Do equipment stands have an impact on electronics?

ethan_winer's profane and insulting post was thankfully deleted. It shows there's nothing to be gained by engaging with this guy.

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

I enjoy and admire atma-sphere's intelligent insights when dealing with the village idiot. Maybe Whiner is a good thing after all.

Dave

Well, sorry to be the messenger with the bad news but no one is going to have much luck playing Untreated CDs on untreated CD players, or CD players that aren’t isolated. Without the entire system being tweaked, including the room. That’s pretty much the difference between mid fi and hi end. If you made your bed you’re the one who has to lie in it. Stock CDs on stock CD players all sound thin, compressed, rolled off, bass shy, metallic, two dimensional, amusical, piercing, boring, hollow, thick, like treacle, like papier-mâché mache. If that’s a sound you like, fine. But I don’t have to listen to it.

"An ordinary man has no means of deliverance." - Old audiophile axiom

Are we not men? We are Devo.

Anyone interested in best digital sound in general should forget CD players and start ripping and streaming.    I find things are much more consistent and robust that way.  

If there was some mysterious type of "inharmonic" distortion, other than IMD or jitter or aliasing which are all known and understood, I’d have seen it by now in an FFT. There is no such thing. If you believe otherwise, please post an FFT showing that distortion, and explain how you created it.

Thanks for your explanation. So the specs you quote are from your own measurement?

Inharmonic distortion is a form of IMD, in this case related to the scan frequency. Its called that as the distortions are not related to harmonics of fundamentals, and differs from regular IMD as it can occur with only a single tone being recorded. IME, its most likely to show up on the record side, and can’t be detected with static tones. You have to use an analog sweep generator (using static tones, or tones generated digitally allows the technician to be unaware that there might be a problem). Set to sweep 20-20KHz, record at just below 0VU and in playback, listen for the ’birdies’ (this is radio parlance for subtones and supertones that vary with the changing frequency of the sweep tone; obviously you will want to set the speed of the sweep to a slow rate so its easier to experience the birdies). It might be a record-only artifact; the problem is you have to play back the sound file at some point and I’ve not investigated the issue enough to ascertain how much of a role the playback systems play. This problem seems to have improved over time- it was horrendous only 15 years ago!

First, the makers of "high end" CD players do whatever they think is needed to convince people to pay handsomely for their stuff. That they "isolate" their transports means nothing. They probably claim to use some BS over-designed power supply too. More important, if you believe normal amounts of vibration can affect audio quality, why don’t you test it for yourself? I’ve done that, which is why I know isolation for CD players is BS. It’s not a difficult test! If you design audio gear, surely you have a sine wave generator, a CD burner, and a way to record the player’s output as you shake it around while playing your test tone CD. Or just watch the output on a ’scope as you shake it. Or just listen. Sheesh!

I do design audio gear, but never gotten to the point where I take digital seriously. I show with digital gear at shows of course, but if I have the same track on LP its always a very easy thing to demonstrate how much better the LP sounds than the digital. The worst system we’ve used at shows was a Tascam DV-50; Tascam is a major supplier of CD transports so you would think their machine would be pretty competent, but I found it irritating enough that usually I could not play an entire track with it (and I have found this pretty repeatable with other examples so I know it was not due to a malfunction). By contrast I find the less expensive Oppo players to be more musical.

The way I see it, if digital is working properly you won’t hear any difference from one machine to another, but we hear differences all the time, which says that the digital is falling well short of the ideal.

The most expensive setup we’ve shown with was also the best (although a close runners up is much more affordable!) by a country mile over any setup I’ve heard anywhere (I have customers with the dcs setups, which have been a benchmark in high end for a long time). When the designer was in the room playing a cut, I asked him if he would like to hear the same thing on LP; he said yes and upon hearing the difference, turned to me and said "digital has such a long ways to go". Its that pragmatic approach on his part which I credit for his gear being one of the very best I’ve seen.

