Speaker Spike Philosophy

" This new learning amazes me Sir Bedevere. Explain to me again how sheep’s bladders may be employed to prevent earthquakes."

I’ll give you an A for persistence 

Aus-audio,

You are stuck in the weeds of book mentality. I will follow up on the ‘clogging of signal pathways’ when I get the time to do so.

See this is just plain wrong, or again communicated poorly. There is no need to seek out "earth’s ground", otherwise known as something with high mass. You simple convert it to heat .... the most common form, by far, of vibration control.

No! You are just plain wrong believing the most common form of vibration control delivers the greater results. We seek only the best!

A one cannot control vibration.

B you are exposing yourself to inexperience, in particular the hands-on variety.

You are now discovering the difference a direct coupled approach to vibration management delivers. Conversion to heat is sluggish - at least with the products we have auditioned that rely on this methodology.

We lose the life, the dynamic, the harmonic structures when we listen to products based on heat conversion. We hear softer and rounded tones where we seek the leading-edge dynamic and live experience.

In music there is a timeline. In musical reproduction there are time elements. Beginning with the voice or the musical instrument to the mic diaphragm, to the recording equipment to the playback to the room performance and finally the human ear, music reproduction quality is relative to high-speed.

Everything in the entire musical spectrum is related to speed. Too fast and the note goes sharp too slow, and the note is flat. In classical music, the musicians play a bit behind the note where in rock the musicians play slightly ahead of the note.

Speed in music governs all sounds. Speed defines the highly audible difference between springs and Points (not cheap spikes) and delivers to us the capabilities to produce that leading edge sound everyone seeks.

Example: if we used a different type of steel where the damping factors are greater, the absorption process in the material changes hence so does the performance of the Platform as well as if the brass geometry changes so does the velocity of resonance energy transfer, therefore altering the timing and speed associated with the result, a compressed dynamic performance with shortened decay qualities.

Heat conversion is a ‘slow go’ in comparison to direct coupling. We have tried it both ways and to our ears, high-speed is the audible difference maker.

Perhaps you would like to explain that to capacitor makers whose whole work is to eliminate electromechanical vibration that leads to ... distortion. But maybe you are just communicating poorly.

The reference is an analogy only.. Remember everyone reading is not - NOT an engineer!

However, if the capacitor makers were to examine their designs overall, they would never rely on another entity taking control over their potential performance. If they were to include a mechanical coupling device or mounting system that transfers energy and resonance buildup, their systems would perform at a higher rate of operational efficiency.

We have manufactured mechanical grounding mechanisms for all key parts in an amplifier such as the caps, transformers, outputs, power supplies and including the circuit itself. At full rated output power of 100 watts per channel the amp was quieter and near cold to the human touch. The heat sink became the entire chassis of the amp where we used our Points, not cheap spikes as the exit for resonance flow.

They say no one has reinvented the amplifier in over forty years - this result at the very least took that understanding to a new level of design. It was not the original sonic whatsoever, it was so much more of the original sonic plus more importantly, the musical character instilled by the designer did not change. You should hear what Live-Vibe Technology does for a valve design.

Huh? So is vibration good or bad now?

The initial vibration contains the dynamics and harmonics we seek as listeners. The problems begin when resonance created by vibrations forms on all surfaces large and small establishing component operational inefficiencies.

Thank you for your time,

Robert

Hey? Where did that previous post go? Am i answering a ghost writer?

I guess MC is right about some things, although I don't think anyone is as smart as he thinks he is.....

Perhaps not, but he may have spent more time trying different things than most(?)  I certainly will not be doing as much, myself. 

BTW, I spoke with KEF about my speakers and they agree that the platform concept I am going to try, replacing the braces/spikes/discs with the multi-component platform can remove vibrations/distortions within the speaker cabinets.

I didn't ask them why they don't just provide it with the speakers :)

I guess MC is right about some things, although I don't think anyone is as smart as he thinks he is.....

Gentlemen,

Coulomb friction is a calculated measurement.

By definition: Coulomb friction is a simplified quantification of the friction force that exists between two dry surfaces in contact with each other.

Coulomb's law states that the kinetic friction of bodies in motion is independent of the actual sliding velocity of the bodies.

Why C_____b friction? Because our discovery titled Live-Vibe Technology™ begins with two dry surfaces contacting each other with motion. The fact that Live-Vibe is scalable and is adaptable to other industries plus there are many surfaces contacting each other and are using physical tension to improve performance in many of the product offerings. 

Now add the demand for proof of function by the audio community and you are back to C_____b friction.

As for the “component operational inefficiency” statement relating to product function” defined as a rancid word salad - get used to it. 

The science of tomorrow is about increasing operational efficiency in existing models such as electric power grids, transformer use, energy storage devices, compressors and electric motors that are a few products seeking newer energy conservation methodologies.

