Grimm MU1 Streamer - Really "The Best"?

Awesome, thank you @svenjosh !  I see that you as well were unsuccessful in securing a Jorma cable this side of the Atlantic.  I even tried contacting UK dealers and distributors, and Jorma directly.  They don’t seem to care about selling their products in North America.

@nyev I have shared my impressions on the AES cables.

 Here you go https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/aes-ebu-cable-shootout

@lalitk +1 Cannot agree more

Further to @arafiq post…those contributing here from their direct experience often ignore (conveniently) a fact that every system is unique just as our individual preferences. There are no absolutes in audio..nuff said! 

I will quickly reply to melm's previous post and then shut up about DACs .. I promise :)

To begin with, I want to emphasize that I'm in no way questioning the integrity of the gentleman who compared Musetec to Tambaqui, or the veracity of his claims. The point I was making was that if a party has any financial stake in writing about or promoting a product, it needs to be disclosed -- even post-facto.

I know a number of dealers who picked up new product lines because they were impressed with the products they heard. So when they promote a product in these forums, it's relatively easy to trust their judgement. But still it's good practice to state your affiliation (and most do) when promoting or comparing a product. Ok, no more DAC posts fro me from this point onwards :)

@lordmelton thanks for the suggestion.  I will try to get around to that and definitely still have an interest in the Musetec.  

@nyev I would strongly suggest you try the Musetec 005, if just to compare what a chip DAC can do against an R2R DAC.

I believe that your preference is for a brighter, more revealing sound and the Musetec will give you that in spades, notwithstanding the subtleties that it’s capable of.

I’ve compared the Musetec to many famous DACs and it’s never been outclassed.

A Musetec with an AQ Dragon Cable makes a very formidable opponent.

NB USB is it’s favoured input and it needs a long burn in time.

@svenjosh , back to you a more interesting topic, for me at least, how is your digital AES cable shootout with your MU1 going?  Can you share details of how the Sablon cable compares and contrasts with the Shunyata Omega?  Really looking forward to your thoughts on that :)

“This is a great thread, let’s keep it focused on the Grimm and not DAC talk, which for whatever reason gets people overly worked up.”

@metaldetektor , agreed, there are lots of DAC war/opinion threads already and I didn’t intend to steer the discussion that way! I only mentioned as I did consider the Musetec before jumping directly to the Tambaqui as part of the journey I’ve described in this thread.  The thing I can say conclusively is that the Tambaqui bests my Gryphon Diablo DAC module in terms of resolution and focus, albeit at a much higher price point.  For the money, the Diablo DAC module is a warm, inviting, lively and engaging DAC with a fuller low frequency tonal balance than the Tambaqui.  Still a great option for the cost, but the Tambaqui goes further which is not a surprise!

I used the Musetec 005 with a fibre stream from both the Lumin X1 (USB out) and Sonore OpticalRendu. Both are excellent streamers and likely hard to beat.

I found the Lumin X1 as a DAC a tiny bit better than the Musetec. When I say better, I have a preference for a less smooth or tubey sound. The Musetec is just a bit warmer and smoother than the Lumin X1. This sound signature of the Mustec is likely what the designer was trying to achieve.

A shame I sold the Musetec 005 but I need the cash to buy the X1. One thing that may get be back to a Musetec 005 is that I want to buy a SACD transport and I think the I2S input on the Musetec can take DSD as input (not sure yet).

The guy that sold me the X1 bought a Tambaqui. All a matter of preference and I cannot say one is better. For example, my Benchmark DAC3B which I consider my worst 2-channel DAC is actually my favorite on my tube headphone amp.

The [insert the name of the DAC you own and favor] (“Your Amazing DAC”) is a marvel of impeccable engineering, parts quality, and price-to-quality ratio. Your Amazing DAC slays better known DACs in head to head comparisons with one channel tied behind its back, at a fraction of the cost. Most audiophiles are not well-informed enough, or are too trusting of professional reviewers, to appreciate the quality of Your Amazing DAC, and that is their loss. Anyone who spends less than the cost of Your Amazing DAC doesn’t know what they’re missing, and anyone who spends more has more money than sense.

This is a great thread, let’s keep it focused on the Grimm and not DAC talk, which for whatever reason gets people overly worked up. 

