Is Spiking Necesarry?

@prof 

That is good to read, thank you. I am considering the Herbie's.

Playing devils advocate for a moment, to your point "they make moving the speakers a breeze", I can imagine a potential down side of that. Specifically, when playing "loud", the vibration of the speaker itself could cause it to move, albeit very slightly. This is one point about using spikes. Namely, through carpet and onto hard wood they secure the speaker in place.

@gdhal

You’re right that the speakers dancing around the room to the music would be an issue if it happened. Happily I can report that it doesn’t. The gliders really do sink into the carpet pile. My speakers are 11 pounds per lighter than prof’s Thiel 3.7’s.  It takes purposeful lateral force to move the speakers.

Spikes have a small problem , energy going down can  come back as well, Herbie's solves that and other thing as well.

I wager half the folks going to the 5K$ route from the 2k$ one, would't bother if they went Herbie's . And you can always use them to effect on a 50K speaker for that matter .

The energy that goes down can’t come back up because it gets dissipated in the floor, a much larger mass. However, seismic type vibration can still go up. Fortunately, the spikes have such a small contact surface area it’s a much better situation than some things. The problem for ANY coupling device is that very low seismic type frequencies can still affect the component since the entire house is shaking, thus the component - by necessity -shakes right along with it - in all six directions of motion. Hel-loo!!

Hello everyone,

There are a lot of people here who share the same opinions as ours. We manufacture the oldest surviving name brand spike in the history of the audio business where our technology and existence are structured around the performance thereof. Our goal here is to provide information, in some cases a different point of view and answer or at least assist in answering the thread topic.

Spikes are a form of mechanical grounding via direct coupling.

If you place your speaker directly onto the flooring surface, without the use of spikes, you lose effectiveness instead of increasing efficiency.

Example: Place a floor standing speaker on hard surfaced flooring without spikes and/or chassis separation and the marriage between them related to physics; the speaker has now become one with the floor. Because of the added weight and mass of the floor/speaker relationship, a 10 inch woofer now reacts more like a twenty inch diameter due to the energy demands being increased from the addition of the ground mass (an energy sink) that is now commanding the loudspeaker. The drivers struggle and the speaker cabinets lose energy as they extend well beyond their original parameters and specifications in attempts to maintain efficiency across the design.

If you employ this technique on a carpeted surface, the rubber or foam pad along with the carpeting become more of a primary absorbent for the energy developed on the surface of the loudspeaker will reduce the harder sound. After a week or so of listening, if you revert back to the spikes, there will be a very noticeable increase in dynamics that are originally lost to the absorption process over a period of time. You cannot create an exacting geometry for the use of rubber based materials. The material is designed to constantly eat (absorb) all types of energy caused from vibration including those precious “live dynamics and harmonic structures” that we so desperately are in search of attaining and/or maintaining.

In either case, the loudspeaker will establish “Operational In-efficiency” as the result.

Example of Mechanical Grounding via Direct Coupling: By placing a metal spike between the speaker chassis on a hard or soft surface allows the speaker to perform more in the way it was designed separating the speaker from the massive grounding plane of the flooring (any type or style of flooring). The spikes maintain chassis rigidity, transferring interfering resonant surface energy away from the speaker chassis to ground plus add a volume of air separating the speaker from the floor.

The differences between these two methodologies provide an audible difference where after a few dedicated listening sessions one may eventually favor mechanical grounding or spiking concepts as do most of the participants written here. Speaker designers found this to be true in the late seventies hence you always get a set of spikes with just about every floor standing speaker system sold.

Spikes are supposed to be better right?  

Problems with Spikes:

Our products and technology are founded on the principles of direct coupling (spikes) so we definitely are qualified enough to ask this question.

How much difference in sonic does one expect to acquire from a $0.28 cent part?

Stop for a moment... this is High-End Audio, right?

Why does everyone including parts and footer suppliers, marketers, rack companies, speaker companies, isolation companies, listeners always debating coupling and decoupling methodologies and in some of the most extreme cases - marketing videos comparing hundreds or worse yet thousands of dollars worth of speaker suspension products to a twenty-eight cent or in the finest of cases, a $1.25 cent part?

Spikes usually end up getting the bad rap. They are generalized, marginalized and always grouped into a single category no matter of how much geometry, material science; technical application and design purpose and cost are offered up. No one ever discusses price and costs when comparing spikes - after all they are just spikes.

My two cents worth of opinion; if you base your understanding, comparisons or parts on the cheap, you may never get to know how much higher levels of quality sound can be achieved and possibly never know how much “more musical qualities exist within the equipment you already own”.

So are spikes (mechanical grounding/energy transfer) better? Some listeners tout isolation/decoupling (storing resonant energy in the equipment) is the method of choice with others convinced combinations of every process known is the key to attaining good sound.

