TBG: The Sistrum SP-1 and SP-004 platforms will support in excess of 2000 pounds. The Sistrum SP-101 will support 300 pounds.
Sorry I was away for a couple of weeks, so I couldn't answer timely. |
TBG, to the contrary, the Sistrum platforms do transfer the vibrations from the component to the ground very efficiently. The points do not function as a "one way" device or "mechanical diode". This is a misconception.The vibrations move toward ground because that is what energy does. Not because there is any "mechanical diode" implied by the cone shape. In the Sistrum platforms, the entire platform is designed to work as a system. In this configuration, it was designed-in to have the upper points contacting the chassis of the component and the lower points contacting the floor. It is only on the Sistrum Platforms that the Audiopoints are arranged this way, because of the presence of the platform in-between them. This does not mean that they are less capable of transferring the vibration to ground, but in fact makes them more capable of doing that. I recognize that this seems different, but I assure you that it is engineered this way because it works better. It wasn't done like that for appearance or other purposes. These platforms are designed by top-flight engineers(with engineering degrees) for a single purpose of vibration transfer, from overall geometry right down to specially specified materials content and finish type. These aren't made by an interior decorator, although they have a nice appearance, fit and finish. |
Sean, I think you are reading more into what I wrote than what I intended. I never said that the shape doesn't matter, I only said that it does not act as a mechanical diode.
To clarify, the resonant energy will seek a ground state, just like any other energy, and this is why the Audiopoints go under the component, and not on top of it. This is the route that the energy will take on its trip toward ground. So, that is why the movement of the energy seems to be one-way.
As far as the materials and geometry are concerned, they affect the ability of the Audiopoint to be more effective than a simple foot. The material and geometry are designed to reduce Coulomb's Friction(with regard to the resonance characteristics) in the Audiopoints, which allows the Audiopoint to rapidly transfer the resonant energy toward ground without damping. Damping could deaden the live dynamics of the music. When using a simple set of Audiopoints, the point is downward because there is a maximum contact of the top of the audiopoint to the component, and a focal point for energy transfer under the point. When using a Sistrum Platform, there are 2 points being used in opposing vertical configuration with a platform sandwiched in-between. The upper points in the upside down cofiguration serve to maximize the contact to the platform, while the lower points serve to drain the resonant energy. When the platform is not used, then this orientation is not necessary. It has been determined that this orientation of the Audiopoints with the platforms provides the best combination, when used together. Since we have pioneered this concept, designed, tested, and used these products in the field, and we are in the best position to determine what works most effectively with these items.
We recognize that this is a different approach than what has been used in the past, which has pretty much been a variety of deadening concepts in the hope of absorbing all ambient energy in the listening room. However, since the introduction of the Audiopoint in 1989, it has been shown that there is a different(and we say MORE EFFECTIVE) way of dealing with resonances, which is reflected by the more than 300,000 Audiopoints sold into the market during the last 15 years. Audiopoints have become one of the most popular form of resonance treatment with consumers because they work. And they work because they are engineered using the concepts that I described above, as well as some other technical concepts. The designs are engineered using accepted laws of physics, and not snake oil.
Our concept, and the central concept of all our products is improving the capability of audio systems to operate at higher levels of performance, using the science of Resonant Energy Transfer, by reducing the Coulomb's Friction in the resonant energy path between the components and the ground. This allows the resonances to move most efficiently and rapidly out of the components and into the ground state. Our materials and geometries are all engineered around this basis, and that is what defines these materials and geometries. While we have pioneered this science, there are still new breakthroughs to be found, and improvements to be made in the future.
We don't expect anyone to simply accept our explanations or ideas. We simply ask that people try them out for themselves. We have a 30-day money back guarantee of 100% total satisfaction on every product we manufacture. We put our money where our mouth is. If our products don't do exactly as we say they do IN YOUR SYSTEM, then we will give you a FULL REFUND OF YOUR MONEY. We have a very low rate of return on this guarantee, although we admit that there are rare occasions that we do get a product returned. We take it back cheerfully, and refund money promptly. For the vast majority that keep our products, we have a LIFETIME WARRANTEE on all of it. And we are a company with over 15 years in the industry, so we have stability and a track record of not being "fly by night".
Truthfully, this is all any company can do. We provide a well engineered, useful product at affordable prices, with a money-back trial period, and lifetime warrantee. We feel that this is the best way to serve our large user base, and attract future purchasers. |
Sean, in the case of the upside down Audiopoint on the Sistrum Platforms, it was decided by the engineers that this was the better orientation for performance. It has been explained to me that the better physical coupling of the upper Audiopoint to the platform was more critical to the performance of the product than having it the other way around.