@melm , just to emphasize what I said, it is simply a hypothesis that those comparing the Tambaqui to the Musetec are feeding it with a more basic source resulting in the Tambaqui being more revealing of system flaws.  It was more of a “what-if” scenario based on what I saw people feeding the Tambaqui in the comparison with Musetec.

I don’t doubt that people in general are feeding their Musetecs with high quality sources and I’m open to the possibility that the Musetec is truly better than the Tambaqui as well.

The individual being referenced as preferring the Musetec over the Tambaqui had a basic streamer listed as the source where he was posting the outcome of his comparison on Head-Fi on the Tambaqui thread (his system was listed in his signature).  Apologies in advance of I’ve misinterpreted something but I see the Lumin U2 Mini listed as the source, which is certainly not a poor source, but maybe not at the level of a MU1.  It would be good to see a comparison of the Tambaqui vs the Mustec with a MU1 level player or higher as the source.

To be clear, I have no conclusions formed (that would be silly as I haven’t heard the Musetec), just mere speculation based on the circumstances of the comparisons.  Based on what many say I’m sure the Musetec is an awesome DAC and perhaps the best value out there when it comes to DACs.  And yes the internals look incredible; very clean like the Holo May.  I just wouldn’t form any conclusions until we see more comparisons with the Tambaqui with higher end / premium sources.  If you can show me some I will stand corrected; I may have simply not come across them! :)

@arafiq 

In the interest of completeness, "the guy" wrote of the comparison months before over at head-fi, well before he became a "distributor" for which he has never done advertising.  Also, the pittance one can make being a distributor for Musetec in the UK is not going to affect the opinion of one who has a reputation to uphold for his primary business that focuses on the integrity of the incoming digital audio stream, at least IMO.

In the interest of transparency, the guy who compared the Musetec with Tambaqui became a distributor for Musetec right around the time he shared his thoughts on these two dacs. Of course this doesn't necessarily mean his comparison is biased, but it is an important data point that must be taken into account when citing the example.

As for the comparison between Grimm and Gustard R26, I'm currently comparing the R26 to Pontus II at this very moment. Is the R26 streamer function as good as Grimm? Based on what I'm hearing, no ... not even close. I think the R26 streamer (not the DAC) plays at the level of Node 2i or many other sub $700 streamers in the market, but it will not outperform higher end streamers. My take on the R26 is that the value it provides is in the DAC section, which is actually very very good. But the streamer functionality is more of a convenience feature and not a serious attempt to become a giant killer. Compared to Innuos Zenith MK3 (which I recently sold) and Aavik S-280 (currently in my main system), the audible difference between R26 and these two are readily apparent. 

@nyev

My friend, on the internet anyone can say anything. But you are dead wrong about what Musetec users are feeding it with. Take the one example you cite, that of a comparison with the Tambaqui. That comparison was made here on the Musetec thread. The writer is a principal of Network Acoustics manufacturing sophisticated ethernet filters. The DAC he chooses is used for testing as well as pleasure. He has tested every variety of front end on his DACs.

I know that with 1475 posts it’s hard to figure out what streaming sources are being used by each poster, but if you ask, I’m sure they’ll let you know. There are some very high end sources being used because the DAC is worthy of them.

The DAC is considered cheap by some standards. But look at it very closely; it is not cheaply made.

@nyev I don’t have a problem with a lower price component sounding better but the poster claims he has not even listened to it and is making comparisons between unheard stuff. 

Once in a blue moon a low cost product seems to rival far more expensive ones.  I had considered trying out the inexpensive Musetec DAC that many say beats much more expensive DACs, including some who say it beats the Tambaqui at a fraction of the cost.  Seems to be a lot of people who love that DAC.  The thing that made me not include the Mustec in my journey was the fact that in every instance where people claimed it beat the Tambaqui or similar more expensive DACs, the poster was feeding the DAC with a very basic and inexpensive streaming source.  My hypothesis is that the better DACs were simply better at exposing flaws of the source and therefore people concluded the cheaper DAC was best.  I’m not saying that’s what happened, it’s just a hypothesis as I said, given that I couldn’t seem to find one of these comparisons where a higher end source was used.  HiFi can be misleading like that, it’s even happed to me in this thread were I’ve attributed sonic qualities to one component only to find later that it was a different component responsible for the sonic trait.

I am not sure if the above post is Sarcasm, Joke or for real….

I haven’t read this all the way through - but maybe try a Gustard R26 Streamer / DAC combo - reviews on it are stunning especially by dacman.