Our theorem involving component operational efficiency can also be proven using temperature as the control mechanism. Temperature reduction is much less arguable than the majority of audio’s hypotheses.

Science relates to efficiency, motion and temperature much easier than audio’s real-time-analyzation, flat response, polar patterns and compression wave dispersion, clogging of signal pathways, all of which are too subjective a topic for science, third party testing and product quantification.

Live-Vibe is also being explored for use in other industries outside that of audio, so I truly believe we are onto something here. I am not a physicist, not a mechanical or EE. Those guys do not wish to get involved in audio’s arguments - too subjective for their blood.

You can challenge any portion of a theorem and usually convince anyone the theorem has holes in it, ours being no different. I get edgy when smirks are presented in distaste hence the tater salad rebuttal. It is all I could come up with at the time but then add a glass of high-end single-malt and a great cigar and you might get a meet with Ron White instead ⌣.

Robert

Star Sound

Interesting. Have you tried isolation platforms? I am going to try Symposium’s as I mentioned above. I like the way it will work and fit with my speakers and keep the height constant.

It has multiple layers with one being a foam core that is the absorbing/compressing function like podiums. From looking at Mike Lavigne’s system, it appears that he is a fan of isolation platforms, although I am sure his are much higher quality and more expensive.

I spoke with the owner who has been at it for 27 years and has been improving incrementally along the way, just like 911s. Substantially less expensive than Max’s lowest cost solution and it focuses on getting the vibrations out of the speakers. Like you, he believes his platforms can help all components, including power conditioners! 

You made a good argument about sunk costs.Are you a lawyer in your spare time?

No, I am better than a lawyer, I am Millercarbon. Actually if you watch the Alan Watts videos I post you would know who I am. And who you are as well.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMRrCYPxD0I

When my folks passed I went to file probate. Clerk said you have to be an attorney to do that. No, you don't. Well you have to hire one, there's all these forms to fill out and file and they must be done a certain way. You mean like this one? And this one? I had researched the whole thing on-line. 

Thirty seconds later the case is filed and I am waiting my turn with the judge. Another time in court being sued by two idiot morons each with their own attorney me representing myself I didn't hardly even have to open my mouth but once to get the whole thing dismissed in my favor. I even got one of the idiot moron's attorneys to do something for me on their dime. So yeah, on top of audio, physics, electronics, politics, philosophy, economics, cosmology, add law. Oh, and business, astronomy, finance, trading, technical analysis, Elliott wave analysis, international finance (different than individual), world history, etc etc. 

Porsche, driving, fine watches, telescopes, bicycles, woodworking, plumbing, ... you get the idea. On top of all that I am incredibly modest and enjoy few things more than helping others master some of these fascinating subjects. 

As to why makers like Wilson don't just put theirs on springs, it would be so easy, but the answer is even easier. There's only so much time, money, and talent to go around. Easy for us armchair entrepreneurs to say do this do that. In reality they already are doing everything they can think of to do. If a Podium looks like a no-brainer, and it is, but so is directional wire, so is trying 15 different solders to find Cardas Quad Eutetic. Why use springs only under the speakers? What about the crossovers? Or should the crossovers be external? 

You get the idea. It is like that for everything. Every minute spent tracking down the best way of doing one of these is a minute not spent on what Wilson really knows best, designing speakers. (Yes I am giving them the benefit of the doubt on that.) 

the Granite,,the Granite,
i went down that road  Tossed it outside after 4 weeks.  Thick wood blocks 
to me a better choice .  Tossed them in the garage  after about 17 weeks or so
 

i never paided  any attention to how or what Cones did.  i just liked the bass better only thing  i could hear different.    i still have not lost my first Gen.  Tip Toes.  But mix different brands up when i use cones.   Now with this floor i have i use Giga ? 2,s   soft footers.   Eugene    Remember,   all of it is very low %% of Sound inprovment 

Thanks @antigrunge2 I spoke with Peter at Symposium and we decided on the Segue platforms (it's a little higher off the ground which I need and I didn't want to go for the roller blocks and the platforms - I can always add them) - he said it will work great with hard wood floors at a fraction of the Townshend price and will be a little more stable with my thin (7" wide) speakers with the speakers directly on the platform versus the Townshend bars having my extenders sitting on top of them.

I'll let everyone know what I think when I get them in a couple weeks. 

MC - something new for you to try - Mike Lavigne uses solid platforms (although I am sure they are much higher than what I am getting).

I use Symposium Svelteshelves with Rollerblock-like Final Darumas on carpet with very good results

Hey @mitch2 - I now understand that Townshend has speaker bars that a speaker can sit on top of at a substantially lower cost, but still using the podiums. They claim the improvement from the podiums on speakers is even greater than that I got from the turntable!

