Talk but not walk?

Hello prof,

If I may jump in and reply to your initial set of questions previously addressed to the audiotweak (he is on Holiday time:)

The question remains: how much vibration is *actually* occurring in any component in question, or in the case of any cap, and then; does it have *audible* consequences.

Electromechanical, mechanical and acoustic resonance caused from vibration establishes component and environmental operational inefficiency. Resonance affects performance.

Audible is the primary focus when adapting or applying our technology to any device. Increasing operational efficiency on fan motors must be measured and is inaudible however when our technology is applied to air conditioner compressors the results are audible as well.

it’s not JUST a hypothesis that the phenomena in question exists; it’s the hypothesis that the tweak, or product, under consideration produces AUDIBLE CHANGES in the output of a stereo system.

Anyone can do their own RTA, FFT and SPL tests in order to ‘see’ the results from any of our product offerings. This type of testing is more on the subjective side of science but is easily charted. You will ‘hear’ the evidence provided by highly AUDIBLE increases in performance from the product.

Operational temperature of an amplifier pre and post using Sistrum Platforms™ is more of a scientific approach to proving function. When the thermal temperature reduces from implementing any Sistrum Platform, it becomes visually obvious that the operational efficiency of the amplifier has increased. From the more subjective standpoint so will the musical quality of sound increase from reducing heat.

This is the Big Red Flag in high end audio claims. Appeal to science and engineering all the way up to the point where you ask for measured results, and then suddenly it’s handed off to marketing.

Agreed. Our problem with providing measured results has always been one of financial procurement and investment. In order to provide the correct data avoid of any doubt or people who insist on doubts as to the test and results requires third party independent testing in a well respected laboratory.

Most companies generate a few charts or graphs involving some type of test in hopes 'seeing is believing'. Have you ever reviewed any “in house” test that did not favor the product in question?

Then ask yourself, how the test relates to audio reproduction?

Example: In our case placing a rack on a shaker table or stomping up and down on a floor or whacking the product with a hammer is meaningless as those obscure situations do not exist in a listening environment. Add to that, the 'in house' test is never truly defined whereas an independent lab would provide information on all the variables including information on the structural environment, equipment list, date of last calibration of test equipment, testing methods, data before, during and after the test is completed, etc…

Anyone can design and produce a chart or graphs that display positive results for their own offerings - now that’s what we call handing it over to marketing - creative marketing.

The harsh reality of third party testing is financially based. Questions immediately arise such as; what is the total financial outlay going to do for the immediate growth of the company and can the company absorb the cost. The CFO has to determine how the tests will be paid for. As you are aware we are not talking pocket change as independent third party testing plus hiring the D.D.E. who will analyze and write opinions on the results costs a lot of money. In our case, that kind of cash buys the next prototype or manufactures the next product or increases existing inventory to keep up with sales demands. AND let's not forget there can be many types of tests involving a single design. 

Regards to measurements: We use FFT and appropriate software plus SPL measurements in order to assist us in analyzing and determining if we are on the correct approach.

Example: The mechanically grounded studio environment recently constructed in Madison, WI was tested with recorded data each step of the way. Began with an empty structure then added grounding instruments on the forward wall - took measurements using four types of test recordings then adding the grounding instruments to each wall thereafter where the same data was recorded. This information was forwarded to a well written and respected seismologist who is heavily involved in the study of shear and velocity of sound. She also holds multiple patents and has a vast knowledge of musical instruments. The information is also forwarded to highly respected sound engineers for further review and opinions.

In the case of an average electronic component - say a CD player sitting in my rack or whatever - how much vibration would the unit actually be undergoing? Have you measured this? I can tell you that, at least with my ipad seismometer app (obviously more crude than a professional device) it can easily measure vibration levels I can’t even feel. It registers no detectable vibration when simply sat on any of my components. Zero. And that’s a device *looking* to register vibration.

I really do not like answering a question with more questions but we need more information.

What were the testing parameters? Volume up or down? What was the room SPL and did you attempt to use various volume levels, etc, what material was the equipment setting on?