I haven’t heard the R26 but I have heard the MU1 - the MU1 made my low cost Metrum Octave DAC sound far better than it should have done.

However I get the impression the R26 for a quarter the price of the MU1 may provide stiff competition.

You could also consider the dCS Bartok Apex streamer / DAC - however - again - the R26 even in this company should not be sniffed at I feel.

+1 @woots I went from Nucleus+ (with a HDPEX), Auralic Aries G2.1 (with a Sean Jacobs Power supply) to the Grimm mu1.  So that is 4 boxes down to one!  To me the Grimm sounds better and so far has run Roon core without issue.  I have 4 endpoints total.  When Grimm upgrades their software later this year (I am told), then the mu1 can be Core like now or an Certified Roon endpoint alone.  This means for me with two systems, one mu1 can be Roon core / streamer  and the other is streamer (endpoint) only.

Appreciate feedback @macdude still demoing the Grimm.but leaning towards a purchase.  One major item that The Grimm MU1 offers is that there is significant simplification in the set up. Ethernet to the Grimm then AES to my Nagra Tube Dac. With other solutions I needed a NUC or Nucleus+ then through Lumin as Streamer and then to Nagra.  It was set up with out the Nagra initially but I wanted a better dac and landed here with the Power Supply. Before adding the Nagra it was just my Nucleus + and Lumin. But there is no comparison in SQ, soundstage, bass on and on with the Grimm.  Total game changer and much simpler set up. I will also add that I have had 0 issues with Roon since I started demoing the Grimm. Not exactly sure why but that’s another discussion in another forum. 
 

Woots

There is a difference between AES cables that is easy to hear when you go back and forth. But the difference is not as significant as other interconnect cables. 

I found that a high quality aes/ebu cable was a worthwhile investment but it isn’t night and day “a veil was removed and my wife walked in and asked what changed” kind of improvement. It matters but its the last thing to address rather than the first.

The digital link is crucial. It's the first thing I would address.

I personally wouldn't invest in a high end dac and server, and not have a reference digital cable.

Maybe the digital AES cable people have tried on this thread were all on the same level.

The digital cable I am using made all other digital cables I've tried sound broken. When I first heard it, my jaw dropped. I thought to myself, how is this even possible, when it's just digital bits?

@woots You should have compared the Grimm to the new Lumin models with the new processing engine. It's a huge step up from the older Lumin models.

About Sablon cable: I have the Sablón USB cable and it is a cable with which I am very satisfied in terms of its sound result. Highly recommended. That does need an adaptation period of many hours.

Hi, Different sources, different sounds. It's that easy. Just as not all dacs sound the same, and not all turntables sound the same, the different sound formats will have their own imprint and each one is free to choose the one they like best. Which and in summary is a matter that in many cases is subjective and there, particularly, I do not enter

@benzman 
“The Grimm and Innuos were very popular at Axpona this weekend. As good as they sounded you went into a room with vinyl and they are still not quite there.”

I heard that Innuos was showing off the Pulsar (although not a functioning demo?).

And yes, I wouldn’t expect that we’d be quite at the level of analog enjoyment in the digital world quite yet…. Maybe one day, maybe never!

“I have used the same make of excellent AES cable, with different lengths (both 1.5m and less than 1.5m), in my rig and I cannot distinguish the difference.”

@metaldetektor I expect it depends on your DAC’s jitter rejection abilities as to how much of an issue this is.  Also, while I clearly heard the difference when comparing the same USB cable of different lengths, I do wonder if maybe USB is more susceptible to this issue than AES.  Of note, I tested two Nordost Valhalla 2 USB cables of different lengths, and I also heard the same effect when I tried a .75m Audioquest Diamond USB cable vs my 1.5m versions of the same cable.

The Grimm and Innuos were very popular at Axpona this weekend. As good as they sounded you went into a room with vinyl and they are still not quite there. 

hi. In my system I have had the opportunity to test the Innuos Phoenix Net together with the Zenith and the Phoenix USB and faced with a simple Netgear 108. The results were quite clear for me, very subtle or practically indistinguishable and I could not in a blind test differentiate between both switches. The explanation is that the reclocking of the signal that the Phoenix USB makes before entering the DAC causes a redundancy in the data synchronization that does not allow the signal to be differentiated from one to the other. Although each audio system has its own idiosyncrasies and characteristics, in mine it was not worth investing in a HIFI switch.

