I put my gear on points and have lead shot to stabalize the components...can't say it made any real audible difference, but then again, I've never tried listening to my system without the points since their introduction. I imagine if you have kids running around, or large trucks driving by frequently, that they may help, but I justify them in my system by telling myself, I've already spent $13000, another $150 to ensure I get the best performance is not a big deal. When I have some more free time, I'll try taking the points away and listen for a week, then add them again. Til then, they are simply giving me peace of mind.
m- |
If you get the the phone number (toll free) from: www.audiopoints.com, Robert could answer all your questions. The site also will have printed information that will answer your questions. |
I want to hear from someone who does not have a financial interest. I really want to hear from someone who has used cones on their amps and CD player and hears a difference and recommends them. |
About a year ago I tried the BDR cones both #3 & #4 under my cdp and didn't like the presentation at all. Next came sand bags under the unit. Both trials were with weight on top of the unit. Had much better success with an inflated inner tube but thats just my system...
It would appear that points or isolation devices of any sort are very system dependant and I would try before you buy if you can. If not buy used so you won't take a big hit if you have to re-sell them. |
Mdomnick made the point how you shouldn't do especially if you're about to deal with tweaks and isolation devices. You should only use them if the produce a positive result and not otherwise(meaning spending extra for nothing).
The majority of dealers will always be glad to land you different devices for you to test and where you can apply them.
I also do not understand the term "appropriate cones" since since there are much more different ways to properly isolate components.
Cones concentrate vibrations onto the smaller surface points and only represent(in any case) sort of "unfinished business". The other part is the platform(probably more vital) that has to have an ability to delay a vibration responce as from the component standing on it or from the different components placed on the same rack. It can happen if the platform is spiked or double-plated with isolation material placed between.
There are some variables to consider before going through the "appropriate cones" meaning that on the different platforms they can bring different(positive or negative) results.
From my experience if you will use "appropriate cones"(somehow I love this term!) on the glass shelf you'll have a probability to get side-wise frictional vibrations caused by a posibility to slide sidewise which brings it to an idea to have the isolation points to be placed under...
I can't deny that it might produce a positive result as well.
My long philosophy there can shortly state that due to a large number of variables to concider when isolating your components you shoud definitely invest your time for trial-and-error tests to define for yourself "proper ..."
Good luck. |
In my experience cones are just fine and dandy under speakers, but with electronic components, they isolate but add a resonant peak (including Audiopoints, BDR and many others I have tried). Better to deal with electronic components with a top quality rack and shelf, and forget fancy footers. Every damn one I tried had some beneficial isolation effect, but also added a persistent coloration that was unacceptable. |
Cones & other tweaks are system dependent; what works well for one won't necessarily help the next guy at all, or it might work even better. Experimentation is required, along with a system that's revealing & resolving enough to show you the differences. My own experiences with cones had the most pronounced effect on source components; CD player & turntable (preamp & tuner to a lesser extent). Not much of a change was noted when I tried them with one power amp, although other tweaks such as shelving & footers had a greater effect there.
Different types of cones work differently on different components too. I keep an assortment on hand: Black Diamond (carbon fiber #3's & #4's) BBC & Audio Points (plated & plain brass), Polycrystal, aluminum, steel, & Orchard Bay titanium.
Cones are coupling devices which help to sink the vibrations out from your equipment, clarifying & improving the sound. When used with speakers they also improve mechanical stability of the cabinets, realizing a more focused effect.
My best results are had with cones when used in conjunction with other techniques, rather than standalone. I use Vibrapods to isolate Black Diamond shelving from my rack's vibrations, then cones to couple the stray vibrational energy out of the component & into the isolated dead-mass shelves. So the sandwich looks like this: component, cones (with discs underneath for the sharp pointy ones), Black Diamond shelf, Vibrapods, then the rack shelf is underneath all that.
You can even tune the effect by placing coins under the cones points; pennies, nickels, dimes, etc. all sound different. Another tuning technique is to vary the spacing of the three cones under the component; closer together is generally warmer & less resolving, further apart is brighter & more revealing.
Mass loading techniques, inner tubes etc. these are other tuning techniques that are sometimes used to good effect (or not) but I don't want to overwhelm you right off the bat. |
Bob- Have you ever thought of taking your traveling circus on the road? open up "Bundus system tuning" bring your bag of tricks and tune folks systems and then take all of there bloody money! This may work we should work out the details and get this thing rolling.
