Scary how few audiophiles can arrive at correct conclusions regarding such things. The improvement is not due to vibration control, but to physically elevating the speaker. The speaker will sound far better with raised soundstage. Just one reason why smallish speakers are inferior. Tweak, tuning sellers certainly have your number, and the isolation authorities show their ignorance. :)
If people are so easily led to false conclusions on this, it's no wonder they pursue insipid methods of system building. |
I will be putting isolation products to the test in my room (again, as I have several times in the past, every time proving insipid/marginal) when I receive the anticipated amps that will be under review. They will be both new. One will be "burned in" by myself while the other will be new. One will have proper stand while the other will sit on a plywood plank on the carpet, one will have isolation devices underneath while the other will sit on its stock feet. I'm not going to proclaim what will happen, I will compare them.
This is just an example of the type of comparisons I run with gear. The last time I conducted such a comparison was between three different elements of an audio system, and that article, "Audiophile Law: Thou Shalt Not Overemphasize Burn In", can be seen at Dagogo.com. Oh, the accolades over burn in! Oh, how necessary, and how one can't possibly be serious if they don't burn in gear... Blah, blah, blah. I actually do comparisons regularly.
You think I haven't put such things to the test? My Vapor Audio Joule White speakers came with two sized spikes, and of differing materials. The larger spikes were a PITA to move the speaker around. I removed them and tried rubber hockey pucks. Yes, hockey pucks; no appreciable difference in sound quality. Why? because the speakers remained at the same height. Later, I put the speakers on casters due to ease of moving in and out of the room. Nice bump in performance from el cheapo casters! Immediately noticeable. If I were a sensationalist I would say it made them sound like speakers twice as expensive! The improvement was obvious, but not due to vibration control, but due to elevation of the speaker. Also, a nice bump in performance by putting some lifts in the back of the top module, thus changing the relative position of the baffles for mid/treble relative to bass. Were these astounding, amazing changes? No. People who make claims like that have no concept of the spectrum of performance and how little such things contribute.
I have better time to spend and better places to spend my money on audio than pucks and spikes. The real gains for audio are in the systems that are built, not the doodads that you stick around the room or underneath components or speakers. Note that I am not discussing analogue here, as I only use digital source. If you feel my methods as a reviewer are not good enough, so be it. There are plenty of other reviewers who will spend inordinate time on these things. Imo, they are getting you to waste your time and money versus spending it on superior methods of system building.
But, as I said, this all will be compared once again, even though I have done so several times in the past with assorted isolation devices.
Final thought; it's such a shame that as prestigious a speaker company as Tannoy can't get it right with their footers. Shame, shame. The world will be so happy to hear that you can get a speaker to sound like 2x the price by putting X brand isolation device under it!
I'm not interested in marginal improvements to audio systems. I spend time on things that vastly advance audio systems. I am also not interested in ranging argument about picking out phrases of my discussion to debate. You either agree or disagree, so be it. :)
|
BTW, I attempt to remain open to the results and change my opinion if merited. For a long time I had concluded that bi-wiring of speakers was universally superior. Recently, I had a case, the first and only to date, where the high quality jumpers with single wiring was superior. So, I had to backtrack on that.
I am willing to revise, say a "mea culpa" if necessary. But, if it happens, it will be due to comparison between the two states I mentioned, not audiophile social pressure. :)
|
roxy54, as said previously, I am not debating my observations.
Addendum to previous post: In addition to the above future comparison I will conduct, I will also have one amp warmed up vs. the other cold, and one amp will have cables that are "settled", vs. the other which will have them disturbed by removing them and placing them back on again prior to comparison.
All of these have been claimed by some to be powerful causes of change in systems. What would it mean if they were grouped, supposedly inducing a high degree of change, and there was no distinction between the two setups? I like approaching such topics with a means to make a clear determination of whether an activity/method is worth investing time and money.
