How do you deal with vibration?

I've decided that everything is imagined, even that I'm imagining.

So therefore, since everything in "reality" is imagined, it matters not whether we are imagining it or not, because everything we know is imagined. Even double-blind testing is no answer, because we could be imagining that we are doing double-blind testing, and imagining the results, and imagining that we are typing the results on the page.

Now that we've established that since I'm imagining my audio system, and that my system sounds better when I buy a new component, or put some cones under it, or use different cables, then it is quite ok that I'm imagining that it sounds better.

And there's really no cost to anything because we are only imagining that we are paying for anything anyway. So, buy anything you want no matter what the cost, because the money is imaginary, so spend to your heart's content.

See, it actually is simple.
You can never "prove" anything, because no matter what you do, you could be imagining it.

This only becomes a problem if one needs to live in a provable universe.

I'd rather take the Algonquin Round Table, United Nations, or ecumenical council approach.

We all weigh in, let the questioning poster sort it out.

Newbee --

Excellent overview of the two different mind-sets and their attendant concerns.

>>The original post here concerned how do people deal with vibration, not whether it is meaningful to do so.<<

True, but when a topic like this comes up, others lurk or peruse the thread as well. I think it is useful for people who come to this forum because they are interested in audio to know that there are people here with different philosophies and approaches. Otherwise, it would give the false appearance of a concensus around things like expensive cabling, vibration control, etc.

I think we're a better forum if people interested in audio know that there isn't any such concensus among audiophiles, that these topics are controversial at best, and that there is a place in this forum for skepticism, that it isn't a "church" for believers only. I think the "church" approach would make this forum weaker, less inclusive, more limited in its appeal.

I don't think we want that.

At least, I don't.

Hello Jadem6,

Thanks for your help with this. It was good to discuss it with you. I am hopefully going to make a few platforms this weekend. It's always nice to get advice for someone who has experimented before (plus you have a resolving of enough system to be able to get a good idea what works.)

And don't worry, I don't take offense to my system being called middle of the road. I know where my system stands. Audio/music is my passion and all that stops me from having the system of my dreams is a few zero's at the end of my paycheck.

I could go work a job I hate and exploit people to make more money, and while it my be legally acceptable I don't think it's morally acceptable. So I purchase what I can afford, which lately is not much (I got married two years ago and bought my first house 1 year ago.) Maybe one day I will own a $15k+ system but not any time soon (unless I win the lottery). For now I am going to continue to enjoy what I have and upgraded it as I can afford too.

Happy listening,

Jadem6...No offense. And well-written comments. I drive a Honda CRV instead of an Acura, because it does everything I need and leaves me with enough money to fly my airplane. Same deal with audio. I could afford the most expensive gear (well almost) but I could never justify it.

This thread is about a general technical issue, vibration, and its possible effect on equipment, which would logically affect all levels of audio equipment. If anything, cheap stuff, with no designed-in vibration control would be most sensitive.

I know that vibration control is very important for LP turntables, and for tube amps. Some people have suggested that electronics are also affected, an idea that seems unlikely to me. However, rather than talk back and forth and work ourselves into a fit about this I prefer to simply make some measurements and find out what is really going on. There are many audio characteristics, like "soundstage", "transparency", "imaging", that I cannot measure and neither can anyone else. But some things, like sensitivity to vibration are easy to measure, so why not do it. If my findings do not please you feel free to make your own measurements.

OK. I did my DVD player, a Denon 2900 with Underwood mod.

As before, I appled a 125 Hz warble tone at 110dB measured by the mic resting on top of the player.

I used the Denon HI-FI Check CD, track 37 (digital zero) and track 38 (one LSB square wave). The player rms output was around -77dB and -76dB respectively regardless of whether the vibration input was ON or OFF. I paid careful attention to the peak reading (displayed numerically about once a second) because one might expect any effect to be of the nature of a digital data error. All peak data was consistent with the variations of the rms value.

Them is the facts. Make of it what you will.

Oh how I wish I too were a relativist. Then I too would think we can all be right! Or was it wrong?

All I know is, I keep throwing my Jell-O against the wall, but it just won't stick.

I wouldn't be surprised if this thread is nominated thread of the year. Shoot I may even nominate it myself!

-IMO

Stehno, almost all posts here and on AA end up with the same division between those who hear benefits and those who either say it is illogical that it makes a difference or that measurements don't lie and show no difference. If you hear a difference unless you like to argue like me, just ignore the din of doubters. If you don't hear a difference, also enjoy in peace.