On the social side of things:

Do you believe that electricity flow generates vibration in electronics circuits (on all active electronic parts that are passing signal) and that vibration forms resonance where said resonance propagates on all smooth surfaces hence blocking or restricting all signal pathways? Have you ever researched Coulomb's law?

I am not attempting to avoid, distance, distract alter conversation or argue but we do require more information prior to forming an opinion in your test case scenario.

Do you have measurements showing the average ambient vibration on a component? Do you have measurements showing this ambient vibration actually alters the values or performance of a tied vs untied cap? Those are pretty obvious questions, right?

The answer is no to the first question as we do not know what an average ambient vibration on a component is or how many chassis’ it would take to come up with an average.  Who is in charge of paying the freight charges on those five hundred to a thousand chassis required for testing?⌣  Every chassis is constructed of different materials, thicknesses, sizing and weights which is what we would have to document before establishing test parameters. No to the second question, never had a reason to pursue the issue and not sure about the term ‘obvious questions’ relative to the capacitor conversation.

Then do you have measurements from any output of an audio device that uses capacitors that indicates the audio signal would have changed? How did you measure, how did you test?

Placing our technology into an existing amplifier design we mechanically grounded all critical parts to the chassis  (transformer, cap bank, output and principle circuit card) then placing the amplifier on a Sistrum Platform completing the high speed grounding pathway from parts to chassis to the greater sink (mass), the floor.

Were the results audible - yes very. Did the operating temperature of the amplifier reduce - yes significantly. The only measurement taken besides temperature was the RMS output. There were many changes made so we cannot state that the capacitors were the only part responsible to improving the sonic of the amplifier.

This initial test led Star Sound to build forty mono amplifiers that were sold to the public which paid for the project. Steve Keiser (B & K) provided the circuit design and was responsible for sonic signature of the amplifier. We mounted all the critical parts in a Star Sound fashion using Sistrum geometry. The project was considered a success and advanced our understanding of a developing new technology. The amps were built in 2003 where there was one issue related to failure since that time so we believe the operational efficiency of the product has established a track record for longevity.

In 2004 we did the same type of project manufacturing forty pair of monitor speakers (included caps) and titled the speaker Caravelle.

If only via listening tests, did you account for listener bias?

Every product we manufacture is based on listener’s recommendations, opinions and objections. In 2000 we chose to sell factory direct and have yet to open web based purchasing. We prefer to communicate with every client in order to learn more about audio or solve problems and earn your business. For nineteen years we worked with people in this manner which has provided us a greater capacity to innovate, further advance our technology and grow the company from hands on listener experience.

Robert

Star Sound

From the OP:

As far as I am concerned I've been waiting to give any explanation needed for folks to comprehend the OP, but as long as the responders are stuck in their own created spins, I can wait. Besides I've been busy walking.

I for one am not interested in comprehending the OP and since the originator is being patient in providing answers to questions asked from the readership being that everyone is stuck here on our own spins, we offer some highly opinionated answers to a couple of outstanding questions. At the same time, we wish to separate ourselves from the OP’s tactics so without further delays and/or psychological gamesmanship:  

My name is Robert and member of Star Sound (SS), a vibration management company. The OP and I crossed paths a quarter century ago where I was an Authorized Dealer for the OP’s products in a high-end boutique located in Allentown, PA in business from 1985 through 1993. We mechanically grounded walls with brass cones and reinforced wall structures by applying various shapes of blocks of wood and metals to existing drywall and flame resistant wall spread surfaces using various sized brackets, long bolts and nuts for anchoring purposes. Through various tensions we were able to change the sonic of the environment. I’m guessing this experience can be accepted by the acolytes as “walking the walk” therefore am fairly qualified to post here as an experienced tuner.

Please keep in mind that the OP and I are entirely different people with two completely diverse technical approaches to audio reproduction but share in and rely on a known application for product function titled mechanical grounding.

Regards to tuning:

Those who have not heard it have no basis to criticize it. Those who have not should try it.  