Now I should make a distinction here- if the sound file is stored on a hard drive or the like I find it robust. It should not be that when you change a CD transport that the sound should change but it does. That simply says to me that CD playback is variable, and is a proven topic that has endured for decades on the web. In a nutshell, its not robust while hard drive performance is. This is why there are programs like ’CD Paranoia’ (an older bit of software for Linux) because Redbook simply does not allow for complete data recovery.

Its very easy to show that vibration can affect a CD transport. Just tapping some machines can cause the CD to drop out or stop playing altogether! So it would appear that reducing vibration, such as on a platform, could have an effect. Personally I feel that the sooner we get rid of the CD format, the better.

Ralph, I can’t tell if you’re being disingenuous or you really believe what you write. For now I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and address your points. You’re in quotes below, and I’m not:

"When you say ’0.01’ are you referring to THD? When one looks at digital specs, one is lucky to find the distortion spec listed at all; if it is its usually in terms of db and at that also as a composite figure representing THD and noise together (which seems a reasonable way to express the value). However its the inharmonic distortions that are the larger amount of distortion that has shown up in a lot of digital gear over time, but that number is not included in the spec, in fact I don’t see it on websites anywhere."

I was quoting typical specs. When I assess gear I often use the FFT display in Sound Forge because it shows all artifacts. I’ve done this dozens of times, and FFT screens are included in my two AES videos and in my Audio Expert book. If there was some mysterious type of "inharmonic" distortion, other than IMD or jitter or aliasing which are all known and understood, I’d have seen it by now in an FFT. There is no such thing. If you believe otherwise, please post an FFT showing that distortion, and explain how you created it.

The GIF linked below displays a series of FFT screen caps showing the THD and IMD and spectral noise of an original Wave file, a copy played out and back in through a 16 year old Delta 66 sound card, and again out and in through a $25 SoundBlaster X-Fi sound card:

http://www.ethanwiner.com/misc-content/sound_card_distortion_corrected.gif

I generated the source file in Sound Forge, so I imagine it’s as clean as a 16-bit digital source can be. The record level meters said -1 for both sound cards for all frequencies:

20 Hz
1 KHz
10 KHz
19 + 20 KHz

Clearly the Delta 66 is extremely clean even when recorded at -1 dB. This proves beyond all doubt that a halfway decent sound card - even a very old one - does not generate "inharmonic distortions" at a level that’s even audible let alone intrusive. And before you claim that people can hear artifacts that are 110 dB down, this section of my AES Audio myths video plays a pair of recordings made simultaneously through the same $25 SoundBlaster sound card and a very high-end Apogee converter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYTlN6wjcvQ&t=41m15s

Even with the higher level of artifacts in the SB card, the sound quality is still very similar to an expensive converter. And before you accuse YouTube compressed audio of masking the differences, here are the original Wave files:

http://ethanwiner.com/aes/sound_cards1.wav
http://ethanwiner.com/aes/sound_cards2.wav

"Since the collection of data from a CD is an analog process, its reasonable to assume that reducing vibration in the transport will improve data recovery. Its not uncommon to see damping applied to high end CD transports."

Wow, talk about circular logic! First, the makers of "high end" CD players do whatever they think is needed to convince people to pay handsomely for their stuff. That they "isolate" their transports means nothing. They probably claim to use some BS over-designed power supply too. More important, if you believe normal amounts of vibration can affect audio quality, why don’t you test it for yourself? I’ve done that, which is why I know isolation for CD players is BS. It’s not a difficult test! If you design audio gear, surely you have a sine wave generator, a CD burner, and a way to record the player’s output as you shake it around while playing your test tone CD. Or just watch the output on a ’scope as you shake it. Or just listen. Sheesh!

Geofkait alone going on and on and fear mongering about esoteric theoretical things does not make them a big deal. Just because something can happen does not mean it will. He needs some disciples to help spread his gospel. Also maybe do something besides talk and repackage others stuff to try to sell here.