If you would like to discuss this with the engineering staff, please call Brent Riehl at 1-402-464-4777. He is the inventer of the Audiopoint, graduated near the top of his engineering class a Lehigh University prior to embarking on his lengthy career in audio, and can satisfy any questions you may have regarding the engineering and performance of this product. He is the one that should be discussing this with you for the clearest result. |
Sean. Regarding "double-speak", my stating that the Audiopoints are not a mechanical diode does not preclude the items from having certain characteristics that may differ somewhat directionally, nor having characteristics that may behave differently when operating in conjunction with other devices(while being able to conduct in both directions). I feel that you have set up a "straw man" and then knocked it down, while claiming to have "defeated the argument". You placed words in my mouth to suit your own purposes.
I clearly stated that the Audiopoints operate as a rapid conduit for resonant energy, and never stated that they cannot conduct in both directions. I stated that the resonant energy would seek ground via the path of least resistance, as the 2nd law of thermodynamics states, and that is how the directionality of the movement would be defined.
Your concept that the vibrations are moving up the point is muddy, because the energy that affects the component on the Audiopoints is simply a side effect of the floor transferring its vibrations toward the greater mass or ground. Everything standing on the floor will be moved along with the floor's movement.
The problem with this idea that floorborne vibrations are more deleterious than airborne vibrations is that one should then sacrifice the ability to properly deal with airborne vibrations in order to try to tame floorborne vibrations with a rubbery storage device. In our experience, it is the airborne vibrations that are considerably more deleterious to performance, and that the proper handling of these airborne resonances is far more important than floorborne considerations. Now maybe you don't agree with this, but that doesn't make us wrong. I have often stated that it makes no sense to reduce the performance of components by blocking the airborne resonance evacuation path, in order to make up for a deficiency in the construction of the floor. If the floor has a structural problem, then fix the floor. Don't wreck the sound of your system trying to make up for a floor problem.
Again, maybe we disagree on this, but I feel you have tried to create a perception here that I am speaking in a contradictory manner, and I am not. I have stated my position, and the company's position on the basic workings of this product, and given the reasons. If you don't agree, fine.
And regarding other methods such as damping, how many rack company salesmen can recite the Zener Viscoelastic Model and explain how it relates to their O-rings or rubber feet, complete with amplitude and frequency ratings in every person's listening environment. Really, I think you are being pretty hard on us, given the fact that nobody else has to back up any of their statements on this subject. I'm trying very hard to give a good explanation of this, and I'm only the salesman. |
Hi. I see that there have been more than a few additions to this thread since my last response. These include some genuine questions, and also some comments just aimed at tweaking certain personalities and attempting to inflame the discussion. I'll try to answer the questions again, although after re-reading my previous posts, I really have answered the questions, and some readers just refuse to accept the explanation.
To try to re-clarify again.
Airborne resonance energy(in the form of the music you are playing) enters the equipment, racks, or whatever, and can influence the sound of the music reproduction. We wish to minimize the effects of this by causing the resonant energy to be tranferred to the ground via our products(which are designed to rapidly transfer this energy). Floorborne resonance energy(caused by energy entering the floor from the music being played) is causing the floor to move as the resonant energy moves through the floor toward the ground state. Note that in both cases, we maintain that the energy is moving toward ground.
The reason that the energy will move toward ground is the law of thermodynamics which states that energy will seek the ground state via the path of least resistance. This is not something we made up.
A major argument seems to have been made that because our Audiopoints have materials and geometry that is designed to cause this Resonant Energy Transfer to happen in the most efficient manner that we can do, that "physical science" maintains that using the Audiopoint in an upside-down configuration on a Sistrum Platform will result in a less-than-ideal result. This seems to be based on the empirical hypothesis that "because it is geometrically optimized in shape, that it can only work best in one direction". However, when we contend that when additional items are introduced(added) into the design(such as a Sistrum Platform), that this may make a difference in the OVERALL PERFORMANCE OF THE PACKAGE AS A WHOLE, opponents do not understand or do not accept this point. In fact, we have determined through our testing(confirming our design concepts), that the configuration for the Sistrum Platform we have chosen DOES work better to do the job of Resonance Energy Transfer than just a simple set of Audiopoints alone. The opponents have no testing to back up their statements, but simply some kind of "technical insight" that "makes them certain" that their statements are correct, and our product testing results wrong. Pardon my attitude, but this position of "technical insight" without any real testing results to back up the statements is ludicrous and profoundly unscientific. To make definitive statements without first ensuring the scientific veracity of these statements, and then casting doubt on the actual results of a manufacturer's products is, at the very least, a slur at the manufacturer, and at most, an attempt at selling the same "snake oil" that they claim to be warning people against.