Good Point… I agree this technique provides function with audible results however… as musicians, engineers, audiophiles and most listeners already know - whatever instrument or device that is ‘tunable’ or has the mechanical means to alter harmonic structures particularly when using any type of woods combined with metal parts and tension procedures; the instrument and/or room will and does  “Go Out of Tune” via changes in temperature (contraction and expansion), air pressure, humidity or whereas pitch can simply alter over the course of elapsed time.

Having to constantly adjust the room, racks and speakers prior to and during listening sessions took too much time out of the day whereas some listeners may thrive having the capability for continuous change. The initial rush felt like I was mixing music again only changing the entire piece of recorded material in a ‘post production setting' compared to mixing individual instruments and vocals. This result yielded a really weird sensation but also one of accomplishment.

The largest drawback was the system and room never achieved a reliable point of reference. Charting measurements was improbable as the environment and system were always in a state of flux eventually leading me to abandon the tuning process.

Proof of this statement is provided from jt47t:

Now I realize that each recording can and should be tuned in as an individual set of values. With every recording we play it is slightly out of tune as compared to the last tuning. With some simple adjustments the soundstage becomes full and the tone balanced. For example the bass line on each recording is completely different from the next. The highs are too but the bass more so. Once we get that bottom end tuned it seems like the rest of the range falls into place or is at least easier to fine tune.

I eventually found difficulty in taking the required time and patience to dial in a single recording because listening time is always cut way too short. In my opinion, people should first analyze their listening habits, goals and available time parameters then decide if the variable adjusting methodology is right for them.

@amg56

Regards to your statement to the OP   -

Explain how or why this works. Why is it so hard to get a straight answer?

Here is my basic opinion on how this methodology functions (anyone can discover this on their own so there are no trade secrets being revealed here).

The process uses metal round rods or bar stock material on the interior of a wood box and is usually accompanied by two brass bolts located outside the box. The bolts are direct-coupled to the bar stock via machined threading with the wood surfaces located in between the metallic parts.

Applying ‘tension’ to the bolt mechanism creates a physical pressure against the wood surface establishing via compression and release the capability to alter the audible harmonic structure of whatever rack, speaker or wall device is in use.

Opposites attract:

Our Company’s technical approach to audio reproduction, environmental sound management and musical instrument applications are based on mechanical grounding techniques. We work to greatly reduce the highly audible frequencies of wood vibrating in hi-fi playback systems and listening environments.

Some prefer the use of wood stating that it offers a warmer or softer sound hence you always get various opinions of which kind (maple, poplar, mahogany, Amish hand-picked ⌣, rare or exotic hardwoods, etc.) and which type of finished wood sounds best (kiln dried, air dried, veneered, stained, painted, hard sealed, etc.). This is where the personal flavoring selections and argumentative conversations on what wood sounds best originate.

SS prefers to rely on applied geometry, material science and metals because the frequency of these "resonance conductive" materials and mass when vibrating are well above and below the range of human hearing. You do not hear their noise qualities unlike wood.

Reducing vibrating wood surfaces greatly lessens the amount of frequencies and noise in the environment. Removing any audible and/or inaudible noise from the overall formula creates open air space so you hear more of your speaker system in comparison to a lot of other self induced sounds being present.

The OP’s approach involves adjusting the harmonics of vibrating wood and often adds a lot more wood into the environment by using more products where the need for more adjustments are then required. There is no wrong doing here as previously stated above, some listeners may prefer and expand their enjoyment from this methodology.

Common Link:

Mechanical grounding is the key process that improves the performance in SS products as well as the OP’s products too. He uses brass cones to connect the stands to the flooring and metal screws or bolts to attach and mechanically ground the products to the walls and I am fairly sure he still uses brass cones or metal objects between the components and rack shelves to mechanically ground the components to the rack structure establishing the method of vibration management known as resonance transfer. Without mechanical grounding we would not have a company or technology to advance.

I feel the need to interject here involving jf47t to amg56:

jf47t states…

OK here's what you do amg. That thing at the top of your page. You type in "how to tune a guitar" now click on videos and it will take you to about a hundred or so videos on tuning a guitar. Now if you choose to pick another instrument simply type in that instrument and it will tell you how to tune it. Let us know what you learn.