Haven't flushed out the best fit Symposium product, but theirs provides isolation within a solid, multi component platform, similar to what Mike Lavigne's system shows. They have lots of options and are US based and offer money back guarantees, which gives it a bit of an advantage from that regard.

@sokogear - I forgot reading about how much you like the Townshend platform under your turntable, so you are indeed familiar with the benefits of their products and the principle.  Since it seemed from your posts that cost may be an issue (relative to the price of your speakers/system) I shared what works for me at a fraction of the cost. 

Some of this audio stuff seems like a Zeno's paradox where each step is half the distance to the wall.  At what point are you at the wall, even though you never will be, and what is each subsequent half step worth?

@mitch2 - as I previously mentioned, I use the Townshend seismic platform (with 4 podiums underneath) for my turntable. It was like listening to a new turntable when I put them in, after I got the correct podiums for the small weight of my table. Every adjustment was noticeable along the way when I was trying a little more weight under my turntable, etc.

I am also going to check back with Symposium Acoustics. They have a great solution also, but couldn't accommodate the small weight of my turntable without having to mess with counterweights that would have had to go on my plinth, which for my table (Rega P8) wouldn't have worked. I'm thinking of putting their version of a podium under each one of my discs to get even more isolation. I'll let you know if I do anything with him or Townshend. I think I can get the Townshend platforms for less than $2500 based on my speakers' weight.

that are damped using very thin-wall heat shrink (somewhat loosely applied) with one or two small holes to allow air to escape.

Rather elegant minimalist approach, I assume only shrunk at the extremes to preserve its more ’squishy‘ state and prevent friction. I guess another option would be to use an even more flexible (possibly corrugated) hose material and hose clamps..

@sokogear - If you want a taste of the Townshend isolation products without the cost, take a look at my system page, which shows pictures of individual springs that are damped using very thin-wall heat shrink (somewhat loosely applied) with one or two small holes to allow air to escape.  Other benefits of the heat shrink damping is that it creates a better bond with the bottom of your speakers or speaker stands and it protects the bottoms from being scratched by the bare springs. 
One source I liked using is Century Springs, which have an easy to use spring finder feature where you input the spring parameters you are looking for and are provided with a list of springs meeting your parameters.  I have teed up the search feature for you in the provided link.  Expect to pay about $6-$20 per spring.
Otherwise, try Nobsound.

The Credo video is indeed a bit cheeky, a former distributor claiming to have taken Max‘s work to another level.......Interesting guy (Ozzie) with a background in microwave engineering. I had an enlightening conversation with him decades ago about vibration and damping (in connection with turntables) and he seemed to have all the fundamental principles pretty well nailed down even then. I ended up buying one of his turntables, which I still own today.

Interesting MC....I just can’t believe how the Wilsons of the world wouldn’t want to improve their speakers sound on new models. Adding a couple grand to $50K speakers  be worth it if the improvement is as significant as I experienced with my platform on my turntable.

You made a good argument about sunk costs.Are you a lawyer in your spare time? I guess the more relevant comparison is how much you’ve spent on your entire system versus just the speakers, in which case $2500 is significant, but if the difference is as big as I got from my turntable platform, perhaps justifiable.

How big a difference do you hear from the platform versus high quality spikes/discs under speakers? Compared to using it with a turntable?

I wonder how the Credos sound.....if the difference is as large as you have experienced with the platform,  it should give them a big edge over their competition. I never heard of them before you mentioned them.

Anyone for a spin of ’Brain Salad Surgery‘?

Everyone seems to think the post that follows is some kind of personal message. I pulled $250 out of my you know what as an extreme example. Oh well.  

I didn't admit anything. Because, for one thing, what you said is false. Some company name of Credo ripped off Townshend's design and builds and delivers their floor standing speakers on springs. Here it is! https://www.credo-audio.ch/ev-reference-one-eng.html 

Made their own tediously wordy video ripping off all Max's same ideas too https://www.credo-audio.ch/loudspeaker-isolation-en.html    

As for Magico, et al, this is the same faulty logic used to discredit aftermarket power cords.  

Fact of the matter is manufacturers of all kinds of things make choices that often times have nothing to do with performance and everything to do with the fact customers vary widely in their skills and abilities. It is a whole lot easier to plop a Wilson down than to crank one up onto a Podium, adjust and level. 

But, funny thing, we had one do just that and you know what? Said it was totally worth it! Worth the trouble, worth the money. I must admit. 

Also, very few are as open minded, innovative, logical and eager to change for the sake of improvement as yours truly. For example, it has been known now for a solid two decades that the solution to SOTA bass is a distributed bass array. Yet where are the speaker manufacturers? You have confused popular with true. Many things that are true are not popular. In a lot of cases probably never will be. So?  

Then too there is this thing called the fallacy of the sunk cost. You might find this interesting. The idea is once having spent some money on something you factor that into all decisions forevermore. The money is spent, the cost is sunk, it is a fallacy to even think about it any more. But it happens all the time. 