On digital cable length -- I have used the same make of excellent AES cable, with different lengths (both 1.5m and less than 1.5m), in my rig and I cannot distinguish the difference. YMMV.

@nadimjaber, I have to say that between replacing my three Innuos boxes with the MU1, and replacing my Gryphon Diablo 300 DAC module with a Mola Mola Tambaqui, the upgrade to the DAC has made the most difference.  But the fact that the MU1 is slightly better than Innuos (along with a different sonic presentation), in one single box, is a win for me personally. Keep in mind I expect the MU1 will get a boost when I finally get my upgraded cables, as I am using only a basic set currently.  I’m also using a 1m AES which as above is not as ideal as a 1.5m length for digital interconnects.

Unfortunately there’s no way to figure out what will give you the biggest boost aside from just trying stuff out.  I started down that path by buying used gear that is easy to sell with good demand on the second hand market, wherever I could.  That way I was able to try stuff without too much of an added cost. Wasn’t able to do that with the MU1 though, so I was risking losing a bit more if it didn’t work out.  Thankfully the MU1 is here to stay though.

Hi, Niev for your comparisons between the Innuos combo and the MU1, they are much appreciated as I own two of the three Innuos you have. I don't know what DAC you have, since that is a very important element in the sound chain. Although the purchase of a Mu1 would be in order to replace the Innuos combo, after your comments I am left wondering if this would be a good decision since it means an outlay of more than $5000. Another option to consider would be to look for a streamer (better without a dac) to do the work of roon ready. There are products that can be attached to my Innuos combo, and it seems that an interesting option would be the new Innuos Pulsar, but it seems that I don't know when it will be released. Another option could be Hifi Rose with the 150B, which, having a digital output, is perfect for my system. Many doubts... About what would be the best option.

@nyev Please note there is no correlation between the speed that your local Ethernet network devices communicate with each other, to the speed of your Internet service.
Data from the internet can be buffered (loaded into memory) at a slower speed, and then transmitted at faster speeds between local devices.

@richtruss , I was thinking about this and not everyone has internet service of 1Gbps. I believe I have up to 300Mbps service to my house. Also, if the communications were capped at 100Mbps even when the MU1 can do 1Gbps, I wonder if that would really matter? Not saying it doesn’t matter but just wondering. If it does matter, that would be an argument to upgrade my internet service I would think!

Update:  further to this, I looked and even Innuos streamers including the Zenith Mk3 support Gigabit Ethernet when the PhoenixNET is noted as supporting only up to 100Mbps.  So this would imply that capping to 100Mbps doesn’t hold back sonic performance as Innuos wouldn’t have held back their own streamers with the PhoenixNET.

@svenjosh Oops! My apologies! It was early in the morning, pre coffee, when I wrote that and it should say the PhoenixNet operates at 100Mb/s, not 100Gb/s, so my bad, and annoyingly I can’t edit it.

The speed of the communication between devices on a local Ethernet network will be down to the hardware level of the Ethernet interface in the device. Most modern devices, including the Grimm, can operate at 1Gb/s. Using the PhoenixNet will prohibit this.

Our experience of listening to the Grimm at 1Gb/s and 100Mb/s connection speeds clearly shows an improved sound quality at 1Gb/s.

I hope that clarifies.

Why is it that so many MU1 owners end up pairing it with a Tambaqui (or vice versa)?  It it just due to precedent, that they are both Dutch, and have both had a common designer that had a hand in their design?  Or, does this pairing actually sound better than other alternatives?  For me it’s the former I suppose.

I believe it partially due to being represented by the same distributor and imo a very good combination compared to my prior setup, which  was an AuralicAries G1 to a Playback Merlot fed by Roon off my PC.   

@richtruss I am not sure I understood. Why would any device run only at 100gb/s? There is no 100Gb/sec available for any home in US. Even 1Gb/s is not consistently available.

Moreover why do you need 1Gb/sec. You can get max bandwidth (192hz/24bit ) with around 10Mbps. Grimm mu1 manual recommends 50 Mbps Ethernet. Can you link a reference as to where Grimm recommends 1GB/s?

“The PhoenixNet only operates at 100Gb/s.

The Mu-1 gives its best performance with a 1Gb Ethernet speed. Running it at 100Mb/s will hold it back.”