Rsbeck:

Many details were omitted in my post for brief purposes. Basic tweaking was performed like interconnect and power cable layout, the rack was on a small rug and it was removed so it was directly on the tile floor. Mass loading of the player was also tried but the cone effect mentioned was far more noticeable than any of the other tried things. Since he was so puzzled by this it was tried several times and the improvement was confirmed by him not by me.
If you got the impression that the untrained ears phrase was demeaning for my friend that was not my intent, I tried to convey the idea that in a not sophisticated listening environment and with people not complicated as we as a group are, there are ways to share our hobby without been or projecting the "complicated" image we have that is limiting in a way the number of people that could enjoy more music with lesser electronics but properly set up that could eventually become audiophiles.
I keep an open mind but first I love to listen to music and is far more important to me than the equipment itself. If tweaking improves my music enjoyment I do it. For me vibration counts and affects the enjoyment I obtain from my listening sessions.
Vibration tweaking has worked for me and is not my idea to "convert" anyone. Just again sharing experiences to motivate people to experiment themselves and take their own conclusions as you seem to have, I have no problem with that and I respect your choices since they are your own.
Cordially
Luis

>>If you got the impression that the untrained ears phrase was demeaning
for my friend that was not my intent<<

No, I did not get the feeling you were trying to demean your friend.

One of my problems with so many of the testimonials I see and the
arguments that follow is that it turns into something like a game of button,
button, whose got the button?

What I mean by that is -- you generally read these testimonials where a new
Cable or Vibrapod, or Halograph, or Shakti Stone is inserted into a system
and makes this HUGE difference. So big that ANYONE would be able to hear it
-- even with cheese cloth over their ears. And even my next door neighboor,
who is half deaf and didn't even know I'd changed anything walked in, his
knees buckled and he shouted out, "MY GOD, YOUR SYSTEM SOUNDS
SO MUCH BETTER, I CAN HARDLY WALK!!!"

But, then when you ask why no one can seem to pass a double-blind listening
test and reliably tell any difference -- the story always changes. Suddenly,
the story becomes all about how these changes are incredibly subtle and only
people who've been trained in Tibetan Caves by Zen Masters can hear the
difference and only with the right system and only when they are in the right
mood and only when their moon is in Sagitarius --- and that's why the
subjects cannot pass these tests.

That's all.

Rsbeck: touché!

Sol322, i agree. it's all about the music, and for you and me these tweaks have improved the enjoyment. Those who posted above me do not find the same enjoyment, great so be it. As for having to prove I'm enjoying myself, look at my smile.

For now, I have A GPA Monaco two-tier stand with a single F-1 shelf(Dac/transport) and a Townshend Seimic rack(for the rest). I try to stay with products/methods that have proven themselves. In the future, I may explore Stillpoints. BTW, I purchase most products used.

Jadem6, I agree. You may notice that I am largely dismissive of those who say vibration control cannot help. If they believe that, it is fine with me, but if someone asks, I have many suggestions. I cannot understand why they care to try to convince me that they are right despite my hearing they are wrong. They often say that I am delusional but they cannot prove it and I don't think they are right. Enjoy.

Tbg...Noone is trying to convince you of anything. I am trying to decide what I need to do, and, just as you report the results of your listening tests, I will report my results. Other guys might benefit from my experience as well as yours. Would you like me to test my turntable, so that I can show the kind of results you like? That would be a waste of time because I already know the importance of vibe control for turntables.

Peace.

I would never try to convince you that you didn't "hear" what you
heard. The subjects in Dunlavy's tests "heard" large
improvements even though the cables were never even changed. All this
means is that the mind is powerful and can supply sensory experiences for
us, can make us "hear" things that are not there, but hear them
nonetheless. So, even in the worst case, no one can say you didn't hear what
you heard. The question is whether it was real or not. No one should feel
insulted by this question. Every scientist that does an experiment builds in
safeguards to protect against these types of influences, or else no one will
accept his/her results. Who would trust a scientist who said he/she didn't
need to build in such safeguards because he/she could trust him/herself not
to be influenced. Why should any one of us be immune? However, the last
part of your statement is true. There is no magic bullet to end these types of
debates. The best we can say is that some people believe in these things and
some people don't and each has their reasoning. (See Newbee's overview of
the divergent belief systems.) However, the idea that one camp enjoys music
more than the other is rather specious.