Why are there so many different opinions?

The answer to that question is rather easy… It is because no two products are built nor do they perform the same.

Anyone can change the sound of any audio component or loudspeaker. Over the years we have experienced inner tubes, super balls, hockey pucks, tennis balls, sand filled boxes, lead fill, wood plinths and shelves, steel, brass, glass, polymers and footers made from multiple combinations from all of the above. Vibration management literally has become the “Footer of the Month Club!” If a newfound material for deep space or deep sea exploration is procured, guaranteed there will be a new audio related footer system made from those elements guaranteeing a higher level of “self induced isolation” and of greater sound quality to boot.

All anyone has to do in order to alter the sound of components and speakers is place any amount of weight from any material known to mankind on top or below a chassis. The sonic results will always change and definitely vary.  The chances you will lose the sonic ‘character’ that first drew you towards purchasing the product will easily become a sound of the past. You generally say goodbye to the sonic performance of what the original designer wanted you to hear.

Listening Tests are the Key:

After so many changes, you eventually have to ask yourself what happens to the “attack, sustain and decay” of the instruments and vocals within the musical performance?

How do the changes made to the system relate to the natural sound of a musical instrument or the actual tone in a single voice?

To answer those questions, one has to return to the original reference point prior to installing the items. The total and complete changes in sound take a period of time to develop due to electronic and mechanical break in processes. We encourage leaving your changes in for at least a week's time then removing the parts in order to hear exactly what changes were provided.

Reality:

Which cone or footer system does one choose that takes your system to the next level in performance and, finally, the most important decision associated with all of the above is what price should one pay out for such added performance?

Always compare the costs between each product to listening value.

We traced the origins of spikes back to the late 70’s where Linn Audio began with selling extremely sharp steel versions. More recognized for the innovation was in the mid 80’s when Steve McCormick released “Tip-Toes” made from aluminum and offered them in a few different sizes. Audio Points were the first brass spikes released in the late 80’s and were initially focused on speaker applications. Early 90’s involved expansions in technology such as the Vibraplane by Kinetic Systems (manufactured long before hitting the audio industry nearly two decades ago) along with various innovators manufacturing absorbent shelving and audio furniture as all equipment racking was titled back then; eventually leading to the first resonance transfer product titled a Platform in 2000 that happened to contain Audio Points. Currently there are literally hundreds and hundreds of parts and products to choose from.

The Industry has grown considerably since those early days where we highly recommend doing your research, make sure of a trial and return policy for products and hoping you achieve the results that get you closer to that LIVE dynamic sound we continue to search for.

All this began with a spike...

Thank you for your time,

Robert - Star Sound

Some counterpoints to Robert’s last post. First, no one is marginalizing or bashing spikes. Second, no one is recommending placing anything, speakers or otherwise, directly on carpet or rubber type materials. Robert’s long and winding post was effectively a Strawman argument. Finall, the argument is not really coupling vs decoupling as Robert suggests. The real challenge for audiophiles is how to integrate, to combine coupling with decoupling. You know, like I've been suggesting here on these threads for many years. One must allow vibration to escape the component or speakers and dis-allow seismic vibrations from coming up into them. 

Cheers

Addendum to my last: When Robert castigated "rubber type materials" one wonders if he’s referring not only to rubber itself but to things that bounce like springs and things that are not hard and rigid, things like Herbies Tenderfeet and constrained layer dampers that employ "rubbery" viscoelastic material as well things like bicycle inner tubes, air springs in general, bungee cords and squash balls. Because if that’s what he’s driving at then that puts a whole new light on things and demonstrates he really doesn’t gronk the whole vibration isolation thing and mechanical low pass filters in particular or even constrained layer damping and is in dire need of a seismologist.

To follow-up on the above posts... In my case I use the spikes that come with the Vandersteen Treo CT's.  Each spike sits in a Titanium disk with a dimple to accept the spike.  The titanium disk sits in db neutralizer material which in turn rests in a small glider.

 For my two 2wq subs., I use audiopoints that then rest in Herbie's giant db neutralizer gliders.  These are larger versions of what I use with the Treos.  In the case of the main speakers, the result of coupling to the decouplers has worked wonders with clarity and openness of sound.  

The subs. are an interesting case in that the drivers are down firing so when seating the audiopoints into the gliders the subs were lifted up from the carpet beneath.  This resulted in cleaner deep bass.  The perception was of less bass, so I was able to compensate by slightly turning up the output of the subs.

The other very desirable benefit is that decoupling the deep bass relieved the rest of the house from the "boom, boom, boom.  On certain recordings, our Westie thought it was thunder and would bark and run around, aggravated.  This works well as my dedicated listening room is located in the basement.