There may be some confusion as to the use of the descriptive term ‘tuning’ as the OP’s methodology does not allow for tuning individual notes as on a musical instrument but does alter the harmonic structure and sound of a chassis.

As not to argue but physically tuning up an instrument for playback is easy to understand and likewise accomplish, however actually knowing what is happening to the instrument with concerns to the forces of shear, tension, vibration, energy build and release, resonance build up and what is actually happening to the string (if it is a guitar) and how those forces relates to sound and velocity is what information I believe amg56 is searching for from the OP?

Example: The readership has asked for definitions on how resonators function. Our R&D manager and product specialist, Tom D (the audiotweak) provided information to that question on 05-24-2018 11:41am and defined speaker function on 05-16-2018 9:48am.

amg56 admitted he did his four years of time and earned a degree in engineering so it’s in his blood to seek out more detailed information. To the best of my knowledge he and gkait are the only persons posted on this thread that have earned their authentic ‘goatskins’. If there are more, please let us know more on your background. There are also those here claiming to hold that distinctive title in education but obviously do not.

Thank you for your time,

Robert - Star Sound

Disclaimer:

Star Sound strives to deliver information to the best of our knowledge as we understand it without infringing on discoveries that are currently involved in the US Patent process. We do not know enough about empirical testing labs or empirical testing methods as they are not recognized as part of our program of study so we’ll let those topics up to others for validation.

Likewise we believe anyone who posts or reads audio related forums are already ‘talking the walk’ by reasons of working to gain greater knowledge and/or achieving better sound regardless of processes, progress, achieving successes and or failures. We all fail quite often while talking the walk and also walking the walk.

Vibration management in audio reproduction is overwhelmingly based on a host of questionable and arguable theories where we also share different opinions and objections. Without all those historical theories our company and newfound technology would not exist. Theory leads to discovery!

Our company is moving forward by learning about sound reproduction and function related to vibration in much greater detail and continues working to earn acceptance from the fact filled, documents required always demanding proof and well tested scientific community. Our theoretical concepts and products, despite all accomplishments are still a work in progress.

Converting theory to fact has been by far - the most difficult path to gain.

@gkait

I am guessing we hit a nerve? Really enjoyed our conversations over the years despite personality conflicts so tell me (based on your education) who is more important to advancing audio - mechanical engineers, sound engineers, aerospace engineers, electrical engineers, architectural engineers, bio engineers or professors that teach engineering?

What are your protocols for becoming a “real engineer”?

Not to burst your bubble but I’ll bet a D.E.E. working in traffic design for a metropolitan city gets paid a lot more money than you. Add to that the good Dr. is saving human lives to boot!

How has your degree helped you in running a retail business other than checks and balances?

Are you actually looking down on those who you obviously feel are beneath your grade and level of education? In my opinion that takes everything you have learned, everything you stand for, everything your professors taught you along with your ability to communicate with others right down to the dump and lets them there. Oh yes let’s not forget those most important sanitary engineers for without their expertise the world would be a very different place indeed ⌣.

Your turn...

I'm surprised you had difficulty tuning.

jf47t - Never alter my statements for your own protocol or intentions as I find that crap quite offensive.

If you properly read my statement, the difficulty was finding time as in hours and minutes in a day to adjust harmonics and not difficulty in “tuning” or turning a couple bolts. I worked concert reinforcement mixing music and sound earning a good living while your most recent favorite person in the world was still in high school so I know how to turn a knob and make changes in musical content.

You and your boss should better review the on-going glamour posts coming out of Las Vegas as they appear to be eerily similar in nature. Like two people are combining efforts and writing styles. It is also blatantly obvious to anyone reading the past four pages of this thread there is a two man team marketing effort being presented here.

Example:

Michael Green

Your a genius! You knew exactly how this thread would develop. You know this hobby's personality better than any of us.

Only you could have made this OP I am convinced.

See what I mean… the OP consistently makes grammatical mistakes like the one above where you jf47t tend to be more correct in the use of proper English. “You're” is the proper spelling so how can we be sure you actually originated this statement and simply did not cut and paste it up from another source?