In your case what the speaker retailed for or how big the discount or what you paid is a done deal and could not possibly matter less. For proof, imagine someone gave you the best brand new Wilson speakers for free. Imagine you know they will be a whole lot better on Podiums. (They will.) But you are not going to put speakers that cost zero on a $2500 platform. Right. See? 

Hey MC- my speakers are not $250, but were $3000 list. I got a huge close out discount which makes the Townshend speaker platforms much more expensive than the speakers.

it is interesting you have to admit, that no floor standing speaker is designed with springs or pods or their ilk, and several turntables are. I am not familiar with Magicos, Wilson’s or other astronomically priced speakers, but are ANY delivered with springs? I know many come with spikes.

I've tried a lot of different spikes and cones over the years and was using BDR Cones as the best for a very long time. This was under my turntable, and speakers, and everything else. When I tried springs it wasn't even close, they were better in every way. There is much less glare, greater clarity, and a lower noise floor. Peak dynamics aren't better in the sense of having more volume but dynamics do improve because the noise floor is so much lower. Imaging improved probably for the same reason.  

Extension, the improvement in extension with springs is highly dependent on tuning them to the load. If the load is too light the top end is too prominent. Likewise if the load is too great the bottom end is bloated and top end extension rolled off. Get it right though and springs are significantly better than any cone, or spike, or anything else. Period. Been tried too extensively now to be anything but beyond doubt. 

That is the situation with plain springs. They beat all comers. Except they have no damping. So the one weakness of springs is the aforementioned tuning requirement. Even then though without damping there is a problem with resonance. I noticed this with springs under my turntable and figured the same had to be happening everywhere else. 

This is really what led me to try Townshend. I knew Max had figured out a way to accomplish damping, and engineered and tested to use the right amount.  

The results are easy to hear. Every instrument has so much more of its correct natural tone signature and timbre it is immediately obvious. It makes all your recordings come alive as never before. This all happens without ever drawing attention to anything. It never sounds like any one frequency is being accentuated or hyped or anything. Quite the opposite That is what happens with spikes- the ringing accentuates a part of the audio band that we associate with detail. It is not really detail. It is etch and ringing masquerading as detail. It is no exaggeration to say the sound on Podiums is a revelation. 

I don't know that I would recommend $2500 Podiums to a guy with $250 speakers. But my $4k Moabs? They for sure sound way better than $10k Ulfberht, and for $4k less. So for me they are a deal, and while not a deal for everyone they sure are for a lot more than have them now.

I hate to disagree @linnvolk, but I have an engineering degree, took physics (even thought it was in Computer Science and Engineering) and knew about Coulomb's law (I vaguely remember it) and of course friction, but not "Coulomb Friction".

In any case, as in one of the earlier posts as recommended by one of the poster's dealers, let your ears do the deciding. Rega uses spikes (very big ones) on its $40K Naiad table and SME tables are very highly regarded and use some type of podium/springs.

I use springs under a platform under my turntable, and spikes (with discs so I don't tear up the hard wood floor) on my speakers....really by default since they came with the speakers and are recommended by the manufacturer. I would be interested in hearing if a spring platform would improve the speaker sound, but then you have to decide if you take out the legs and the spikes and the discs, just the discs, just the spikes and discs....a lot of experimentation. I am sure the distance off the floor makes a difference also.

The fact that the spring platform for speakers from Townshend costs more than my speakers makes it a non-starter. I personally think springs are better suited to turntables than really heavy items because of the sensitivity of the cartridge picking up the signal from the groove. A completely solid floor standing speaker that is well designed should not need springs. There must be a reason why NO speaker company designs them with springs. Now when you talk about monitors on stands, you're adding a lot of variables, and maybe then springs would be advantageous.

Sorry - no word salad, just horse sense.

Anyone who has taken physics (which includes anyone with an engineering degree) should know what Coulomb friction is.  It may be more widely understood than not.  But we digress...

@mitch2 , I know you are not the salad guy.

Whether the model applies or not, using Coulomb friction in any literature directed at audiophiles, to me, is not above board, as most would have no idea that means nothing to do with electricity (in general).  I think we are in sync on our impressions of marketing. Whether it applies to the matter at hand, it is just one of many forces that would be in play.

@ausaudio - I may have misunderstood your response but I am not the salad guy, just the guy tapping out after seeing enough pseudo-scientific rhetoric used to try and sell audio stuff. 