The reduction of Coulomb's Friction in our Audiopoints and Sistrum Platforms is what improves the speed of the energy transfer via certain proprietary materials(no, it's not just any brass) and geometry. The geometry acts as a focusing "lens", for lack of a better term. In the case of the Sistrum Platform which uses the stacked Audiopoints in opposing configuration, we desired the "lens" to be in the opposing configuration to conform with our overall design goals. With all due respect, if someone else has a better idea or wants to do it differently, then go design your own platforms. This is how we do it, how it works best(in our opinions), and we have quite a few happy customers who can verify the results of this design. This is the product. It stands on its own merits, and it sells based upon how well it works and whether it is worth the money, not whether some skeptics understand the design or not.
In case anyone needs further info in "layman's terms", our Audiopoints have specific design that allows them to be efficient at transferring resonant energy from the equipment above them to the floor below them. Once the energy is in the floor, it is moving through the floor toward ground and is only influencing the equipment or rack above it by the fact that the floor is causing anything on it to move along with it. The Audiopoint is not making the energy flow in one direction(as a "mechanical diode") but instead, the laws of physics are defining the direction of the energy flow. We designed our products to have excellent performance at their price points, and an audible improvement at each price point increase, so that good value is perceived by the purchaser who may wish to upgrade to our products higher up the line. We have a product design and performance philosophy, and this philosophy is maintained throughout our entire product line. We don't strive to please everyone or gain approval of every audiophile, but simply offer what we feel is a line of solid performing products for the money, and back it up with as good a customer support as can be found in the industry. If there is any purchaser dissatisfaction within the very reasonable trial period, we give the money back. Anyone can simply try for themselves. To answer the question about the reviews, there certainly are reviews - notably a very recent Positive Feedback article, and Brutus Award for Excellence for our Sistrum SP-101 platform.
So, we have a resonance control philosophy and products that are designed along with that philosophy at several affordable price points, and some higher price points. This is what our company does. It is up to the audiophiles and purchasers as to whether they agree or wish to use our products. I have explained this design philosophy as well as I can, and as well as we wish to(since we will elect to maintain some of our design as proprietary). From here on in, it is up to each person to decide what they want to do about resonance control in their system, and how they want to do it. If some still wish to not accept this explanation, then that is fine. Nobody is pushing this down your throat. However, I hope to put to rest this notion that we do not have valid, tested, and working concepts and products that are available for anyone to veryify at any time.
And notice that at no time did I cast any aspersions on any other companies, products, or people. We simply have our way of doing things, and offer them for sale. We don't need to knock anyone else down, since we are confident that our products will sustain our claims on their own merits.
I sincerly hope that this settles this issue. |
David(4yanx), I neglected to address your question about our Sistrum and Audiopoints products vs. other cones such as ceramic type cones.
While, of course, we feel that our approach is superior than others, the main differences begin in the design concepts, and emerge in the eventual product and performance behavior. Our Audiopoints are designed with the idea of moving the resonances out of the components. Most others(no mfr. targeted here) are designed to be a vibration blocker or absorber. The concepts are entirely opposite to each other. Starsound says that the best way to do it, is to let the vibrations naturally evacuate via a very well-designed rapid evacuation route to ground. Most of the other makers of feet and racks say block the vibrations under the feet and try to absorb them. While every method may have some proponents, it is our contention that blocking and attempting to absorb this energy is less effective, because it not only cannot achieve nearly what it strives to achieve, but also, in addition, traps any airborne vibrational energy in the components, since it blocks the only natural way out for the energy.
We recognize that our approach is not the traditional method for controlling vibration that has been considered "normal" for years. However, simple tradition is no competition for a truly improved way of doing things. A way that wasn't even considered(by most) before the last 15 years. And even though our products have been out for 15 years, there has been a fight every inch of the way from people who "liked the old" and had no desire to try anything new or better.
