comparison are maybe a quarter pound of total mass? What is the total weight of the isolation device? We have absolutely nothing against this company. Creating sales is first and foremost in order to advance products and fund technologies but if you really want to show the differences between coupling (mechanical grounding) and decoupling (isolation) then why not be a bit more fair and place a $1,700.00 Rhythm Platform or any other existing product from the same cost bracket as the Townshend and compare from there? In my personal opinion, Townshend has a great storyboard depicting isolation as this methodology has been accepted for years. Staying away from comparisons might be the better way to go and avoid the rebuttals from the competition entirely.
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. Thank you for your time, Robert Star Sound. |
Measuring the performance of any spring based iso devices is not rocket science folks. All you need is a second hand on a watch. Then manually set the iso device into motion. And time the number of cycles per second and you have the resonant frequency Fr in cycles per second, or Hz. Then the isolation effectiveness of the device for any structureborne frequency is only a calculation away. |
agear, for anyone desiring measured proof of the effectiveness of the Townshend Audio Seismic Isolator, let me once again state that Max Townshend has a video on You Tube in which he explains the theory and design of the product, and demonstrates its isolation capabilities and effectiveness in a couple of ways. One demonstration is of a speaker with its enclosure having a surface mounted microphone (there is a name for them, but I can’t recall it. It’s the type John Atkinson uses to measure cabinet resonances in the Stereophile speaker reviews) attached to it, the output of the mic displayed on an oscilloscope. Max stomps on the ground near the speaker, both with and without the Seismic Platform installed under its enclosure, the oscilloscope displaying the cabinet resonances produced in response to the foot stomping both ways. He also raps on the speaker cabinet with his knuckles, again both with and without the Platform under the speaker, the mic output again displayed on the oscilloscope. Max does another demonstration proving the effectiveness of his products in regard to minimizing (or eliminating?) internally generated resonances. Very interesting and informative, to me anyway. There is an Audiogon member who lives not far from me, an owner of a very nice system (the member has posted it in the Audiogon Virtual System section, but I don’t feel I should assume he doesn’t mind me identifying him) with loudspeakers under which he has installed the Townshend Seismic Platform. He found it to provide a very noticeable improvement to the sound of his speakers, and has extended to me the offer of an invitation to come over and take a listen, which I intend to do very soon. I will then consider whether or not to acquire a set of the Townshend Seismic Pods for my own speakers (as well as perhaps for my turntable and CD player). |
"The combination of roller bearings and either metal or air springs (which decouple in the vertical plane, providing isolation) provide isolation in all three axis down to perhaps 3Hz, about as good as you can do outside of the $2000-$3000 Newport and MinusK tables, and the Townshend Seismic Pods at about half that. I’ll let Geoff speak in behalf of his own springs!" to which agear replied, "Based on what measurements? Geoff does not have any actual data (or customer feedback). Do you?" Geez, agear, there you go again! The same old demands for measurements. Knock yourself out. By the way, I have tons of feedback right here on Audiogon, not to mention my own website. Duh! http://www.resfreq.com/images/BODY-WAVE-TRANSMISSION-REDUCTION-with-Appendices.pdf Link to customer comments on my website, http://machinadynamica.com/machina11.htm Y'all have a nice day Geoff Kait Machina Dynamica Advanced Audio Concepts |
The combination of roller bearings and either metal or air springs (which decouple in the vertical plane, providing isolation) provide isolation in all three axis down to perhaps 3Hz, about as good as you can do outside of the $2000-$3000 Newport and MinusK tables, and the Townshend Seismic Pods at about half that. I’ll let Geoff speak in behalf of his own springs!Based on what measurements? Geoff does not have any actual data (or customer feedback). Do you? |
| Post removed |
No Randy, but turntables are arguably more than any other component affected by the stand they are sitting on, as well as from all other sources of vibration. The physical dimensions of the LP groove walls that the cartridge is "measuring" are on the order of microns, often smaller than the amount of physical displacement in the legs and/or shelves of the stand the turntable is on. |
