Sistrum or Neuance or...?

More to ponder...

It seems logical to me that a group of interested parties (audiophiles) would benefit from the establishment of some baselines or minimum standards by which to judge or quantify the effectiveness and advantages of products in question. But, this is difficult if not impossible to achieve due to the subjectivity of the individual listener and the myriad variables which must be considered.

If one cannot personally listen to a specific product, one is relegated to the evaluation of reviews, testimonials, word of mouth, and finally, the manufacturers claims. Nevertheless, the educated buyer has the distinct advantage of insight, because he or she can understand the fundamentals of the product.

In addition, it would be hard to argue that a product has little or no merit if after significant time in the marketplace, it has apparently sold very well or better than others within its price range. On the other hand, there are a few excellent products which by virtue of the reclusive nature of their designers, and a total lack of advertising, remain virtually unknown.

The reasons why so many products sell is because many are actually good or effective. But what does “good” mean? I t only means the product out-performed or performed differently in a pleasing manner, than the product it replaced!
If it was the first product of its kind, it merely fulfilled the buyer’s expectations.

Therefore, a product may be deemed “good”, especially by only a few people, dispite its limited effectiveness and marginal performance.

Most significally, a product may be “good” for some even if the manufacturer’s claims make no sense or at worst, contradict established fundamental engineering and the laws of physics!

Audiophiles buy racks or “furniture” that don’t satisfy their expectations. Next they buy a certain shelf or platform which still doesn’t do it, so they buy couplers or footers to place between the component and the platform. If this isn’t good enough, they replace the shelf and the couplers. Then it becomes apparent that the rack itself is to blame, so that gets replaced. When everthing finally seems perfect, a large or heavy component that you must have won’t fit in the rack!
People use cut-up tennis balls, hockey pucks, plumbing washers, marbles in spoons, and all kinds of tweaks that somehow please them. One adds “warmth” the other is “bright” or “dark” .... it goes on forever.
I’m not ridiculing anyone because I did my share of “experimenting”.

In my opinion, a rack system must do THREE THINGS to produce ultimate component performance;

1. Expeditiously drain and damp harmful component-generated, and air-to-component
vibration. (this requires direct coupling to the chassis if the stock feet are rubber)
2. Isolate the component from rack-borne vibration.
3. Provide the rack with isolation and damping of floor-borne and air-borne vibration.

As a bonus, I would look for “extras” to add to the prerequisites;
1. Capacity to accommodate large and heavy components.
2. Flexibility/versatility, which requires adjustable-height levels.

Any rack or support system which accomplishes only one of the three prerequisites may be “good” or effective. A rack that offers two out of three is even better, and the one that accomplishes all three is the best.

Finally, I’ll answer Budrew’s question... to get the best performance from your transport and DAC, you should buy the best (true) bearings that you can afford. No other device offers the benefits of damping and lateral isolation while simultaneously coupling and decoupling the supported equipment.

We all want the best we can afford, and I hope everyone gets what he or she wants.

Yours Truly,
Joe Ciulla
Equa Corp. / EquaRack

My name is Joe Ciulla... I am the designer of EquaRack products. I am not writing to tout my own products or to contradict or agree with any of the posters on this thread. Instead, I wish only to make a recommendation that may benefit all interested parties.

It would appear virtually all of the Audiogon threads on the subject of vibration control are far less than informative and non-productive. They often spiral downward into an abyss of offensive/defensive dialogs, challenges, accusations, and arguments. At the same time, the subject of the thread is almost always forgotten as the “fog of war” envelopes the opposing armys. Who wins these battles? is it the last poster, or the person who quits first so he or she can go back to listening to music? One thing is for sure - readers and posters who genuinely want and need to get true facts go away dismayed and empty handed! Doe’s anyone profit or enjoy this?

I believe the solution lies largely in self-education.

Despite the fact that effective audio products are often based upon science and art, these designs rarely contradict established engineering and technological principals. In fact, the best designs usually rely on these principles as their underpinnings.

Doe’s the product in question embody such priciples? Do you understand the priciples? If not, would you like to understand them?

Like no other industry, high-end audio if absolutely rife with mis-information and hype. This plague flourishes largely because too many people rely entirely on manufacturers claims, subjective testimonials by those who own the gear in question, by those who don’t own it and haven’t heard it, and a swamp of anecdotal and hypothetical musings.

Instead of relying solely on others, why not do some independent reasearch on the web or in a library? One can read volumes of actual un-biased facts in textbooks and technical reports and “white-papers”. Using a search-engine like GOOGLE, one could enter appropriate key words such as, “Vibration Damping”, “Vibration Isolation”, “Viscoelastic”, “Internal Friction” , “Hysterisis”, “Loss Coefficient”, “Transmissibility”, “Coulomb Friction”, “Resonance”, “Frequency”, and many others.

In addition, a basic understanding of the nature of the materials used in audio equipment is of paramount importance. Read about metallurgy, plastics, composites, and rubber. Why are bells made of brass? Why is aluminum used as sole-plate material in quality cookware? Why do cars use shock absorbers instead of rubber bumpers? Why are musical instruments made of wood? You could answer all of these questions and apply the underlying principles to audio.

Armed with real knowlege, one could evaluate the audio gear in question with regards to the soundness of its engineering and technology. If the subject item “makes sense” based on one’s educated opinion, one can then consider the manufacturer’s claims, and the opinions of others in a new light!

Yours Truly,
Joe Ciulla
Equa Corp. / EquaRack