BTW, Coulomb was an 18th century engineer who is best known for Coulomb's law, which addresses the proportionality of electrostatic forces of attraction and repulsion.  The scrapyard guys who lift old cars using an electromagnet are probably thankful for Coulomb.  His name also defines the SI unit of electric charge.  He did do work in friction, and Coulomb friction is a model used to predict the direction and magnitude of the friction force, and acceleration, between two bodies with dry surfaces in contact, taking into account the relationship between static and kinetic friction, and how those may act with respect to a system where there could be a variety of contact surfaces and loading situations.   I am skeptical as to the applicability of the model to spiked audio equipment platforms, at least in the manner portrayed.  Of course, my impressions of their marketing scheme has nothing to do with the success and value of the products they produce with respect to spikes, platforms, and more.

This stuff wears me out. How many illogical analogies can be made in one paper....how many times can you say "Coulomb Friction"....why not just say, "only our product will fix the problem you didn't realize you had....." Props for persistence though...

Agreed, but I stand corrected, your quote I believe referenced tater salad with mayonnaise dressing left on the counter far too long and long since rancid.

Personally I would have just used the more common name for Coulomb Friction ---- friction.  I assume this is to confuse people to think it has something to do with electricity, but in this case Coulomb is a person's name, not an electrical constant. 

Of course, that tater salad makes the assumption of the sources of energy, and where they are going, relative amplitude, etc. and hence makes a blanket conclusion for mechanical grounding.

The statement you are referring to is backed by technology, physic.

I am all ears. What technology and physics?

By changing the effectiveness of the grounding plane (platform or spikes), the transfer of resonance becomes reality where your book-mentored approach might change as well.

Resonance cannot transfer. Mechanical motion can transfer. Sound can transfer. Changing how you couple something to a ground plane can impact the resonance point or size of the resonance by changing effective mass, damping, or spring ratio. There is no transfer of resonance.

Vibrations (mechanical, electromechanical or airborne) establish resonance and clogging of the signal pathways establishing component operational inefficiency.

Resonances do not clog anything in a signal pathway. They may add to the signal as a non-harmonic component, or they may modulate the signal creating harmonic and IM components. They do not clog anything.

Employing isolation techniques, one merely protects one component from interfering with another that it is in direct contact with. Isolation increases the effects of Coulomb friction by building resistance between the mating surfaces. With regards to airborne resonance, isolation principles serve much like the dielectric material in a capacitance device, essentially turning the component into a giant Resonance Capacitor. This is not the opinion of our company, Star Sound Technologies, LLC but rather that of the average graduate - level physics textbook. Minimizing the resistance (as caused by Coulomb friction) via a mechanical grounding process is the only logical way to compensate for the effects of Mechanical, Electrical and Airborne resonance within any given system.

This stuff wears me out.  How many illogical analogies can be made in one paper....how many times can you say "Coulomb Friction"....why not just say, "only our product will fix the problem you didn't realize you had....."  Props for persistence though...

Aus-audio

Never related audio discussions to a food group. 

Word Salad with Low Cal Ranch Dressing that has been in the fridge too long and gone rancid.

Here we call that tater… tater salad!

The statement you are referring to is backed by technology, physics and can easily be proven by ear with your choice of any electronic component, turntable, speaker, tabletop radio or my personal favorite, the vintage plastic boombox - your choice, any brand.

It will even work on your Close & Play...⍢

Too bad if you’re a vegetarian......

By changing the effectiveness of the grounding plane (platform or spikes), the transfer of resonance becomes reality where your book-mentored approach might change as well.

Word Salad

Vibrations (mechanical, electromechanical or airborne) establish resonance and clogging of the signal pathways establishing component operational inefficiency.

Word Salad with Low Cal Ranch Dressing that has been in the fridge too long and gone rancid.

Mijosty,

Long winded is my middle name. Anyone who ever spent time on the phone or has met me in person knows this. As not to bicker or argue over points of resonant frequency and amplitudes of resonance continuously forming on “all” vibrating surfaces and hopefully putting us on the same page of understanding, I urge you to review this document.

 http://www.starsoundtechnologies.com/CMS/uploads/vibration-and-coulomb-friction-2013_001.pdf

Regards to renderings on testing:

My point was that ‘live environment’ testing results are meaningful only to the designer. I was hoping to pick up more on the studies of driver function, formation from shear waves to compression waves, velocity of various materials and anechoic wave patterns but that would require another half-dozen paragraphs. ⌣

We can perform the same accelerometer testing on your system in our lab that would clearly differ in comparison to your results unless we have the same room sonic environment, the same equipment support systems holding the model, the same racking system holding the test equipment, the same attachments and stand for supporting the calibrated microphone or accelerometer or recording drives and the list goes on. The measurements would greatly differ.

Regards to resonant frequency:

Any resonant frequency can be changed easily. Based on your postings, my guess is your physical model is not providing you the best information due to the cheap spikes and environmental obstructions limiting the performance of your subwoofer.

Changing the resonant point of your test model, say we replace the cheap spikes and put the enclosure on $300 Audio Points or a $500 Platform. The changes in sound quality would improve as would your testing results where you would realize how much further along you are in the process of development.