@richtruss thank you.  That would make a lot of sense.

There are some comments in this thread about using the PhoenixNet with the Grimm Mu-1.

The PhoenixNet only operates at 100Gb/s.

The Mu-1 gives its best performance with a 1Gb Ethernet speed. Running it at 100Mb/s will hold it back.

The Mu-1 should be used with a 1Gb/s Ethernet switch and a 1Gb/s Ethernet filter to get the best performance.

Just finished reading the highly technical article that @svenjosh referenced explaining why digital cables less than 1.5m are not ideal.  I have the right background to understand it but I did have to read through it a couple of times to figure it out as it’s been a while.  

Here is my attempt at a one sentence explanation, assuming I understood it correctly:  A fast transition of a square wave transmitted to the DAC by the streamer will cause the DAC’s receiver to receive it a few nanoseconds later.  The DAC will register the transition and then impose that transition back on the line - slightly later.  After 3-4 “ping-pongs”’ of these reflections the timing of the digital sample can result in the transition being registered at the incorrect time.  Essentially, jitter.  A 1.5m cable will prolong this ping-pong effect with delayed propagation over a 1m cable, and the digital sample will occur prior to the damage (jitter) caused by the ping-pong effect.

Okay a bit more than one sentence :)

Here is the link to the Positive Feedback article.  For anyone technically inclined, I’d be curious to know my summary of the article is accurate….  Or if maybe I totally misunderstood it :)

“The Phoenix Net is in no small portion a reclocker. In my system I reclock the ethernet with both an Etherregen clocked by Antelope 10m preceded by a LHYaudio Ocxo switch. The effect of both is demonstrable and not achievable by Isolators or filters.”

@antigrunge2 , getting back to this topic…. You are absolutely correct that the PhoenixNET adds an element of refinement to the MU1, presumably in part due to its reclocking function. But I find it also has its own sonic character that seems to inhibit the MU1 in particular (can sound wonderful with other streamers). The MU1 simply doesn’t sing quite as freely with the PhoenixNET in the chain, at the top of the midrange band.  The refinement factor it adds isn’t huge.  With my Innuos gear I think the PhoenixNET’s character improves things rather than holds it back, which isn’t surprising.  
 

Nevertheless I’m going to start with the Muon Pro filter in a few weeks.  At some point in the future I may experiment with other Ethernet switches/reclockers…

“The Phoenix Net is in no small portion a reclocker. In my system I reclock the ethernet with both an Etherregen clocked by Antelope 10m preceded by a LHYaudio Ocxo switch. The effect of both is demonstrable and not achievable by Isolators or filters.”

@antigrunge2 , getting back to this topic…. You are absolutely correct that the PhoenixNET adds an element of refinement to the MU1, presumably in part due to its reclocking function.  But I find it also has its own sonic character that seems to inhibit the MU1 in particular (can sound wonderful with other streamers).  The MU1 simply doesn’t sing quite as freely with the PhoenixNET in the chain, at the top of the midrange band.

“Also… in reading the manual for the MU1, I noticed that they state that you must use the variable volume control, and that they recommend not using a fixed volume level. I am interested in how that does not reduce the quality of the digital signal. Can anyone chime in about that?”

@peter_s , I checked page 11 of the MU1 manual after you pointed that out, finally...  I believe the manual is referring to when you are NOT using an analog preamp as a volume control, you must use the MU1’s variable volume instead of other volume controls (in other words don’t fix the MU1 volume and have Roon set the volume in this type of setup).  I think using the analog preamp as the volume and disabling the MU1 volume control is just fine.

@svenjosh , thanks I’ll check out that article on Positive Feedback. TBH every explanation I’ve seen to date detailing the reasons for the 1.5m minimum has been specific to the USB protocol and how it synchronizes between source and destination. AES cables use a totally different protocol and maybe are different. That said Nordost suggests 1.5m minimum for all digital cables. Again I wouldn’t put too much stock in vendor statements like this, if not for the fact that I heard the difference for myself as plain as day (for USB cables). And I heard this for myself before I even knew about the general recommendations.

Looking forward to seeing how the Sablon cable pans out for you - results seem very promising so far considering what you are staking it up against.  