I am hoping your boss gave you a raise in pay for posting that one. Next up, you might consider taking out a paid advertisement compared to working a forum hoping to attract a couple more clients via this poorly conceived ad campaign which should have been titled ‘talking is talk’.

OK, I'll bite:

Please fill everyone in… what’s special about ‘your’ genius that separates him from the rest of us or are you simply attempting to establish more needless bickering between the very few participants left posting here?

In closing:  

Did you hear the one about the tuning revolution and how it is going to explode and take over the Audio Industry on a global scale? That’s been out there for a long-long time so we are all watching and hoping you can become the latest catalyst to successfully launch it.

As always - Good Listening!

Robert

Mr. Green, glad to be of service. The truth hurts and always will - forever. Before exiting your campaign here (as things were just warming up); since you prefer to address the readership via children’s storytelling, I would like to ad the final chapter to your tale.

For all the angry cherries, there is hope. One first has to discover who and why the happiest cherry in the tree is disrupting the batch.

This is a good read by Jane E Brody of the New York Times  

https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/07/18/the-narcissist-next-door/

Sincerely,

Robert

Manufacturers and Dealers have no business owning threads on the AudioGon Forum. The floodgates will open once ‘free - no cost marketing and advertising’ is discovered. I will write a letter to management in order to have them weigh in on the topic.

Currently manufacturers and dealers are permitted to participate on threads and we appreciate having that capability however in my opinion, our contributions should end there.

Robert

Star Sound  

Jf47t,

You posted:

“Picture having a system from start to finish without any enclosed chassis? I'm not just talking about the playback part but all the way from the microphone forward. He started with the tunable studio (live room), control room, mastering room, in studio playback room all tunable. All the equipment was without their chassis, or custom built without chassis from the microphones on. No cable barrels no plugs every stage was either hardwired or clipped. No cover even on the mixers.”

First you say “imagine” then state “he started with” so which is it?

Does this recording studio exist? Does it have a physical address?

Can we book studio time in order to see and hear what it is you are attempting to tell us?

You posted:

“No cable barrels, no plugs”

I am assuming you are talking about the XLR, TRS and RCA mic and signal cables but are we also talking Alternating Current power cable plugs as in hardwired to the wall feeds? Are the steel covers then removed from the primary AC panels too?

Are you stating all the equipment covers have been removed from the total electronics package consisting of amps, compressors, all outboard digital effects, power supplies, microphones and the mixers too?

In closing, 

We would really enjoy seeing pictures of this studio to determine if in fact it does exist and is not imaginary or imaginarily engineered so do you have any?

Robert

These are all questions about audio and application so I am hoping this post remains void of a couple people filing complaint reports hence leading to the removal of this post. People want to know more...

@geofkait,

Thanks for pointing out my mistake as I generally make a few more with age setting in.

You of all people questioning engineering? Beep Beep - is that the sound of too much amg56 “traffic” in your head or has MG finally won you over with his compliments and praise?

I (we) are not desperate whatsoever. The On Stage Studio™ product is about to come online and will be open for auditions but it never hurts to learn why others apply different techniques that are totally uncommon.

We want to know why chassis lids, and cable connectors and barrels come off and what effect this has over the norm other than safety issues. We have our opinions of course but would like to hear the technical side from the OP walker or his assistant, the talker.

Heck, I’m trying to figure out how to keep a post alive on this thread. It’s obvious that you and me have thicker skin and do not complain to the moderators or have posts silenced, so I'm thinking you too should cut me some slack GacK.

@geoffkait

>>>>So, let me get this straight. You guys apparently have a mission statement

Yes, in a nutshell... 

Mission and Vision:

To create and establish a newfound science from understanding the detrimental effects caused by vibration ultimately affecting the operational performance of any equipment utilizing or manipulating power through its operation. Establishing a higher level of product operational efficiency while reducing power consumption.

and standard operating procedure to let the vibrations flow freely, right? And this mission statement and SOP obviously precludes the use of vibration isolation, right?

Yes and yes,

In fact, if I can be so bold, you guys actually believe that vibration isolation is not (rpt not) possible, correct me if I’m wrong.