Rsbeck and Eldartford, I am a social scientist with many published research reports. I firmly believe in test hypotheses with data. I know full-well that the mind can be fooled. I do not believe, however, that science can settle the issues of whether there are differences between amp, cables, with and without isolation, or whether the IC works. I feel no need to prove what I hear nor do I think the rigor or research designs in tests I have seen and even participated in allows conclusions that some might want to make. I merely report my observations, which are the basis of inductive theory development. When I have my science hat on, I want data to assess the hypothesis, but here all I want to know is whether my sound improves.

I am certainly not discouraging others from reaching other conclusions, but I very much resent notions that I am merely deluding myself. When others share my impressions, I feel more secure in my impressions. Guys this is a hobby not competitive football or finding a cure to cancer.

Tbg, A social scientist! You must find these forums mighty interesting. You could do a lifetime research project on us and still not figure us out.

I thought this thread was about vibration. Please don't extrapolate my views into other aspects of audio where they don't apply, and then criticize me for these views.

To reiterate..."There are many audio characteristics, like "soundstage", "transparency", "imaging", that I cannot measure and neither can anyone else. But some things, like sensitivity to vibration are easy to measure, so why not do it".

Tbg -- I hear ya.

Reduction of vibrational influences within a component should make the component operate with greater efficiency. With this in mind.. hooking up a component to a Variac and adjusting the operating voltage and then recording the current draw with and then with out your faviorite method for vibration control should lead you down the road of greater or lesser confusion..I myself have my own beliefs and I will try to measure and record these influences.Tom

Theaudiotweak, I am very interested in hearing about what you can find. Without criticizing or confronting Eldarford I have been questioning to myself if his methods are the correct test in this case. I appreciate the fact that Eldarford is trying to apply science while at the same time not attacking those of us who will swear on our grandmother’s grave. Civility is one word for it. I conceder it maturity and an appreciation for each other as human souls, Kindness goes a lot longer way in communication than anger and irrational comments. I for one have thoroughly enjoyed this thread, maybe the best I've participated in. Good job all!

Hi JD,
Re:>>>"Civility is one word for it. I conceder it maturity and an appreciation for each other as human souls, Kindness goes a lot longer way in communication than anger and irrational comments. I for one have thoroughly enjoyed this thread, maybe the best I've participated in. Good job all!"<<<

Oh Geez, Jade.All this nicey-nice crap makes me sick.
Bite me.

; )
best,
Ken

ltns-how ya been,dude?

The component will operate with greater efficiency? What is meant by "efficiency" in this context?

This is a classic thread that shows that some people are mightily convinced that audio is a one-man thing since no one hears the same.

As a complementary question what does it actually mean when one says that we all hear differently?

Surely if this were true any research towards advancing audio would be in vain.

Great how everything has been reduced to a question of individual taste; it is surely a sign of the times where magic thinking is the order of the day.

just my 2 cents on whether vibration control works; in some cases an unreserved yes.

I had a pair of silver/copper pro silway IIs that had some nice bass control and openness qualities when used with my CDP but they also had a horrific tiring glare. No getting around it. They sucked in that role to the point of being unlistenable.

I had some mixed metal chrome/sorbathane feet deals (about 1.5 in dia at the base) under my tube pre to help control vibration impacts to the tubes. I'm not sure if they really help out all that much under the pre but when i put them under the CDP the glare from the Pro Silways was gone and the whole shebang tightened up top to bottom. Points up vrs point down...no significant change that i could tell. would other vibration controls work better...can't say and don't really have time to try these days. However, controlling the vibration at the source at the macro level helped unquestionably. On a detail tweak side of things it did seem that the sound was a tad better with the cages off my amps than with them on but the arrival of toddlers ended that experiment.

Eldartford, Re your testing protocol, do you think that generating a 125hz signal is sufficient or would it be more revealing if you were to do a frequency sweep? I've never tried what you are doing, so I haven't got a clue.

Pbb, re your comments on the "we all hear different". I think a good analogy to demonstrate that we do hear (and see) differently, involves our eyes and vision - we all look at the same scene at the same time and we will all describe what we see differently. Those differences will depend upon what our interests at that moment cause us to focus on, even though, apart from issues of acuity, our eyes probably can see everything there is to see.

Much the same thing for how we hear things - recall the old game of telling some one a short story and having him pass it on to the next listener, who then passes it on to a 3rd listener, etc. By the time you get to the last listener, the story bears no resembalance to the original version. If you haven't already tried this, do so. Its not about a process of the eyes or ears that is determinitive, its the brain. You would certainly have to agree that our brains are in fact different in subtle, if not gross, ways.