Now, naturally, there are applications for nearly any technology, and there may be some applications where this blocking and absorbing technique may be just the ticket. However, it is our contention that in most audio applications where there is not some glaring deficiency in floor construction, or some other opposing technology added to the mix with our product, the Starsound products should, and most often do, give a better sounding result(in our customers' opinions and ours).
Also, there have been other companies attempting to enter the "coupling" camp with products that seek to emulate the performance of Audiopoints and Sistrum products, but lack the basic understanding of the science employed by our engineers. This leads to the inevitable statement that I hear every day, "But I've tried brass cones, and other metal cones." Of course. But Audiopoints are not "just any brass cone". I know people want to say, "Sure, and I'm a Mongolian Rocket Scientist too(no disrespect to MRS's)". But the fact is that there is an underlying design concept in Audiopoints that is not used in any other cone, and this is what makes the Audiopoint the real deal. Just any cone, brass or otherwise, doesn't employ the reduction of Coulomb's Friction that the Starsound products do. I'd venture to say that most of the cone designers don't even know what Coulomb's Friction is, nor what it may have to do with making feet for audio components. It's sort of like saying that I've tried analog turntables because I had a "Close and Play" as a child. I can't help that this is a complex design that people have a hard time understanding, but it is alot more engineered than people realize.
So, those are some of the main differences that I can talk about, but the proof is in the listening. No matter what I say about our products, it really doesn't say what the difference in your system can sound like. The only way to know that is to try them. |
Newbee, I have spoken with the guys about this, and we are working on a "White Paper" to discuss all of these issues in depth, so that all can understand. It may take a little time, but we're working on it. We want people to understand this technology as much as possible. It is of no use to us for people to have misconceptions about our products.
Basically, it(the efficiency increase) amounts to less wasted energy in the component. We will address this in the White Paper. Please allow us the time for our engineers and staff to put this together. |
I find it humorous that some(actually about 3) people think that an entire product line could be designed (from the ground up) around a certain concept, works totally awesomely(according to the users), yet these same people think that the manufacturers have no clue how it works (Even after several explanations).
I think it far more likely that these same people lack the necessary technical understanding to grasp the obvious explanations that have been put forth several times on this thread already.
Just because certain individuals fail to accept or understand certain technical facts about the working of these products, has no bearing on anything. These products still do work as advertised, and operate exactly on the principles described at least twice in some of the above posts. Discussions of "logic" when totally misapplied, and based on faulty misconceptions about our product, are not helpful to anyone.
Thousands of other audiophile users do accept and understand these concepts, and buy the products, and are ecstatic with the results. Statistically, that makes the few grumblers and misunderstanders in this thread a negligable representation, which is to be expected when dealing with large numbers of people.
I'm truly sorry that some cannot manage to grasp the idea behind these products, but it has been explained at least twice.
If this is not enough, there is another explanation forthcoming, as promised, from our engineering staff. We really would like to have everyone understand these things if possible. We don't want to leave anyone "out in the cold", except to the extent that they may refuse to accept our statements.
Please stay tuned for this, if you still are having trouble with these concepts.
For the rest of the people in the world, we can continue to do business as usual, and continue to improve the sound of peoples' systems who can understand and do buy our products. |
I agree, not much has really changed, and Sistrum continues to be at, or regularly contending for, the top position of the performance platform and racking category.
When platform and racking systems get compared at the top of the heap, as to which one is sonically best, Sistrum is always mentioned in the mix. It has always been this way since the intro of the products(quite to the consternation of some).
When something is new or better, there are always those from the "old camp" who feel threatened and make disparaging comments, while never trying or experiencing the product themselves. No amount of explanation will do, because they simply refuse to accept it. The common name for such activity is "naysayers".
I think that this will continue, because it is, to some degree, human nature for some people.
I would only hope that this really small percentage of the naysayers would try the products themselves, and become experienced on the subject.
Of course, we at Sistrum never say that anyone HAS to try or use our products. Just that we RECOMMEND that they try them. And we cheerfully accept any returns of our products with a full 30-day refund without nitpicking. I really fail to see how this seemingly arouses such ire from a certain group. We make products for home audio use. If you like it, you can buy it. If not, then don't. It is as simple as that. Our strongest sales technique is to actually have people audition our product because once they try it, they keep it.
What some (unbiased?)people(who admit to never hearing the products) have to gain by trying to imply snake-oil claims, when the products obviously have legions of happy users and magazine awards over 4-15 years of time, is not too clear to me. But it is clear to me that these same folks seem very irritated that Sistrum supporters(and company personnel who clearly state their affiliations) would post on these forums, and we are always met with pretty close to the same group of opponents, year after year, who STILL have never tried the products and STILL refuse to accept any amount of explanation.