Yes,

“True isolation” can never be achieved in real world applications. In audio, there are various techniques that alter sound through isolation principles however “true” isolation can never be achieved (physics, laws of gravity and motion and Coulomb’s law) in 'real world applications'.

So, are you guys claiming a scientific conspiracy of massive proportions that the project to detect and observe gravity waves LIGO uses a complex and comprehensive system of vibration isolation (they say is) required to isolate and stabilize the optics and other critical parts of the experiment from extremely low frequency vibration?

No.

We spent little time analyzing LIGO as we are in the music, sound and audio industries where this multimillion dollar experiment has no bearing on our business and - no sound.

However, even LIGO requires mechanical grounding supports for function as a non-isolation resonance energy transfer support system is used to champion their isolation techniques in a 'real world application'.

Everyone and his brother knows shape is an important aspect of isolation and energy control. That is why the Super DH (Diamond Hardness) Cone is superior in performance to the Jumbo DH cone which is the same basic size but slightly different shape. We’ve known that for more than 20 years, probably more than 25 years.

First, we are not claiming to be the originator of variable shapes.

Our research is taking us towards what is “not” totally understood regarding shapes related to vibration, interfering energy, resonance transfer and product function.

Secondly, hardness has very little to do with our technology where damping factors and mass related to material science combined with mechanical grounding techniques are more the focus.

My question for you is; what does hardness have to do with attack, sustain and decay qualities related to sound reproduction equipment or musical instruments?

We find that the "harder is better" approach to materials related to musical applications has drawbacks. The harder materials generally elevates pitch and narrows frequency range when applied to sound reproduction equipment, musical instruments and fails miserably when combined with a Sistrum geometry.

Robert

Regards to the dated Pioneer receiver:

MG took his time and converted this amp into a variable music machine that now can easily rival the very best of the best.

@jf47t,

Please provide a list of what equipment you believe to be the best of the best.

While at Axpona (this year) I listened to a pair of mono-blocks in two totally different environments designed by Rick Schultz of High Fidelity Cables and assembled by Peter Israelson. Peter is a member of Star Sound and has walked in your shoes prior to me. He is one of the most gifted and knowledgeable people I met in HEA and just think, MG “left him go” too ⌣.

This amplifier design uses Magnetic Conduction Technology where magnets and nickel tubing are used to pass signal and not copper wire (MCT is protected by US patents). These two gents are very good friends of mine as we share technologies and knowledge for the advancement of sound and audio. Bias aside, I consider this amplifier design a must hear and a strong contender for that ‘best of the best’ from my highly opinionated and extremely limited list of finest sounding electronics.

Sorry to state j47t, but the materials used to build the Pioneer chassis and chassis mass disqualifies the capability of holding a proverbial sonic candle in comparison to this design. Obviously these amplifiers are expensive to own. In fact, they enter the MG world where not only is HEA dead but so are large chassis electronics - dead. There were three pair sold since their debut in January of this year which puts MG’s claims to question.

If the reports and observations provided by gulpson concerning the Pioneer power conductors sticking in the AC outlet without a surrounding casing are correct and the public is permitted into the building; makes for a great case in search of a building inspector, fire marshal and if there is ever an accident of any kind, a good attorney. Cancels the insurance policy too!

There is the removing of the chassis cover again and we are awaiting an answer as to how that works in relationship with tuning techniques as previously requested?

You create a lot of wind… but zero answers to any questions on technical and/or mechanical function.

Robert

@geoffkait

>>>>Let me answer with a question. Why are the very hardest cones have the best performance and the softer cones like brass and carbon fiber sound the worst?

Depending on geometry - the shapes of cones will always vary performance greatly. The hardest cones according to your opinion have the best performance referring to Mohs’ scale as some type of scientific proof that hardness is a finer conductor for resonance where that relationship is extremely subjective at best.

Depending on material - brass is manmade where the chemistry and metallurgy varies greatly from supplier to supplier. There are quite a few choices when it comes to brass selections used in production that adds another variable in establishing performance criterion for comparison sake.