 Now place the same model on a $1200 platform and you will also notice how much more effective your design is in sonic as well as the differences in measurement. To prove beyond any doubt that you are ahead of expectations, place the same model on a $2,500 platform and that might show you where your inefficiencies are in the design along with advancing the test criterion and more importantly, really focus on the sonic improvements.

By changing the effectiveness of the grounding plane (platform or spikes), the transfer of resonance becomes reality where your book-mentored approach might change as well.

*A subwoofer measurably generates less distortion when it is firmly spiked to the floor. I do not know if this is true for a full range loudspeaker that is crossed to a sub at say 100 Hz.

This is true regardless of speaker size, mass, material science, construction, or crossover points. If you use a higher end spike, there will be much less distortion to begin with.

*Does vibration transferred to a purely electronic device cause audible distortion?

It would take a massive series of vibrations or a poorly designed chassis with a cheap footer system where I do not believe any of those exist in today's marketplace however, any device using manmade power will vibrate. Vibrations (mechanical, electromechanical or airborne) establish resonance and clogging of the signal pathways establishing component operational inefficiency. When the inefficiencies are mechanically grounded and transformed into component operational efficiency, one will hear the difference regardless of tube or transistor design.

*Designing a decent speaker spike is child's play as is making a decent speaker stand. Locking the speaker to the stand is also child's play as long as you don't mind sinking a few screws into the enclosure. Designing and making a subwoofer enclosure that does not shake or resonate is not so easy. Do you have any siggestions?

Yes a few… but first,

My experience with subwoofer driver and cabinet development was spent with the engineering team at McCauley Sound and working in the sound reinforcement business with three highly successful sound companies. I was part of a four person team that designed and manufactured over 300 custom subwoofer enclosures in the days of IASCA Tournaments and have participated in the build of a few championship vehicle systems that toured audio and electronics shows.

We just placed a pair of twin modified 18” subwoofers into our mechanically grounded Energy Room in Madison, WI to see how much pressure level is required in an attempt to acoustically overload the walls, floor and ceiling. Imagine having the feel and dynamic headroom of a live event in a studio setting? Yet the room is capable of hearing every note and decay defining the difference in sound between two different brand names of woodwind or string musical instruments.

http://www.mccauleysound.com/product_overview.cfm?ID=2338 

https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/8168

I just wanted you to know, we do have some experience in your field of interest.

According to you, developing a "decent" cone is childsplay. Really?

We have witnessed a multitude of “decent” vibration management companies come and go over the years, but few remain past the ten-year mark and by the twenty-fifth year, all of them are no longer in business with exception to maybe two companies.  

Your "decent" speaker stand design that was also defined as child’s play might climb to the level of a boat anchor by our standards.

If the speaker resides on our products using a few screws to attach the speaker to the stand will alter its original sonic - guaranteed.

The point being "decent" does not survive High-End Audio.

Suggestions:

1 There are talented designers that have already surpassed your level of achievement so I would always recommend reaching out to them or gathering information on their products adding to your understanding and level of research.

2 Get the subwoofer off carpeted surfaces and cheap spikes. Hard surfaces will define all that is going on without the absorption of rubber/foam carpet. Place the sub on a neutral grounding plane. Contact some manufacturers to see if they would accommodate you with pricing in order to attain a quality grounding plane for your testing.

3 Concentrate on the sound and forget about the hand touching tests or physically stomping on flooring tests that are totally irrelevant to speaker design and sonic performance. Do not forget as you are adding mass, the product has to be capable of transport and positioning.

Good luck with your future in designing and we hope it earns you a living or a place in the industry or self-gratification if that is what you seek.

Please feel free to phone us, we will always be happy to answer questions or assist in solving anyone’s audio related issues or just talk sound.

Thank you for your time,

Robert

Star Sound

Right. I started testing with different springs ordered from eBay. Even once you know what you want in terms of dimensions it is still a lot of trouble to find. That is why I ultimately dumped individual big springs and recommend Nobsound. Not because they are better, but because they are about as good and save a tremendous amount of time and trouble!  

Townshend on the other hand are not only a whole lot better but save even more time and trouble. The MDF test platform I built was from scrap just sitting around my shop. Knocked em together in an hour or so. Looked ghastly but worked plenty good. When I was seriously contemplating just what it would take to make them look good and be easily adjustable, the whole package, that is when I decided to try Townshend Podiums. Glad I did. Better looking, easier to adjust, and sound way better too.  

Lots of choices. All of em better than cones or spikes. That is what amazes me. That all these options are so much better, yet the vast majority still have not figured this out. Kind of like DBA, around for 20 years, yet hardly anyone knows about it and half the ones who do argue instead of adopt. Go figure!

It is really quite astounding just how good ordinary springs can be when resonance is minimized by tuning the spring to the component load.