Not impressed with Ethan’s attitude methods conclusions or approach either.

Guess that leaves us where? No better or worse off than when we started.

At least Atmasphere, though operating on/offering a different paradigm than most, presents useful information in a reasonable manner with no condescending attitude normally so people can decide and digest on their own to what extent it really matters to them. Plus he has years of experience actually testing out and making things that clearly back up what he says whereas Ethan is still measuring away trying to figure out how things really work and seems bent on convincing others that he has figured it all out better than all the rest already somehow. He too could use a few disciples to help spread the gospel. Atmasphere has plenty of those.

"accuse of having an agenda." Truth can hurt.

"A common example is the capacitor placed on the reference input to an ADC. The circuit may work fine in the lab, where it isn’t being shaken vigorously. Once it is installed in an environment with vibration, significant errors in the ADC readings might appear. Power supply designers are also aware of the converse piezoelectric effect, where the ripple voltage across the capacitor causes it to “sing” or vibrate."

You owe atmasphere $100, Ethan. Pay up or shut up.

Dave

Obviously its not a big deal.  if it were it would have been made apparent by now.

They cannot answer the question, They never will be able to answer the question. All they can do is insult us, and call us names, and accuse of having an agenda. But the one thing that would put us in our place, and shut us up for good, is forever beyond their grasp. :->)

The original intention of this thread was to troll. This thread was started by the OP immediately following the removal of a previous very similar thread by the moderators. I’m not wishing to judge things too harshly but it appears the troll was successful. 😀

The original troll: "Mechanical grounding or isolation from vibration has been a hot topic as of late.....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?" Geez, give me a break!

No, the intention was to resurrect a previous thread that was cannonballed by trolls.  It seems as if history may repeat itself.  Now, answer the question if you can.....

illuminator
Geoff,

I thought that you’d gotten it. I just couldn’t understand why you went along and added fuel to the fire instead of just letting it die out like it probably should have.

I appreciate a good troll as much as the next guy. A good troll is indistinguishable from magic. 😀

The secret is in the experiment of suspending cables I mentioned earlier. If the sound improves by suspending or otherwise isolating cables there’s a pretty good chance that the reduction of vibration is the reason. If that’s true cables and wiring everywhere should be considered at risk. It’s Logic 101. All internal wiring of tube and solid state electronics, internal speaker wiring, wires inside tubes, wires inside capacitors, wires inside transformers, to name a few. This is not to say that static electric fields on carpets and wood are not an issue as well.

Competent digital converters (ie: CD quality at 16/44) have typical distortion less than 0.01 percent at all audible frequencies right up to the point of hard clipping. I'll be glad to see your real world distortion numbers for sine waves on an LP played back at typical levels. Use the best test tone LP you can find, with the finest turntable and cartridge you can get your hands on, and have Michael Fremer align it if you'd like. :->) I imagine that best case it's at least 100 times worse than the distortion of CDs but, as always, I'm willing to change my opinion as soon as you or someone else shows actual evidence. So whatcha got?

When you say "0.01" are you referring to THD? When one looks at digital specs, one is lucky to find the distortion spec listed at all; if it is its usually in terms of db and at that also as a composite figure representing THD and noise together (which seems a reasonable way to express the value). However its the inharmonic distortions that are the larger amount of distortion that has shown up in a lot of digital gear over time, but that number is not included in the spec, in fact I don't see it on websites anywhere. The industry as a whole seems reluctant to produce specs on it, but especially in the old days it was the primary distortion component by a large margin. This to me is one of the annoying things about the industry; many of the specs are made for marketing purposes.

So until we can get a handle on that I don't think we can pass judgment one way or the other.

So it's disingenuous to pick on that one situation when it's clear that the real BS is selling "isolation products" for use under wires and CD players etc.