Depending on metallurgy - where a cheaper imported brass might look the same and even have the same “certifications in print” and are told it is the same material however we have gone through this process and will state otherwise. Metallurgy is critical to our product’s performance. Star Sound purchases a premium grade of brass and acquires it from a single source here in the States hence we benefit from thirty years of consistency in performance. We cannot speak for others.

Depending on the cost of the cone - comparing a $25 part to a higher priced item establishes a disadvantage although in some areas of the marketplace the lesser cost remains the stronger performer.

Depending on what the cone is resting on - a piece of wood will not yield the same result as any type of steel, copper, acrylic or carbon, etc shelf material. You make statements based on your analogy that somehow always relates to some type of chart or experiment having nothing to do with audio and/or sound.

You can classify the brass cone as being part of your worst sound however the history and longevity supporting the Audio Point™ tends to prove otherwise. Keep in mind, our particular brass cone is but one part involving the geometries used in our platforms, mechanically grounded studio environments and musical instruments so it’s not just a cone but serves multiple purposes.

Pop Quiz: Why is seismic vibration much more important for SQ than acoustic vibration or induced vibration? Especially for vinyl playback.

Where on Earth does one acquire testing data that could possibly support an answer to such a loaded and highly subjective question as this?

You forgot to include mechanical and electromechanical vibration in your question as these two also play a significant factor in the “importance role” of the formula but before any attempt to answer is even considered we need to know...

Are we talking day to day every minute mini earthquakes, close proximity vehicle traffic, extreme SPL in a pressurized environment, low noise levels in a recording studio, seismic as in trains passing by, air conditioners on/off, etc.?

Next - does your data or test methodology state how mechanical and electrical noise within all the electronic chassis was managed?

Next - what was the turntable resting on? A wood rack, an acrylic, a combo of lots of materials rack, a Sistrum Platform™, they all have very different performance values. The equipment rack is the foundation that either excels, limits or reduces the potential of any sound system and affects the outcome of all testing methodologies including what the test equipment itself is residing on.

Next - what facility was used for the testing and what was the test criterion used to produce your findings other than your own opinions?

Next - a biggie - what footer system factory or otherwise used to support the turntable or turntables? As you related to above there are differences between material, hardness and shapes govern audible performance where a simple factory turntable footer now controls the outcome and sonic results no matter what testing formula, equipment or methodology you used to set up this unanswerable question. What if the turntable footer is inefficient or less of a sonic performer - does that make the data and/or your opinion less relevant?

Finally - how did you make comparisons between seismic and airborne resonance?

Extra credit: Why is the material of the top plate of a vibration isolation stand relatively immaterial, to use a word?

I presume you are talking about an electronic controlled isolation stand such as Kinetic Systems Bench Mate - correct? Otherwise we refer back to question one and two - refrain, refrain, refrain.

We are limited by experience using these devices in audio applications as isolation is not a focus for our Company. In music reproduction we do not study nor rely on what is best for aerospace, biosciences, laser supports, etc. We do not study the effects of resonance related to electron microscope stability. Audio environments involve higher sound pressure levels that establish heavier amplitudes of resonance in comparison to what is generated in a clean room or scientific testing laboratory.

Since isolation and resonance energy transfer methodologies are entirely different so is the sonic performance created from each product. We have experienced Kinetic Systems in comparison with our products at a local dealer where the sonic reproduction using the same turntable, speakers, racking, electronics and cables remained the same for comparison between both devices. The result in sound performance was extremely diverse.

Two different theories, two different products (isolation and mechanical grounding) yield two very different sound qualities. It’s not like comparing two amplifiers of the same power and cost where one may point out minor differences in sonic. The differences are extremely audible where the listener will immediately know what performance is best for their sound - the differences are not subtle whatsoever.

Try placing a Sistrum Platform under the isolation table. Your previous listening results and information from the table are now also subject to change.

In closing:

When you can answer those questions you will answer your own question.

We will never be able to answer ‘those’ questions due to the vagueness of ‘those’ questions. I was hoping you would answer our initial question.