I have experienced good things with cones under my speakers, I was running them for the first few years with out and realized I should try them and WOW! A more seamless soundstage-that is to say it sounds like wall of sound and not like a left channel, a right channel and everything else coming from the non-existant center channel. I also noticed a lot more bass and it seemed smoother then before. But as Bob said it is very system dependent-though I think he may be off the deep end with the pennies and nickels thing, the cheapskate should use silver dollars like the rest of us ;)
~Tim |
Hi Tim: If you think that this is bad just give Mike VansEvers a call. He'll have you playing with blocks all over again; wood blocks of different sizes & types of wood, located in different places throughout the listening room & even placed atop of & alongside of your components. The scary part is that this stuff actually works! |
Whirshfield, I think the relevant point here is the difference between the way cones or spikes function underneath a speaker vs. the other components you are wondering about. The reason Thiels (I own 'em too) come with spike points is to rigidly couple the speaker cabinet to the floor, assuming the floor is not a flexible suspended job and is carpeted (if the floor is too flexible or resonant, degradation instead of benefit may result from direct coupling; without carpet, protective disks may need be used in between for floor protection). The spikes do this by piercing the carpet to the floor below, bringing the speaker's considerable weight to bear on three tiny points (which define a plane) at some extremely high PSI (pounds per square inch). This has the effect of rigidly fixing the cabinet in position without the possibility of sonically significant wobble or flex (particularly in the case of a poured concrete floor substrate, like the foundation of a typical SFH). This in turn gives the drivers, especially the high-excursion bass driver, a less "lossy" "launch platform" from which to operate. In other words, the mechanical impulses as transduced by the moving drivers are not partially dissapated on unwanted cabinet motion ("For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction" - or how about, "If you see the cabinet rocking, don't come a-knocking!"). This makes the speaker's response more accurate and linear, both temporally and dynamically. This type of operation DOES NOT have anything to do with theories about "vibrational drainage" or "resonant tuning" and the like that you see bandied about when it comes to cones being placed under electronic equipment. For that type of useage, you may subscribe to any of the above-posted or similar theories; I take them all with a grain of salt (especially those pertaining to the "mechanical diode" concept of supposed one-way motional transference - the famous "drainage with isolation"). I personally believe that environmental isolation, in the form of non-resonant decoupling support footers, makes the most sense under most components (I like Audio Prism Iso-Bearings here). This should be combined with a highly rigid and inert support shelf and rack, for which good arguments can be made in favor of construction that is either very massive (hard to excite, vibrationally speaking) or very light (quick to stop vibrating, less inertial influence over the component). Good arguments can also be made for suspended (hanging) support systems, to in effect remove the components from sharing the floor with the speakers. The "soft" footer support concept is essentially one of a damped spring, and just as a car suspension is tuned to the mass of the vehicle, a component that very heavy may need several footers underneath to place each footer in its optimum range of compression vs. compliance, while a lightweight component may need to be mass-loaded on top of the cabinet. (Speaking of cabinet tops, many of them will benefit from the internal application of a constrained-layer damping adhesive sheeting material to kill ringing of the casework). Of course, in the final analysis, if you're gonna tweak, then you're gonna have to try different things out and listen for yourself. It's all quite dependent on the component in question, but as for myself, in general I think the improvements to be had from aftermarket footers are fairly marginal in most situations with a good rack system, but not entirely insignificant either. For my all-tube amps, Iso-Bearings result in a little bit more transparency in the bass, and they help keep my API PLC from disturbing the rest of my rack. But I also had a CD player that was more likely to skip when disturbed if on FocalPods, so cones may have helped there. And I have never tried air bladders, microscope tables, ball-and-cup systems, etc., although I do have a Symposium shelf under my TT, which I like. As always, YMMV! |
this is the funniest string I have read here at Audiogon (aside from the cat sleeping on amps)...it seems I shouldn't spend my money the way I want to, and what works for one may not work for another...yet that means the tweak is useless?
Back to answering the orginal question...try points, and see what you hear. You may or may not get the point.
I do have one question...if van evers sells wood blocks to tweak my sound, will he also sell me the pennies dimes and nickels to tweak? If so, I wonder how much he charges. |
Mdomnick, to me the funniest thing about this string is the entirely (honest!) unintentional pun I seem to have slipped into the first sentence from my above post. I've really gotta stop writing on the 'Gon past my bedtime... |
I recently awoke the other day and found myself in the 21st.century. Last time I saw anyone use an innertube was on the deck of the Titanic [they drowned]. Hope you get the point. Isolation does not work. It only delays the the time of return. |