Since the collection of data from a CD is an analog process, its reasonable to assume that reducing vibration in the transport will improve data recovery. Its not uncommon to see damping applied to high end CD transports. I for one am happy to see other codices supplant the CD.  

I've seen situations where cables have been microphonic (for lack of a better word). I've seen microphone cables 'squeak' when disturbed (although depending on the cable that can vary by quite a lot) and I've seen longer interconnects between an amp and preamp do the same thing (although to a far lessor degree). I personally feel when a cable imparts an artifact like that when moved that maybe one might want to find a different cable, but I can imagine others using little stands and the like.

I put myself through college and the like by servicing consumer gear. I have seen microphonic transistors and ICs (that simply had to be replaced). Semiconductors are not entirely immune to vibration, but I expect that the equipment under test would have to be mounted on a shaker table to see anything significant.

However, some types of capacitors are much more susceptible, and these types are found in both tube and solid state equipment. In addition to the ceramic devices in the article link below, silver mica, tantalum and mylar can be added to the list although they don't react as much as the common disk cap. Its a short article, and may explain why the conversation continues with the equipment stands, even though tubes and turntables are not involved (BTW this was a first hit on Google...).

https://e2e.ti.com/blogs_/b/precisionhub/archive/2014/12/19/stress-induced-outbursts-microphonics-in...

ethan_winer
Geoff Kait said, "every environment is different and vibration sources and amplitudes and frequencies vary all over the place. Thus, any attempt to explapolate the measured performance of an isolation device’s effect on the audio signal and say this is what you will experience in your system is naive."

LOL, dude, I’ll be glad to see your one lone example where isolation makes a difference. Just one. But as I already said, it’s clear you don’t have a clue how to even measure this stuff. Do you not see how foolish you look? Even the other believers in this thread are laughing at you.

Nathan, Don’t you think I know you’re a loudmouthed and naive troll? Albeit a not overly swift one. I see through you like you were made of glass.

Geoff Kait said, "every environment is different and vibration sources and amplitudes and frequencies vary all over the place. Thus, any attempt to explapolate the measured performance of an isolation device's effect on the audio signal and say this is what you will experience in your system is naive."

LOL, dude, I'll be glad to see your one lone example where isolation makes a difference. Just one. But as I already said, it's clear you don't have a clue how to even measure this stuff. Do you not see how foolish you look? Even the other believers in this thread are laughing at you.

Looking back I'm not sure it was in this discussion that I excluded turntables from audio gear that doesn't benefit from isolation. I usually mention that. Of course, it's incredibly obvious that record players will skip if you stomp around. So it's disingenuous to pick on that one situation when it's clear that the real BS is selling "isolation products" for use under wires and CD players etc.

illuminator
I agree with NoNoise. I find it interesting that the original intention of this thread doesn’t seem to have been uncovered in these past two and a half months.

That’s not very illuminating. The original intention of this thread was to troll. This thread was started by the OP immediately following the removal of a previous very similar thread by the moderators. I’m not wishing to judge things too harshly but it appears the troll was successful. 😀

The original troll: "Mechanical grounding or isolation from vibration has been a hot topic as of late.....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?"  Geez, give me a break!

I agree with NoNoise. I find it interesting that the original intention of this thread doesn’t seem to have been uncovered in these past two and a half months.

mapman
Clearly and practically vibrations are worth some concern when dealing with mechanical transducers like phono carts and speakers. Also with devices like tubes that can clearly be micro phonic. Inherently less so if at all with most ss components. I would even entertain that vibration could negatively affect a cd optical drives ability to function optimally to some extent. Thats pretty much it. Amazing such a long thread full of mostly showboating and not able to constructively focus or agree on anything.

Speaking as someone with as much experience with vibration as anyone and a lot more than most, and having supported (no pun intended) some of the most important and famous rooms at CES, there is actually is not much that won’t benefit from vibration isolation. To name a few things: solid state amps, printed circuit boards, power line conditioners, DACs, CD players, subwoofers, big heavy turntables the ones with 50 lb platters, power line purifiers such as Quantum Corp. stuff, speaker crossover networks, cables and power cords and of course tube electronics and speakers. Oh, almost forgot, tube and solid state power supplies.