It was back in Nov 1995 in Stereophile magazine that Shannon Dickson published "Bad Vibes" - the landmark article on vibration isolation and also the Vibraplane iso stand that had recently come out. IIRC there were then only two isolation stands in high end audio - Vibraplane and Sesimic Sink from Townshend in UK. I debuted my six degree of freedom Nimbus Sub Hertz platform with Mapleshade at CES Jan 1997. A feature of Nimbus was actually provided by Shannon Dickson. Even back then the Nimbus featured a single air spring of correct geometry, the world’s best air spring, an axillary air canister, and cryogenically treated steel rods that supported steel ballast below decks. I later introduced Promethean Base, a steel spring based ISO stand at CES 2000 and 2001 followed by much smaller cryo’d high carbon steel springs, Cryo Baby Prometheans. Now I have small cryo’d springs for every load from 1 lb to 300 lb. My Super Stiff Spings are for really heavy loads like large turntables and amps and subwoofers. Since cost is NOT an issue for my springs, we’re practically GIVING them away, ALL COMPONENTS in the system can be isolated at LOW COST - and since the springs are very low profile (about an inch high compressed) they have outstanding lateral support. THUS in most cases they can be placed DIRECTLY under components. I recently introduced the Bio Mikro G "Woody the Woodpecker" isolation stand that is not a spring-based ISO stand. I have constructed a dual layer ISO stand, a trick I learned from LIGO. Dual mass-spring layer devices are very tricky and not for the timid or young. Ironically my small springs yield the same resonant frequency as the Vibraplane, about 3 Hz. Full text of Shannon Dickson’s Bad Vibes at, http://www.stereophile.com/reference/52/ Geoff Kait Machina Dynamica advanced audio concepts |
The guys who have $2000-$3000 microscope isolation tables (first reported on in TAS about twenty years ago, now made by Newport, MinusK, and others) have them only under their turntables. One under every component in a system would be a whole lotta dough, as well overkill imo. The suspension of a turntable seriously affects the sound of LP’s, and a serious isolation table for them is justified. Geoff is again correct (and correct in correcting me!) in the matter of affected frequencies. I used a 5Hz figure for seismic activity only because it is vibrations below that frequency that cannot be provided isolation from except by herculean effort. Spikes and cones are effective down to maybe 10Hz, Sorbothane and Navcom about the same (see the chart on the Townshend Audio site for exact figures). Roller bearing devices provide isolation down to about 5Hz in the horizontal/lateral plane, but coupling (the exact opposite of isolation) in the vertical. Audiophile recording engineer Barry Diament (from whom I learned of the bearings) postulates that vibration travels largely across the surface of the floor (the lateral plane), and roller bearing are very effective at isolation in that plane. But vibrations also travel vertically, and roller bearings act as couplers in that plane. The combination of roller bearings and either metal or air springs (which decouple in the vertical plane, providing isolation) provide isolation in all three axis down to perhaps 3Hz, about as good as you can do outside of the $2000-$3000 Newport and MinusK tables, and the Townshend Seismic Pods at about half that. I’ll let Geoff speak in behalf of his own springs! Barry uses roller bearings of his own design (manufactured locally for him only for his own use, not for sale) under his Maggie 3.7 speakers, and both the bearings and air springs (an under-inflated inner tube between two pieces marble or granite, I believe) under every piece of his recording and playback electronics. |
mapman "It’ll be a cold day in hell that gk succumbs to that appeal to authority deal." 😉 Thus spake the geologist. Who, according to my calculations, has zero to say on the subject. I’m guessing seismology wasn’t his major. Mapman thinks for a minute, then pulls the trigger, "Btw im guessing seismic vibrations/waves to her and geologists in general infer those where the earths plate tectonics are the source. Not including man made sources." That’s fascinating. You thought of that all by yourself? Then, perhaps against his better judgement, Mapman pulls the trigger again, "Just saying. As it relates to hifi what matters mainly is whether the source can be identified and controlled or eliminated if needed. But it can’t hurt to all be speaking the same language." Whatever. 😩 |
It’ll be a cold day in hell that gk succumbs to that appeal to authority deal. 😉 Btw im guessing seismic vibrations/waves to her and geologists in general infer those where the earths plate tectonics are the source. Not including man made sources. Just saying. As it relates to hifi what matters mainly is whether the source can be identified and controlled or eliminated if needed. But it can’t hurt to all be speaking the same language. |
theaudiotweak She received her masters of Geophysical Engineering almost 40 years ago. She has authored and presented 14 papers on different aspects of interpretation and understanding compressional waves to the Society of Exploration Geophysicists (SEG) International meetings, European Association of Exploration Geophysicists (EAEG) meetings, Australian Association of Exploration Geophysicists (ASEG) meetings, SEG Summer Research Workshop and to SEG chapter meetings. Many of these papers were invited and some were awarded best paper. In addition, she taught a three-day course on seismic interpretation requested by the SEG. She has also worked as a Geotechnical Engineer in the housing industry. Recently she discovered the largest ever deposit of helium gas in North America ..well except for you, Your Highness. Have a wonderful day, Tom There’s really no need to call me Your Highness, although it does have a nice ring to it. I guess you might have been taking your nap when I pointed out on this thread much to Mapman’s dismay that trying to win an argument by bringing up credentials is nothing more than everyone’s favorite logical fallacy, the Appeal to Authority. Didn’t you consult with your seismologist that p wave and s waves have nothing at all to do with the Earth crust motion I’ve been referring to? You know, the things you’ve been ranting about incoherently for the past month. LOL The funniest comment today by far, when you quoted fhe seismologist who saw your video of the martini glass with no sloshing around, "That’s what I would expect from your products." Please, spare me! Did you explain to her you’ve been ignoring seismic vibration for thirty years? LOL I've discovered the largest deposit of natural gas in North America. It's right here on this thread! have a nice day |