However, I would invite anyone to try any/all of these very good products and learn what the fuss is all about.
DISCLAIMER: For anyone who still is not aware of my affiliation, I am employed by Starsound Technologies, the manufacturer of Sistrum Platforms, Audiopoints, Sonoran A/V Wire Designs, and Harmonic Precision electronics and speakers. |
Actually, I'm not in very bad shape. I could use a couple more miles a day on the track.
Thanks for the "promotional opportunity". |
Thank you Ohlala, for your very reasonable, and polite response.
I appreciate that. |
Larry, thanks for trying out the Sistrum products. I'm glad that you found them very satisfying on your system. You've shown an open mind, and it benefitted your system.
It seems that the only people who recognize what the Sistrum products can do, are the people who use them. Funny thing about that, huh?
Any pioneering technology always meets resistance from the entrenched "status quo". We have definitely seen that.
However, the cream will always rise to the top.
Naysayers notwithstanding, Sistrum proves itself in listening tests again, and again.
Thanks for sharing your experiences with us. |
Starsound will be speaking at the Chicago Audio Society meeting on Sept. 26,2004, and will be displaying a room full of our gear at the Rocky Mountain Audio Festival in Denver during October 8 thru October 10, 2004.
The Harmonic Precision Caravelles will be there(at Rocky Mtn. Festival), and also the new Harmonic Precision preamp, and monoblock amps. Of course, Sistrum, Audiopoints, and Sonoran A/V Wire Designs cables will be in use throughout.
You can meet us all there, and hear what the fuss is all about. That's where the talk stops, and "the rubber hits the road". Ha! A pun! :^).
Certainly, we understand that some have difficulty understanding our technology, but very few have any difficulty hearing the excellent results. Perhaps that is the only way for some to fully understand the validity of our product's performance. And, if any buyer does not see/hear the value of our products, we ALWAYS are willing to give a full refund upon return of the equipment within 30 days of purchase. We put ourselves "on trial" with every purchaser. Items are very rarely returned. This speaks volumes in itself.
Looking forward to meeting some of you at the show. |
Considering this thread is about Sistrum products, and a point was raised about someone not knowing when the Chicago Audio Society meeting was, and also the Rocky Mtn. Audio Festival(where we are showing), I think that my post was on topic and perfectly within the guidelines.
Simply because there are a couple of posters here who seemingly can't stand to have anything said about products or companies that they don't like, has no bearing on what can be said on these forums. They are not moderators, nor do they have any power to determine what is said here, any more than I do. |
Ohlala, I'm sorry that you feel that way. But of course, with your past posting history, I'm not surprised.
I'd express my opinions about you too, but don't want to sully the board as you did.
For one who apparently feels so high and mighty as to pass judgment(ie: narcissistic) on others here, you show quite a need of humility yourself. Whether YOU "believe" our technology, or not, is of no concern to me. Many others who actually use our items KNOW that they work well, and need no "beliefs" to bolster their experiences.
If you feel that Sean is the benchmark of audio knowledge, fine, but I would disagree. However, you seem to be somewhat selective in your opinion of whose "ethics" you approve of, and perhaps you need to review the reasons for his dismissal for extreme lack of them.
All my posts have withstood the scrutiny of the moderators here, and they have been monitored. Starsound's "deal" with Audiogon is the same as any other supporting advertiser, without whom the members would not enjoy the benefit of this website.
Whether you, or others, personally like me or not, is not a matter of priority to me. What matters to me is that some members of this website can get better sound from their systems by learning things about audio here, and that is why I post here. Not a popularity contest. I found out long ago that I can't please everybody all the time, and apparently you are one(among a few others) that isn't pleased. That's okay with me.
I've reduced my posting on this board by about 80% from my previous contributions, and the bulk of my typing time now comes from answering many emails from members asking me for advice about their systems. Oddly enough, they don't share your views about me. And I do everything I can to help them. And many times I don't even discuss anything that I sell. Surprise!
But actually, I don't need to explain myself to you, or anyone else. Let the chips fall where they may. You're taking your shot at "poster pressure". Let's see how far it gets you. You won't get me thrown off here by baiting me into a tirade or anger fit. I've been around way too long to bite on that one.
Back to playing records now.
Cheers. |