No offense Mapman, but you’re out ranked. 😄

And you don't have to be rich as Croesus anymore. If you’re a clever monkey you can isolate everything in the whole damn room for a hundred or two hundred bucks. I’m not hot doggin ya.

 
wolf_garcia
"I find that the tubes in my guitar amps can only be isolated from vibration by not using them. They might still suffer some vibration from seismic sources, or from people walking around them…the doorbell (rare)…but the only real way to preserve tonality is to embrace tonelessness, and hey…nothing wrong with quiet!"

just a suggestion but have you tried holding them in your teeth? 

I find that the tubes in my guitar amps can only be isolated from vibration by not using them. They might still suffer some vibration from seismic sources, or from people walking around them…the doorbell (rare)…but the only real way to preserve tonality is to embrace tonelessness, and hey…nothing wrong with quiet!

Shake, rattle and troll.

Everyone should just agree to disagree and move on. This thread has more legs than a centipede. 

Clearly and practically vibrations are worth some concern when dealing with mechanical transducers like phono carts and speakers. Also with devices like tubes that can clearly be micro phonic. Inherently less so if at all with most ss components. I would even entertain that vibration could negatively affect a cd optical drives ability to function optimally to some extent. Thats pretty much it. Amazing such a long thread full of mostly showboating and not able to constructively focus or agree on anything.  

 
ethan_winer
Geoff posted a link that shows how to measure vibration, but it doesn't show how to measure the affects of vibration on audio as I requested. So yet again Geoff has failed.

every environment is different and vibration sources and amplitudes and frequencies vary all over the place. Thus, any attempt to explapolate the measured performance of an isolation device's effect on the audio signal and say this is what you will experience in your system is naive. On the other hand you naysayers do come across as quite naive sometimes. 

Ralph, I've been in this thread for only the last few pages, so you should have seen my qualifier about vibration that I'm specifically not talking about turntables. Yes, obviously vibration when cutting a record, or playing it back later, will affect the sound. I think I also mentioned that tubes can be microphonic, so there too vibration can possibly affect the audio. I'm sure you know that I'm talking about wires and solid state gear, and all the other silly "vibration" products believers waste their money on.

As for LP distortion, just because cutter heads are powered by large amps has nothing to do with the amount of distortion throughout the entire signal chain. Competent digital converters (ie: CD quality at 16/44) have typical distortion less than 0.01 percent at all audible frequencies right up to the point of hard clipping. I'll be glad to see your real world distortion numbers for sine waves on an LP played back at typical levels. Use the best test tone LP you can find, with the finest turntable and cartridge you can get your hands on, and have Michael Fremer align it if you'd like. :->) I imagine that best case it's at least 100 times worse than the distortion of CDs but, as always, I'm willing to change my opinion as soon as you or someone else shows actual evidence. So whatcha got?

Geoff posted a link that shows how to measure vibration, but it doesn't show how to measure the affects of vibration on audio as I requested. So yet again Geoff has failed.

Theaudiotweak

Geoff

You neglected to add your personal tests and measurement results to the documents you supplied a link for. Maybe you felt your results were irrelevant or inconclusive. Tom

I didn’t neglect it. It’s not up to me to test anything for any other purposes than my own. It’s up to a third party to verify and validate claims or whatever and publish data. Didn’t you know that? I feel that your refusal to stop ignoring the evidence that vibration isolation is effective for improving audio system performance is irrelevant.

Geoff 

You neglected to add your personal tests and measurement results to the documents you supplied a link for. Maybe you felt your results were  irrelevant or inconclusive. Tom

$100 says none of these believers will ever post a measurement or other proof showing the affects of vibration.

I've posted this before Ethan, but this is a long thread and I don't blame you for not wanting to wade through it.