Exactly what I have found.  Use the correct spring constant and appropriate maximum spring load compared to the actual load, apply damping, such as loosely applied thin heat shrink with a hole in it (what I use), or maybe foam inside of the spring, and you should be able to reduce the natural frequency of the damped system to below the audible band.  It was a little more than $35 though because it took me a few tries to get the correct combination of springs.  Other "design" considerations include what spring diameter and compressed height you want, as well as what number of spring coils might work best for the height of spring you are using.  There are lots of choices.  With speakers it is good to know the front (under the baffle) is heavier than the rear due to the weight of the drivers so two different spring constants may be necessary.  Another thing helpful to me is that my main speakers and my two subs all use Sound Anchor stands, which provide a rigid base for the springs to act against.

The Credo video used a very early generation Townshend Podium that they tried to pass off as a current model. They were for a time a Townshend distributor, until they ripped it off and started selling that instead. They pull a fast one with the graphs, you have to watch real close and go back, as they try and make the Townshend graph look bad when it is better, and theirs look better when it is worse.  

You are right, you do not have to break the bank with isolation. Ordinary springs from eBay for about $30, or Nobsound springs for about $35, perform about as well as Gaia or anything else around that price level. It is really quite astounding just how good ordinary springs can be when resonance is minimized by tuning the spring to the component load. Nowhere near Townshend level but awfully good for the money.

Was pretty impressed by a guy on youtube from Credo in Switzerland and what he found was spikes attenuated certain frequencies and amplified some , he had all the correct gear to test and sensors and when he put the graph of both tests up when he measured the waves from peak to peak you could clearly see a benifit to using decoupling pucks vs spikes one instance 80% differance, you cant ignore that unless you believe the guy is lying to you, he wasn't trying to sell me anything . I seen GIIA makes the puck with the disk spike combination of both, he didn't test that but that might be worth looking into if you want spikes. I did allot of research and looked at allot of reviews and went with the SVS feet , I need 12 for my dual pb16s SVS and they really do work no BS there , you dont have to break the bank with isolation , I spoke with the head of SVS cause I was getting room boom and this along with acoustic treatments Curtain/ Corner Traps really cut down and cleaned up my bass , once I reran room correction it allowed my gain to come up so you know it worked . Im really happy with the results, without decoupleing your subs your turning your floor into a speaker smearing/ mudding up your bass. 

Those who bash springs dont know what they speak about.... I know.....I devised my own method with total success...

Excellent to hear of your successful outcome through careful experimentation. I feel inspired.....

@ jchiappinelli  - Lenehan Audio in QLD Australia sell the ML5 floorstanders exclusively with springs, which were developed to be as good as Townshend podiums. The first pair actually shipped with Townshend as the feet some years ago now.


Mike Livine's system extensively uses isolation, often very expensive devices are used. https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/615

Or could it be, because I called out that your preferred method - Springs, are you know.. “springy”, and would not be be best at damping vibrations. The spring action would just add their own color or even potentially, resonance to the vibration. Springs might be good at suppressing vibration transmission (from one send to the other), but this is a different application altogether.

No, that is EXACTLY the application! Could it be you have totally missed this? How?! It has been explained clearly several times. Max Townshend has a whole video on this!

Springs do not damp. Never said they do. Nobody said they do. That would be nuts!

Springs isolate. They allow the speaker to vibrate independently from the floor. This allows the speaker to damp itself and stop vibrating much more quickly than when coupled to the floor such as with spikes. This is why the seismograph clearly shows less ringing with Townshend Podiums than spikes. NOT because the Podiums damp anything, but because they break the coupling with the floor.

Honestly, it seems there is a small but very butt hurt group who just can’t get past their being butt hurt long enough to read and understand. Try and see through the pain. There is no shame in being wrong. Some of this stuff is not that easy to understand. Took me a while. But I find it a whole lot easier to TRY AND UNDERSTAND than to go around trying to blame someone else’s attitude or whatever other excuse I can dream up.

Just accept the fact that you blew it. You blew it so bad that what is the essential element- decoupling- you thought was "a different application altogether." You got it absolutely bass ackwards. Admit it. Accept it. Move on. In other words, grow up.

Springs, are you know.. “springy”, and would not be be best at damping vibrations. The spring action would just add their own color or even potentially, resonance to the vibration

Then add some carefully calibrated damping to address the vibrations and you have ........... Townshend Podiums

If my fine tuned and double set of 4 springs boxes under and another set of 4 on top of each speaker and under the load,  finely tuned by the  load under an heavy precise weight but with a different compressive force applied onto them is more than good....THEN,

I dont doubt the platform by Townshend must be more refined and more efficient...

But for 100 bucks for my 2 speakers with NO negative impact at all but only a better timbre perception a better imaging etc...I dont plan to buy one for my 500 bucks system for sure....It does not make sense ...