She received her masters of
Geophysical
Engineering almost 40 years ago. She has authored and presented 14 papers on different aspects of interpretation and understanding compressional waves to the Society of Exploration Geophysicists (SEG) International meetings, European Association of Exploration Geophysicists (EAEG) meetings, Australian Association of Exploration Geophysicists (ASEG) meetings, SEG Summer Research Workshop and to SEG chapter meetings. Many of these papers were invited and some were awarded best paper. In addition, she taught a three-day course on seismic interpretation requested by the SEG. She has also worked as a Geotechnical Engineer in the housing industry. Recently she discovered the largest ever deposit of helium gas in North America ..well except for you, Your Highness.Have a wonderful day, Tom |
The audio tweak, wouldn’t it have been a whole lot easier if she took a plane? Maybe you’re not paying her enough. But it’s none of my business, I know. Besides if she agrees with you you’re in a world of hurt. Did she ignore seismic vibration for 30 years like you guys? I’d scout around for a new seismologist if I were you. Respectfully, Geoff Kait Have a nice day |
A gear. That just shows you how much you know. They're not mattress Springs, they're Springs out of wiley coyote shoes I get off eBay. Since you actually have nothing to contribute to your own thread I'm left with the distinct impression the only thing they taught you at the college at UVa is how to drink. |
Duplicate that experiment with your mattress springs Geoff or have one of your customers chime in (still crickets on that request....) Geoff, you were clearly an English major at whatever community college you went to (one of the swirling, skatty, Jack Kerouac style which does actually require any real learnin'). Wikipedia and Barnes & Nobles don't hand out engineering degrees. No red blooded engineer would be caught dead in bed with Sheldrake unless of course he renounced "science" after a Ayahuasca-fueled vision quest in the Peruvian rain forests..... |
She just...left my house after driving 18 hours for a visit on her way to a week long seminar. I showed her our video on You Tube and she said thats exactly what she expected of our technology. I showed her your responses to the thread..she just laughed as we and most others do. She will be thru again on her way back west so we can then do more analysis of our technology and discuss future applications. Tom.. Star Sound |
Stanwal wrote, "All isolation devices sound different." That’s exactly what I’ve been saying. And there are perfectly good reasons why they all sound different - as I’ve also been saying. The reasons are: Isolation devices vary widely in terms of directions of isolation addressed and resonant frequency of the device, the latter dictating the effectiveness of isolation, as I just got through explaining a couple of posts ago. Also, since seismic noise varies all over the place depending on geographic location, traffic and other factors one cannot really expect any isolation device to work the same everywhere or for every system. This is why I stated early in this thread that measurements for isolation are a bit pointless. Since you cannot generalize results. Furthermore, many devices marketed as isolation devices are actually either coupling devices or resonators. Thus the statement that all isolation devices sound different can actually be viewed as an excellent example of a strawman argument. Finally. Most audiophiles continually change their systems so it's a moving train and no one should expect his sound to remain constant for very long. Thus attempts to compare isolation devices or ANY class of audio device or cable might be fruitless. |
Theaudiotweak, Since you seem to be extremely enamored of the phrase polarities of shear and for some bizarre reason I haven’t figured out yet it probably time that I pointed out that earth crust motion - the seismic wave that travels along the surface of the Earth - has nothing whatsoever to do with polarities of shear or p waves or s waves, all of which are manifestations of vibrations produced deep in the earth, by the body of the earth as it were. If you guys had resisted the urge to defend yourselves and had consulted the seismologist, assuming she hasn't long thrown up her hands in frustration and left for greener pastures or, even better, had gotten her to discuss these technical aspects right here on this thread you wouldn’t seem so uh, clueless. The wave that travels along the surface of the earth has six directions of motion as I’ve already explained. Like your benefactor Micheal Green you guys are still, amazingly, hypnotized by the idea that vibration of any kind can be good for the sound. Whereas you guys and your benefactor wish to allow vibrations to roam free - unrestrained, undamped and unisolated - I say the only good vibration is a dead vibration! |