I own a Scully LP mastering lathe equipped with a Westerex 3D cutter. The lathe itself has 3 feet which are carefully machined stainless adjustable points. They rest in turn on an anti-vibration platform in machined cradles; the platform in turn employs softer feet and rests on top of a table built for the lathe and platform. The table also employs pointed adjustable feet just as the lathe itself does.

Clearly this is an attempt on the part of Scully to control vibration issues and for obvious reasons. It has to be able to make a silent cut on the lacquers it cuts. You might be interested to know that its quite good at that- a lacquer cut on the lathe is so quiet that no matter what your playback electronics, they are the noise floor and not the groove itself. That puts the groove noise easily at about -95db. Obviously things are different when the actual LP is produced! Apparently the pro audio industry recognized the possibility that vibration could be a problem and dealt with it in many of the same ways that audiophiles are using today. My lathe was made about 1950 or a little earlier, so these techniques you might say are 'time honored'.

(as a side note, Acoustic Sounds (Salinas, KS) recognized that vibration was playing a role in the surface noise of the LPs they were producing in their QRP (Quality Record Pressings) facility and so modified their pressing machines to not vibrate whilst the LP was cooling within during the pressing process. We've done a couple of projects through them and the noise floor is impressive- very nearly that of the lathe cuts themselves.)

A further example might be an Ampex 351 tape electronics chassis, which incorporates isomeric isolation on each of its circuit boards. Clearly Ampex engineers were concerned about the effects of vibration as well.

The Marantz 7C preamp employs an isomeric isolation technique on the subchassis of the preamp. This is clearly done to reduce vibration sensitivity.

We use isomerics to isolate our circuit boards in two of our preamps as well as intentionally dissimilar resonances in the various parts of the chassis which cause the chassis to be quite dead but I am assuming they don't count in your challenge. 

A further example of vibration awareness in the industry is demonstrated by Technics in their SL1200G turntable which is not a reissue of their older SL1200 although it looks like it at first blush. But in closer examination, it is seen that the turntable employs 4 different methods of reducing the effects of vibration including damping the platter itself.

These five example easily show that vibration has an effect and are the proof you are asking for.  I nor anyone on this thread is expecting that you will actually come through with the $100 but if you are your word then I am easily enough contacted. Of course, an out for you is that I'm not a 'believer' so much as a 'knower' and there is a profound difference! Your quote does refer to believers so I am probably disqualified.

Incidentally it appears that your comment about LPs is misleading; the distortion LPs convey is much lower than you seem to realize. For example, the cutter amplifiers used to drive a cutter head usually are spec'ed to make about 10x the power needed to completely fry the cutter head itself (obviously this means that the mastering engineer has to be quite careful as the cutter head is thus very easily toasted). In essence, the cutter amps are/were loafing in order to make any cut ever put on a stereo LP. The problem with LPs is not built-in to the LP itself as it is the often poor setup that occurs in playback (which is not the fault of the LP) and also the much higher distortion that occurs if analog tape is in the equation. So I am making a distinction between the capabilities of LP as opposed to the tapes that are often used in making them.

How to measure the effects of vibration on the audio signal, for the newcomer. By "newcomer" one assumes they’re referring to folks like Ethan, Agear and Tom, not to mention Wolfie.

https://www.bksv.com/media/doc/br0094.pdf

agear wrote: "Now, back to the matter of how modulation of vibration effects all things electrical....anyone?"

LOL, I asked that a few times too. Crickets. These people have NO CLUE how audio works, or how vibration might affect sound, or how to even assess or measure the effects of vibration. Yet they go on forever about audio unicorns while ignoring the very real elephant in the room (acoustics), and to a lesser extent the distortion in their LP records and loudspeakers.

$100 says none of these believers will ever post a measurement or other proof showing the affects of vibration.