As I have already demonstrated in my former article that paying attention to burn in for SS electronics is not productive, this article will focus on support and isolation, and will retest the burn in results as well. The following will be compared:
Plywood plank on floor vs. amp stand
Isolation devices underneath vs. none
"Settled" cables vs. cables removed and reattached
Cable risers for speaker cables vs. none
Burned in amp vs. new
Weight atop amp vs. none
Warmed up amp vs. cold start
Surely, since these are all accepted as inducements to change in audio systems, the difference between the two setups should theoretically be profound! Comparison will tell. What might some of the implications be if all these inducements to change were found to be insipid? Might it influence a persons' perspective in regard to their use? OTOH, if there was a significant/easily audible change, what cause it and why? Further comparisons in isolation would be warranted.
I take the time to do such comparisons, as it cuts through a lot of fog in terms of what is efficacious in system building. My apologies for sounding pompous. Surely we are not all so gullible as to think that a speaker system will attain even a 1-2% holistic improvement in performance by elevating it on a puck or spike. Would anyone care to measure said speaker with/without stands and see if there is ANY measurable difference in performance?
There is a tremendous amount of murky, nebulous, unsubstantiated fact in audiophilia. Stands and isolation devices are treated similarly to platter material, tone arm material, etc. It's all anecdotal. Big changes, huge difference, monumental... How about some comparisons side by side? Not gonna happen in most cases. Well, I do comparisons, so I have a pretty strong opinion. :)
|
I spent years working on lower cost methods, passive devices with floor stander and stand mount speakers. IMO insipid in comparison with building systems. Elevating systems makes the other activities a poor return for my time.
Jim's book is ok, but underrates importance of quality of gear. Setup can't fix mediocre gear. You can't reach upper level sound by tuning and tweaking average gear. Anyone disagree? I'm not too bothered by that. :)
Suppose a speaker comes in. Do I spend time on spikes vs. Stand or build another system. Maybe you spend time on stand, but i build another system. I am a system Builder, not a tweaker. Disagree? Great, go at it your way.
Revolution going on in digital, and a new DAC under assessment, and I'm going to spend time on a stand? I'll let someone else do that.
Anyway, I think I'm done with this discussion. Blessings to all and happy listening.
|
Correct use of the word which expresses my displeasure with such methods failing my Law of Efficacy.
If I wished to express that I thought there was no benefit to stands I would have chosen a word such as ineffectual. My point is not that such devices do nothing, but that they do nothing much that could be accomplished more economically, and do not much compared to working within the power and signal paths.
|
Robert, thank you for your polite, well reasoned response. I will be in touch to discuss your most polite proposal.
|
roxy54, thank you for the polite comment. I attempt to remain open to additional testing/comparing over the years, and this has turned into an opportunity to demonstrate it. Technology, products, etc. change over time, so a conclusion held perhaps 5 years ago may be influenced by a new tech or product. I found Robert’s message here compelling, a beautiful invitation to put my current conclusions to the test. I left a phone message for him today, so we have not made any formal arrangements yet, but does seem to be moving in that direction, however.
I should state for the record here that if I do a review of Star Sound products, I likely will "go dark" here on the topic. I do not discuss publicly to any appreciable degree reviews that are underway. Often no one knows of them until they are published. Recently I mentioned the Pass Labs XA200.8 review prior to publication, but that’s rare. I would not wish to influence the review with side conversations; I would think this to be appropriate and understandable. So, if I were to drop participation here, it would be for that reason.
There have been other surprises before in this hobby, and I’m sure there will be in the future. In fact, one current shocker is the DAC I am now reviewing. It’s using ESS chips, but I have never built a digital-sourced system as erudite coming from a DAC with ESS chips. So, things, and perspectives, change - again, with the march of technological advancement. It is one advantage of my reviewing style, wherein I build many systems for assessment. It gives me more broad exposure to systems and situations of synergy between components, cables and speakers. The resolution of the system in this state is exquisite. In addition, the room has an ambient noise level of about 14-16dB (I remember one dB meter showing that is in the range of a ticking watch, higher than a leaf falling at 10dB) - well below the average quiet room in a house. So, if there is any change to be heard in a system, I will hear it. :)
|