Not an experiment but reality as conveyed by our products in the video. We don't want a splash as none was desired or reproduced. If the energy was stored you would see ripples and as the energy built up within the confines of the container you would see a splash...there is none because the energy is not stored but is passed thru to ground. Remove the interfering energy and you have greater dynamic contrasts and resolution. Tom.. Star Sound |
The audio weak, Speaker feedback is not a problem only if the audio engineer is smart enough to employ isolation. Otherwise some feedback is inevitable. The video you provided shows how someone can perform the water in the glass experiment incorrectly, although I have to confess I didn’t think that was actually possible. The lemon, ice and stirrer damp the vibrations that might otherwise appear and the glass should be filled to the brim since the ripples appear in the surface of the water. It’s not rocket science. At least you tried. Lol helpful hint: the ripples that appear on the surface are a little subtle, it’s not like water is sloshing around in there although someone might be sloshed. |
We know how to remove interfering energy without removing needed polarties of shear as does your product and like designs. We keep the good because they are required for accurate reproduction. Your designs create a mechanical barrier on which any voice coil loses articulation while trying to overcome your materials of cancelation. Tom. Star Sound |
Oleic hooligans, Good for you! You’re not a troll. Before you get your knickers in a bunch, however, you must have been snoozing when I relented and agreed to let you purchase something. But that was some time ago and my offer has since expired. Here we are back at square 1. In case you hadn’t noticed this thread is actually about the technical end of things, not the sound. Nothing wrong with arguing about sound but it’s subjective. What sounds low in distortion to you most likely sounds rather distorted to me. Not only that but audiophiles have been known to puff up their listening impressions on occasion. I know, say it isn’t so!! |
What you see is what you get..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5hBXr3aJus Observational facts: New York City - a real test and listening environment for seismic activity. “Earth crust motion, other earth vibration, wind, footfall, traffic, subway, ocean wave action, local construction, large fans and speaker feedback” Speaker feedback? (Only if you are a poor sound engineer :) Add to that El trains (but not so much in Manhattan), subterranean city and workers 24-7, rivers, shipping and large engines, cab drivers complaining, aircraft, crowds of humanity singing and dancing, plates, glasses and bottles clattering, live band instruments (acoustic and electronic) and percussion and any other type of noise you can imagine… And the liquid in the glass remains stable, not only stable but there are no discernable opposite reactions of the waves hitting the glass; would not they come back then forth again creating even greater instability of the fluid surface? Still extremely calm with a powerhouse subwoofer system beneath and a 1500 watt satellite system direct coupled to the subwoofer cabinet then add to that another pair of identical cabinets located on stage left and a half dozen floor monitors too! Now that is what I call a full frequency range testing environment. Clearly more energy heading to ground (flooring) versus coming up the chain. Tom. Star Sound. |
I am not a troll,I am a musician and audiophile among many things . There obviously are solutions at various levels or designs to vibration . At 2-3 k per stand under spkr, amp ,pre,tt and digital that is quite expensive to the average joe . I believe this is system related , i have been reading and occasionally commenting since the first comment . I get discouraged by the chastising and belittling of members because they are not smart enough ..there will be different viewpoints , i see this all the time with instruments , there is science yes but there is also sound .. I am well aware of your one unit system gk , not everyone wants a headphone only or a modded walkman . Even if it is the cats meow , which has been debated over and over .. I would be shocked if over half of this thread didn’t say the exact same thing 50 times. Opinions aren’t changing , I said i like Roberts audiopoint they work for me at a somewhat reasonable price considering what they do for my sound.I hated sorbethene it was a no go for my setup . As for your tweeks gk how can anyone even try them when you blacklist any member here to try your "springs" ? Just because a c.a.d machine carves a guitar body does not make it sound better then a handmade martin to me . I respond to final sound, at the price I determine to be acceptable for my situation. Cheers |
Class, come to order! As much as I dislike being contradictory seismic noise actually encompasses all of the various types of very low frequency, low frequency and higher frequency vibration that can be transmitted via the floor or any other building structure. Thus, seismic noise producers include - but are not lmited to - earth crust motion, other earth vibration, wind, footfall, traffic, subway, ocean wave action, local construction, large fans and speaker feedback. Thus, seismic frequencies should be considered to be primarily in the range 0 Hz to 30 Hz but extending also to higher frequencies. Which is why the Townshend isolation data showed 88% and 97% or whatever isolation effectiveness at 20 Hz and higher frequencies like 150 Hz. Hel-loo! |