Those who bash springs dont know what they speak about.... I know.....I devised my own method with total success...

Springs, are you know.. “springy”, and would not be be best at damping vibrations.  The spring action would just add their own color or even potentially, resonance to the vibration

Then add some carefully calibrated damping to address the vibrations and you have ...........  Townshend Podiums

a speaker or subs that sit directly on the floor will transfer a vibration into the floor . Much like a tin can with a string , your basically turning the floor into a speaker smearing and coloring your sound , you have to decouple your subs and your speakers with rubber isolators , if you want to be extra most guys are here then you can add spikes under the rubber , I chose the isolation only and works wonders and you dont have to break the bank either SVS makes a great kit 4 $50. also any vibrations that make it to your center will smear the sound , isolating your center is key to keep vibrations going both ways 

@sokogear, thanks for the advice. Garage is in Houston area and is not climate-controlled, but it is an attached garage.  It did not get below 32 F when we had our recent snowpocalypse with temps dipping (just) into the single digits. Summers here are hot and humid. We will see how it goes. I doubt the garage temp gets above 90 F (?). The larger issue is wood dust—this is my wood shop, and while I use hand tools whenever circumstances permit, a fair amount of dust gets generated nonetheless. 
The investment is fairly modest: BlueSound Node 2i, NAD C316BEE V2 (40 Watts), and Klipsch RP-600M.  About $1700 drive-out. I am all ears if anyone has ideas about protecting it from dust. (No discussions on dust-collection systems, please.). 

+1 @linnvolk  Most of the belittling involves @millercarbon, who does know a lot, but sometimes doesn’t understand some of your points above. Your dealer sounds like a good guy. Everybody’s hearing, taste, and priorities/budget are different.

I don’t think $17K is a small amount to be investing though. However, you’re around my age and hopefully your expenses (payroll) are shrinking and the amount of time you have to enjoy your system is increasing, so you will benefit more from it now.

One point- not sure if I would invest much in a garage system unless it is climate controlled or you live somewhere like San Diego where the weather doesn’t get extreme. I’m sure our equipment doesn’t like 30 or 90 degrees or worse. I have a Bose wave clock radio that I move down into the garage when I wash my car. Not great sound, but strictly background music. You could do something like that (portable boom box type set up) and either put more into your main system or trim your expenditure.

Enjoy!

<soapbox on>
I am really not interested in seeing personal slights.  My OP was a set of technical inquiries.  Was hoping to see mature technical responses.  Most replies thus far have been.  Seeing the beginnings of a departure from that here.  This is a highly subjective subject.  I heard it best from my dealer earlier today.  A lot of this is "witchcraft,"  (please read on)  by which he did NOT mean that there were not valid physical explanations for what is going on.  He was honestly stating what I agree to be a fact, which is that:

1.  There are things that make a difference.
2.  Not all will hear the difference.
3.  A given difference may or may not be simply perceived (as opposed to real).  In other words, some things do not make a difference.
4.  Some will find a given difference "good" and others will find the same difference "bad."
5.  For the most part, our understanding of what is really going on physically, acoustically, and psychoacoustically in these differences is incomplete, sometimes vastly so.

I don't care to see others' audiophilic manhood called into question because of opinions/preferences on the above (or anything else for that matter). 

Back to the dealer.  This dealer has never attempted to sell me isolation equipment, though he certainly has it for sale.  He believes in it.  When I asked him about the topic today, we had the discussion summarized above.

He has a regular stream of folks coming through his door hawking the latest and greatest bits of kit.  In most cases, he puts it in his reference system and has the team give a listen.  If he and/or they find it to be helpful, they may start selling it.  If they find it not to be helpful, they do not sell it (I gathered most things fit this category).  He does not sell anything that he does not believe improves SQ.  He sells pricey Symphony plinths, and high-dollar power and speaker cables out in plain sight, none of which I intend to buy.  Today.

He is a firm believer in trusting your ears.  Not his. 

He also has a good grip on the twin realities of budget constraints and limitations on what any given client can hear.  His flagship system is $275k, but I am going in for a paltry $17k myself to update the electronics behind my AV 5140s, including going Aktiv (Exakt), and to put a modest system in my garage so I can have music while spending time there.  This is perhaps more than I should be spending, but I suspect it will be my last large expenditure.  I am 58, and the last time I spent serious money on audio was about 20 years ago.  I needed to get into the 21st century this time (streaming), and have chosen a path that should be incrementally upgradeable.  I have spare drivers for the speakers, which I like a lot.

I bring this dealer up to say that I like his approach:  Don't judge.  Help others.  Know your stuff (he does--he was involved with Jack Renner in the early Telarc recording sessions (Fennell, etc.)).  Know your clients (if you are a dealer).  Don't belittle others just because you know a lot and have a great pair of ears.   
<soapbox off>