Geoff 

You should call Robert and request an auditon of a platform suitable in size to place under your Walkman. Some years ago we made a very effective and amazing demo when a platform was placed under a boom box for a group of listeners at a local audio store. Instant improvement even under plastic. Tom

theaudiotweak
Geoff,

I want to thank you for posting all my statements and those of others a second time for all to see. Tom

Tom, you’re welcome. I trust others can learn from your mistakes and confusion.

Geoff

Geoff,

I want to thank you for posting all my statements and those of others a second time for all to see.  Tom

theaudiotweak
Is the phase lag of the system also irrelevant as when the force is applied or removed and the system responds in kind? Tom

This conversation can no longer serve any purpose. Good luck with your online scientific journal/manual/whatever.

Is the phase lag of the system also irrelevant as when the force is applied or removed and the system responds in kind? Tom 

12-18-2016 9:49pm
But Geoff you said and the engineering manual confirmed springs do have a natural resonant frequency. Just wanted to confirm your statement as written in the journal. Tom

Tom, I said the springs have a spring rate. You said they have a natural frequency. The natural frequency of the spring is irrelevant. Besides, the spring itself is not really free to resonate, it's under compression.

But Geoff you said and the engineering manual confirmed springs do have a natural resonant frequency. Just wanted to confirm your statement as written in the journal. And you cowboy speak with a forked tongue. Tom

theaudiotweak
1,455 posts
12-18-2016 8:48pm
That differs from what I just read in an online engineering journal saying a spring does have a natural resonant frequency. Everything has a natural resonance. Tom

As as I already said you cannot take the spring in isolation, as it were, it is the mass on spring together, forming a system, that is what matters. Therefore, it’s the resonant frequency of the isolation SYSTEM that determines its isolation effectiveness, not the natural frequency of the spring. And the natural frequency of the system is a function of both the spring rate of the springs and the total mass on the springs. You are one mixed up cowboy.

That differs from what I just read in an online engineering journal saying a spring does have a natural resonant frequency. Everything has a natural resonance. Tom

theaudiotweak
A spring will move above and below its resonant frequency.

Springs don’t have a natural frequency. They have spring rates. The device as a whole has a natural frequency. The frequency at which it moves. The more springs the higher the Fn. When you force a device to oscillate it oscillates at one frequency only. See if you can guess what frequency that is. Answer at 11.

Note to self: this is like shooting fish in a barrel.

A spring will move above and below its resonant frequency. Tom

theaudiotweak
IGNORE is to be ignorant, duh! Cheers..Tom

one assumes you're looking in the mirror. 

Have a a nice day 

IGNORE is to be ignorant, duh!  Cheers..Tom

theaudiotweak

"Geoff,
Those springs help develop and help retain shear wave interference."

No they don’t. The combination of mass and springs attenuates the structural vibration, ALL structural vibration, whatever its source. Vibrations that reside on the top plate or anywhere in the device can be dealt with by any number of means, as well they should.

Then Theaudiotweak wrote,
"The fact that a moving coil sits atop a moving object (your perpetual motion machine at least in motion while you are trying to listen to music in accurate formation and time) I guess you could move your head in the opposite direction in hopes of keeping perfect time and speed ..kinda like a woodpecker..He’s got it going....some Doppler distortion as well."

The motion of a spring based isolation device is minuscule compared to any motion of the voice coil or the speaker cabinet. You can therefore IGNORE the motion of the isolation device. In fact, there isn’t any motion you can detect visually, duh! The motion is damped by the inherent or intentional internal damping if the device. It’s probably, what, maybe a thousandth of an inch. Besides, the isolation device can only move with only ONE FREQUENCY - it’s resonant frequency. Hel-loo! There is not MORE distortion. There’s LESS. There’s less distortion because you’ve reduced the amount of seismic vibration getting up into the speaker or whatever. Of course for speakers the added BONUS is that the mechanical feedback of the speaker to the electronics and cables is reduced. You know, by decoupling them. Thus, LESS DISTORTION.