Seismic simply means very, very low frequencies, like 5Hz down. And it is no boogey man, they are quite real. Ask anyone who has put the Townshend Audio Seismic products (or perhaps Geoff’s springs) under his speakers, turntable, CD player, or tube electronics if they are effective at providing isolation from floor-borne vibrations (which transmit up into a speaker cabinet or an equipment rack, and through a turntable’s suspension, none of which provide isolation at seismic frequencies. That is why the microscope isolation tables selling for $2000-3000 sell as well as they do to those of sufficient means). There are a few here on Audiogon, one in Portland who has invited me over to hear them under his speakers for myself. I already own the older Seismic Platforms (used in conjunction with roller bearings, effective down to around 3Hz), and will be adding Pods shortly. Again, Max Townshend has an excellent video on You Tube in which he explains and demonstrates his Seismic products. It is definitely worth a half hour of one’s time to watch. |
I put mine on woodpecker feather pillows and watch star trek re runs via holographic projection thru a certified crystal ball .. I try it if it works i use it period! Star sound works for me i know that ,is it price no object grounding ? maybe not . I dont have ligo spring money Unfortunately we are unable to try a gk tweek because forum members are undereducated and undeserving of a purchase .. damm |
That’s how I see it too Geoff (your summary on page 10). Approach addressing those low frequency vibrations coming up into the equipment stand, and the components therein, however you choose, but address them you should. What on Earth is there to argue about in regard to that? It is simply, inarguably, fact. IMHO.How so? Which part of the seismic boogie man spectrum are you referring to and why? |
That’s how I see it too Geoff (your summary on page 10). Approach addressing those low frequency vibrations coming up into the equipment stand, and the components therein, however you choose, but address them you should. What on Earth (unintended pun, but apropos ;-) is there to argue about in regard to that? It is simply, inarguably, fact. IMHO. |
Now this is the kind of third party corroboration that makes me sit up and listen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5hBXr3aJus I believe its a well known independent lab in NYC. Live band with 1400 watts across 2 18’s house sound with levels of +104 db.... Look Ma....no springs....just lowly SS stands. |
Mapman stated - "gk your recall and logic are both flawed. You collect your facts selectively and draw conclusions as you see fit. I totally agree with you mapman. He attempts to provide so much information (which is a good thing) but then takes parts of the discussion totally out of context for his own purpose only to argue or belittle his rival. Just one Example of the many: Mr. Kait says - “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. ;-)” His Keywords are WHAT IS NOT MENTIONED IN THE REPORT - But Obviously the Case is.... Mr. Kait is making an argument that has no basis. He is making nothing more than a very large assumption. At the end of the day, the topic in conversation was to provide our opinion on independent third-party testing where this test was not. Therefore the data has no value outside of good marketing. Mr. Kait should have come back when he or they have an actual formal third-party report that doesn't have homemade Microsoft XL graphs and poorly defined language. Then he could claim independent results that carry weight. Mr. Kait says - “http://www.solid-tech.net/products/discs-of-silence-4537455 Finally! Someone was smart enough to copy my original Nimbus Sub Hertz Isolation platform design;” Accusing Solid-Tech of being a copycat is really, really low. Please provide us any Patents or a Trademark on the original design that supports such a statement. Mr. Kait, in my opinion you tend to lower the bar wherever you go even when a mistake is made and apology follows. Example: Mr. Kait hammers back after an apology is made - “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?” Calling anyone a liar is far below that of whale crap, so unless you provide undeniable evidence to back your claim, I suggest you go play daddy on someone else. Mr. Kait, you are stepping on thin ice here, liable for slander and defamation of character. Next time we will defend via other means. I have related to you in comedic fashion on a few posts, feeling the need to 'reply in kind' to your 'observations' on the people posting, our company personnel and myself included (tit for tat) - but leave the audience to determine who the name caller is or better yet, anyone can review any of your historical 4,000+ posts in order to assist with their decision. You have been doing this long before my personal involvement on this forum. In my opinion, if you cannot on occasion take some of your own medicine, you might want to visit someone who can help you become a more positive person. In audio - “product performance” and “value” always trumps the written opinions of anyone, anywhere, anytime and anyplace... including those who personally ridicule or insult others (accidently or directly) on this forum that are seeking personal gain, self or company recognition, self satisfaction or whatever they were never able to accomplish in life (everyone included). Very truly yours, Robert - Star Sound |
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. |
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. |