Hifiman5:

My Treo CTs are on an old Oriental rug over a hardwood floor.

Sorry I didn't see you inquiry until just now.

@gdhal  After being brought back to this thread today, I was wondering how things worked out with your GE References regarding placement  and your overall assessment of their sound quality.

@hifiman5 

Thanks for the follow up. Both placement and my overall assessment have worked out extremely well.

http://halr.x10.mx/TritonReference.htm

As it turns out I'm not in any immediate need for the Herbie's Gliders. However, this is still on the radar and I have made more than one (positive/recommendation) reference to it on the Golden Ear forum to some other members that are in need of this type of footing.

@gdhal   Wow!  Just finished reading your review.  Very comprehensive and detailed.  I liked how you kept updating as it reveals how your continuing listening experiences matured your overall view of the References and their sonic/cost benefit relative to the T Ones.

I went through a similar experience upgrading from Vandersteen 3A Signatures to the Treo CTs.  The cool thing for me is that although the Treos are sleeker in appearance, there is a greater verisimilitude relative to the Model 3's.  Since I still have both Vandy 2wq subs., the deep bass hasn't changed.  If I didn't have the subs. I would have needed to jump to the Quatros which are too pricey.  The Treo CTs are so much cleaner and precise at all frequencies.  They provoked me to go from very large high quality copper speaker cables to all silver cables so I could realize all that the carbon tweeters of the Treo CTs are able to deliver.  Awesome!

Now back to your situation.  After looking at the pic of your setup, and reading about the relatively narrow room, the choice of any Golden Ear tower speaker was smart as they are slim widthwise.  I'm so glad to hear that all went well.

@hifiman5 

Thank you.

True story.

I have this old Jamo Sub200. Cheapo but pretty decent for the price. Using for HT only. Bought it used. It does good things but when the Hz goes low and loud, it would rattle/distort.

I removed its plastic feet. Put them on it is own screws and put felt pad under the screws. No more rattle/distortion. I cannot believe. I am very surprised how a simple trick fixed the problem.

I am sure spikes would work too (maybe better) if simple screws work.

I stopped using speaker spikes years ago when I found that simple and inexpensive Vibrapods (I've had suspended wood floors in listening rooms for many decades) keep the energy from the speaker from going into the floor and coming back into the speaker…many modern high end speakers have adopted something like this…also custom feet with some sort of suspension/damping can also accomplish this but at a far higher cost than Vibrapods. Currently (and with my previous speakers) my speakers are on butcher blocks with "pods" between the blocks and the speakers…works for me.

I stopped using speaker spikes years ago when I found that simple and inexpensive Vibrapods.....

I would consider Vibrapods "spikes", albeit loosely defined. They appear similar to the Herbies Gliders.

Put your hand on the floor (suspended, not slab) next to spiked speakers paying dynamic music with plenty of bass content and you can feel the vibration on the floor…do the same with Vibrapods (or other things that turn vibes into heat…like my cousin Shirley) and you should ( or will) feel zero vibration from the speakers. That’s the difference. Also, it it necessary to know how to spell "necessary?"

My problem with spikes and footers is that every time I've ever raised my speakers using them - and that includes several different speakers - I've found a change for the worse.  The  upper/lower bass tends to start bloating a bit more.  Whereas simply sitting directly on my wood floor (actually, sitting on a shag carpet over my wood floor), with no spikes, the sound stays tight and clean.  I don't know why.

Put your hand on the floor (suspended, not slab) next to spiked speakers paying dynamic music with plenty of bass content and you can feel the vibration on the floor…do the same with Vibrapods (or other things that turn vibes into heat…like my cousin Shirley) and you should ( or will) feel zero vibration from the speakers. That’s the difference.

Right. I get it. And true in your case if this is your experience. However, I'm not convinced (granted I haven't tried) that would necessarily be the case with my speakers on carpeted wood flooring, and more importantly whether or not it *should* be the case. I think what you're referring to would be a complete "decoupling" from the room, and I'm not sure speakers that are producing low bass should necessarily be completely decoupled. But I'll conceded that "pointed spikes" in the traditional sense (like still points) may be less desirable than the Vibrapods in certain applications.

My problem with spikes and footers is that every time I've ever raised my speakers using them - and that includes several different speakers - I've found a change for the worse.

And this is why the most appropriate answer to the thread title, with the assumption "necessary" implies improved sound quality, is "it depends". 

I misspelled "is" in my criticism of misspellings. Also, I have Vibrapods on things, although my 2 subs don't…they're on the floor making bass sounds so I allow them a pass to bend the floor with aplomb (!). Clearly I should not be let out of the house without adult supervision.