Can you learn to refocus your attention visually or acoustically to "hear" or "see" other things. Of course. Will you if you are closed minded or, for what ever reason, unmotivated. Unlikely. (I'm not implying that you are closed minded.)

>>I had a pair of silver/copper pro silway IIs that had some nice bass control and openness qualities when used with my CDP but they also had a horrific tiring glare. No getting around it. They sucked in that role to the point of being unlistenable.<<

This is the kind of thing that fascinates me. What in a cable would cause "glare?" These comments treat the cable as if one listens to a cable that plays music through a speaker, like a guiatr string. No responsibility is given to any other component for music reproduction. For some reason, cable enthusiasts are very trusting of their other components -- the ones that have the toughest most complex job -- and endlessly suspicious of their cables -- which have the easiest job in the entire chain.

Cable advertisers have done a superb job of getting audiophiles to overlook huge problems in their speakers and rooms and to fixate on their cables, inventing problems where none exist.

It is easily demonstrated that rooms have glare, but no -- it must be the cable -- even though there's no evidence whatsoever that cables cause glare.

Okay, I know this is a vibration control thread, but I just had to comment.

Pbb vibration control in a component will mean that it will draw less current than one with improperly implemented vibration control or none at all. It all starts with self induced losses within the component, even at idle.This is what I believe and hope to document..Tom

Oy. The thing about this thread that's jumped out at me is that Twl has kept his big nose out of it! Actually, I thought he succumbed once, but I probably imagined it. ;->

The one component that impressed me is the Rack of Silence by Solid Tech. Heard a great system in a local shop here both with and without the ROS and can absolutely say that the difference was stunning. The price may be a bit stiff, but you owe it to yourself to hear this component. The name may sound like a torture device, but having one in your system is like removing many many veils and the background is definitely blacker. Heard it with a top of the line Clearaudio table, Nagra electronics and Verity speakers, the background was amazing but, unlike, digital, all the music was there. Unfortunately in audio you get what you pay for. Like for every other component more money will provide more music.

This has been very educational to this point.

As some one who has reached that stage of looking at vibration isolation as one of the next steps in the evolution of his system, I am very interested in the results of Theaudiotweak's experiment.

You can read the following about what we call PFM (Pure F****** Magic) or not it is your choice.

Electronics is based on theory. To my knowledge (Albeit a little outdated) it has no basis in fact. Take the skin affect of a conductor. One camp says below 20K there is no such thing the other says there is. Therefore I will use another area, capacitance. At extremely high frequencies a cavity filled with components and current has its own capacitance. In the IF section of some radar systems all you have to do is adjust the bolts on the cabinet for the final calibration. Also if you change the location of components on the circuit board the capacitance of the circuit changes. Let’s assume the same is true at lower frequencies. What happens to the capacitance of that cavity when vibration is induced? We aren't turning a bolt or a varister but inducing micro vibrations in the components is that enough to change the capacitance of the circuit (Thereby changing the frequency response) I honestly do not know. But remember this is theory therefore I believe it just may be possible.

A little story about PFM. There once was a spectrum analyzer with 200 MHz out of its reference oscillator instead of the required 100 MHz. To keep this story short the problem was a cracked base biasing resistor, not visible mind you but cracked all the same. Wish I could post a diagram of the circuit. All the DC voltages were correct and the 4 amplifiers operating correctly. In theory the amp circuits should not have worked at all. The moral is the resistor was turned into a capacitor allowing the circuit to operate properly except for the crystal oscillator. PFM.

There are many things in electronics that do not make any sense. Ask me I have had to troubleshoot some of them. Including the above.

Remember measurements don't always tell the whole story. Or some times it takes instruments that are highly sensitive and cost more than our audio systems.

So I guess I am in the vibration control camp and I haven't even gotten started yet. So down the road if I change camps I am apologizing now.

Theaudiotweak sez:

vibration control in a component will mean that it will draw less current than one with improperly implemented vibration control or none at all. It all starts with self induced losses within the component

It's interesting you think that. I have entertained an identical intuitive notion -- but haven't really researched the subject. I'd be VERY interested in your findings! Cheers

Newbee...IF any sensitivity were detected, THEN a sweep of frequencies would pinpoint the frequency of greatest sensitivity. However, at least for my equipment there is no sensitivity.

Theaudiotweak...Your basic assumption doesn't make sense to me. Vibration will REDUCE friction in a mechanical system (the opposite of what you suggest) but I can see no reason to think that electronics would draw more current when exposed to vibration.