Sistrum/Grand Prix Racks for Turntable Support

Stehno, No vinyl, that I can forgive and on many days understand, but no tubes! I'll have to order some tar, feathers and a rail, assemble the drummers and come for a friendly visit to explain to you the benefits of tubes. I'll have to admit however, I've often thought it would be wonderful to have tube sound without all of the hassles. I've even considered monitors and an integrated in a small library/den as a good alternative - maybe some day. :-)

Newbee, I already knew you were a dog from hell. So tell me something I don't know.

Why no turntable? Perhaps for the same reason I have no false teeth. :)

Seriously, though I have heard some nice analog systems, I've not been overly impressed. There are at least one or two ways to obtain a rich, full, and rounded sound without having to add vinyl to the mix.

It's kinda' like adding tubes which I also do not own. There are alternatives and like vinyl, tubed equipment requires more attention and maintenance and often times the sonic compromises are just as great or greater than digital and/or solid state.

My goal is to actually put together a system whose sound is hopefully the best combination of what the different technologies offer. (as if that's unique). And if I may be so bold, I believe I'm just about there.

But I've often thought, that if I were to start a second system, I would want to consider installing a turntable and tubes there.

-IMO

Stehno, Just so you're not disappointed -- WOOF WOOF! :-) But your second paragraph sez it all. Good post, even if you don't have a TT. By the way, why not?

Randyk,

I'll offer some additional theoretical musings. Like Stehno I haven't tried either of these racks, but I fully agree with his post. The Sistrum and Grand Prix are diametrically opposite in design philosophies.

I have a situation similar to yours, unsuspended TT (Teres) on a carpeted wood floor that's rather springy. The preferred solutions would be to:
a) move to a music room with solid floors or,
b) support the wood floor from beneath down to earth or,
c) mount the TT on a very solid wall shelf.
IOW, an unsuspended TT wants to have the most solid and rigid support possible. That's the whole point of the TT's design of course. To the degree that the TT can be moved, its inherently good transient and dynamic response will suffer.

So far this clearly argues in favor of the Sistrum. The problem of course is that d@&# wood floor. If a rigid coupling to the floor would subject the TT to excessive feedback or make it vulnerable to footfalls then you may have problems with a fully rigid coupling. OTOH, putting damping materials of any kind too close to the feet of an unsuspended TT is a disaster. I've tried it and transients, dynamics and bass response are just destroyed. This, IMO, rules out the Grand Prix.

So what to do? My solution was to use a heavy, rigid rack but with carefully selected dampening beneath the feet of the rack ONLY. My intent was to isolate the rack from the floor while retaining as much mass and rigidity as possible. I'll probably even try some braces between the back side of my rack and the wall behind it. This may enhance lateral stability without significantly increasing floor coupling.

Purists from both camps may have at me for this approach. Each side is fairly dogmatic about not mixing damping with coupling. My preference is to analyze the requirements of a complex situation and use whatever mix of techniques make sense, regardless of dogma.

If I had to choose Sistrum or Grand Prix without auditioning, I'd go with the Sistrum as designed but I'd be prepared to try isolating it from the floor and coupling it to a wall if necessary.

FWIW, YMMV and all that. If Twl wants his HIFI Mod back I'll understand! Fire away folks.

I do not have a turntable, but since nobody has responded yet, and at the risk of bringing out the hounds of hell, I'd like to throw out a thought or two.

I would suggest that, if you have not already done so, you thoroughly study the different methodologies and philosophies behind the design and execution of each of these two racks.

On the surface, these two racks may look as if they were designed using the same principles and fundamentals of dealing with vibrations and resonance.

They are not. In fact, I believe they are vastly different in just about every principle of design.

It's easier said than done, but the best way to verify which design and execution works best is have one of each on hand.

If one were able to conjure such a thing, keep in mind that the two different methodologies require an all or nothing approach to determine which is truly the better performer.

In addition, at least one of the racks using one of the methodologies (perhaps both) can take about a week for mechanical break-in to occur. And simply removing the equipment, moving the rack, reloading the equipment, etc. can take upwards of 3 to 4 days for everything to settle back in for best performance.

In other words, performance gains or differences can be absolute minimal for those first few days. But if done correctly and completely and once some of break-in/settling in time is allowed to occur, the sonic differences can be nothing short of amazing.

-IMO