Yes the Sablon is really good, I need to do some more back and forth before I can say for sure.
Tbh, I don’t know for sure if Nordost makes any cable less than 1.5 but when I was getting my XLR cables a couple of years back, I wanted 0.5m or 1m. But my dealer told me that as far as Odin2 digital cables, he could get me only 1.5m and I assumed Nordost did not make anything shorter. He also referred me to the article by Steve Nugent in positive feedback for the reasoning. So it may be either Nordost was not making anything shorter in Odin line or my dealer deciding not to carry anything shorter.

As far as Taiko and Grimm, I am going to take my Grimm to my friends place as it is easier than getting his Taiko to my home. I will be happy if the Grimm is getting close to 90% of Taiko.

@svenjosh ”So far the Sablon is holding on its own. I will make a decision once I get the Jorma to try.”

Probably too early but is the Sablon AES really keeping up with the Omega and Odin 2? If so that’s incredible….

BTW I did actually get two Nordost Valhalla 2 USB cable demos last year (I needed two for my Zenith and PhoenixUSB reclocker) and one was 1m and the other was 2m with the 1m practically sounding broken in comparison to the 2m. So if Nordost stopped making sub 1.5m cables it must have been recent (or my demo cables were old possibly).

Very lucky you get to test the Taiko. Will you get to try it in your system or will you try your MU1 in your friend’s system? I expect the Taiko will win although I have seen some forum posts saying a few prefer the MU1. But even if I could afford one I’m not sure I’d go that route. Imagine spending that much on a top of the line server from 2013. Personally I’d not be at all happy with a top of the line 2013 server here in 2023. And spending that much, I’d want to be still happy with it in 2033. I can live with having to upgrade the Grimm MU1 in 10 years or so however. Just my own perspective though…. The Grimm ring-binder manual that comes with the unit says something like “Your music player for life” or something like that…. Funny.

I will also be comparing the Grimm Mu1(mine) and my friends Taiko Extreme next weekend (hopefully). I will give my impressions on that too. 

@nyev I agree with using 1.5m cables for any digital connections. Nordost makes only 1.5m or more for digital cables. Unfortunately the only Sablon AES cable I could get was 1 m but still I could get an idea of how it sounds. I do have the Sablon 1.5m Spdif so I can compare the two. Grimm Mu1 outputs both AES and SPDIF simultaneously so I can go back and forth with a flip of a switch. So far the Sablon is holding on its own. I will make a decision once I get the Jorma to try. 

@lalitk , what you say makes a lot of sense, as the rack impacts every component at once. In fact, by far the biggest boost was when I installed four of Herbie’s “Giant Fat Dots” under my current heavy wooden shelf. There was a sudden boost that was far larger than when installing Herbie’s Tenderfeet under each individual component, as it improved all components at once.

However - I first installed the Giant Fat Dots under my shelf, I didn’t do it right. I let the shelf’s four plastic feet rest on the Fat Dots. Herbie’s says these are only for applications where you are interfacing two broad, flat surfaces. When I corrected this fairly recently and moved the fat dots to another location under the shelf away from the shelf’s feet (which raises the shelf’s feet off the floor as the Fat Dots are taller than the shelf’s feet), I couldn’t believe how much stability and solidity was added to the image. Prior to correcting this, the image was always every so slightly “skewing” in one direction or another, especially after I moved a component on my shelf which I guess slightly changed how the shelf’s feet were digging into the fat dots.  The curse of a revealing system.

I expect a high end audio rack would go even farther as you say. The trouble is for me, most tend to look more like science equipment than a welcoming presentation of your system, at least from what I’ve seen.

I’ve just ordered from Herbie’s those discs that you rest on top of your gear. I did this after I experimented by placing a small square piece of granite on top of each component in my system and realizing that it helps. Not to the degree that the Tenderfeet help but still a boost. Unfortunately you can’t really do this with the MU1 because of its chassis design and the big button wheel on top (there I made this at least a bit on-topic :) ). I was able to do it with the Tambaqui despite its curved top. For all components I found the sound became a bit more crisp and sweet in the upper mids and up top.

@nyev 

@lalitk 

Interesting posts, thanks for sharing.

@nyev 

Herbie’s Tender feet’s are good and offers a great value. When it comes to components Isolation and vibration control, sky is the limit. Over the years, I went through so many of these type of devices. While they work to a degree, nothing is more profound as installing your components in an audio rack that addresses all the airborne and floor borne vibrations effectively. There is an obvious upfront high cost but once you make the commitment, you’re done messing around.