At some point, you should take us up on our offer to provide you a Sistrum Platform for your review. It might change your opinion on a few old school standards.

Robert

To jf47t:

Which one of you two are making this stuff up?

With the rising number of listeners moving from higher to lower mass systems the original audiopoint that MG introduced in the early 90's worked well with some of the amps of that time, but by the time the mid 90's were here the brass "zing" was becoming obvious as products changed their component materials.

News Flash!  Material science, manufacturing materials and manufacturer’s financial operating budgets which control materials selections change every day of the year and not every half decade. Your statement bears no merit. To the best of our knowledge this storyboarding cannot be supported or verified by Industry so, do you really expect us to believe this philosophical rhetoric?

And... Nice attempt at boxing the Audio Point™ into a small corner - zing! This year we are predicting to succeed a half million units sold, so it is obvious the AP’s continue to work well in a lot of speaker applications, OEM and DIY electronic and chassis modifications including “modern day” electronic equipment packages to boot!

Regards to the ‘lower mass systems’ portion of your statement - what exactly are you attempting to convey? Is the lighter mass better than greater mass? Does mass reduction sound better? Is the so called move to lighter mass a result of Industry or public trending? We never knew of this phenomenon taking place and truthfully would never consider it an issue of any importance.

When you analyze a well ‘engineered’ mechanically grounded racking system, the equipment chassis weight or materials chemistry makeup being placed on the platform is not a concern. If the device weighs two pounds of plastic or two-thousand pounds of metal alloy - the platform performs as geometry and material science determines function.

You can place a speaker, transformer, electric fan motor, industrial machine, CD player, turntable, grand piano, vibes, or any “amplifier from the early 90’s” on top where the product operational efficiency and performance increases remain remarkably consistent.

If you look at TuneLand you can see the evolution of components and the need for several different types of mechanical grounding methods and tools.

You will always be making different tools for all types of components and speaker systems because wood is an extremely inefficient material for conducting resonance to ground.

Any material of any size or shape will have an audible effect (positive and negative) when positioned between any components or speaker chassis contacting a wood surface or any surface for that matter.

We are of the opinion that racking designers who choose wood as a shelf material for mechanical grounding or isolation rack designs attempt to match the resonant frequency of the component and footer system to establish a desired sonic in combination with the audible sound of the wood shelf vibrating. This process becomes rather difficult when the equipment has different types of footer systems.

Correct us if we are wrong in this theory but someone has to take a shot at explaining in basic terms how ‘tuning’ works. The variable adjustment or tuning process works towards matching the resonant frequencies of the equipment, footer systems and audible sonic of the wood shelf into one sound by applying tension (compression and expansion) altering the harmonic structure of the whole.  

Manufacturers who do not use the variable adjusting methodology generally apply a greater mass of wood to dissipate and/or absorb resonance and/or apply damping materials such as rubber, sand, metals, etc to attain their desired product performance.  

If mechanical grounding is still the determining philosophy on how OP’s racks work then making a host of additional blocks, spheres, cones, springs, etc., will equate to a never ending ‘racking accessories for sales list’. Which ones do or should I purchase to use with what application? The gambit begins...

If any component footer outperforms another, the reason is directly related to the rack design or medium on which the footer resides. The difficult part is manufacturing a footer that is well accepted by a majority of listeners, becomes and remains popular for use in multiple applications and stands the test of time. Jf47t, what you describe as a better sounding product may not be the case when considering all the various racking, resonance management techniques and shelving systems available in today's marketplace - zing...

As stated earlier, there is never a sonic reference point established using a variable adjusting methodology as everything related to sound reproduction remains in a state of flux.

If you look at TuneLand you can see the evolution of components…

Everyone here is participating on the "AudioGon Forum". Why not provide direct links to your planned destinations as this will save listeners a lot of time in searching and navigating your site. The down side is you would not have to sell and resell and now more than ever - over sell your website on this forum.

Plus it would stop a lot of public confusion:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuneland

We are still waiting for an address location where that tunable recording studio is located; remember the one you recently bragged about with the three variable rooms where all the covers are removed from all equipment including the mixers.

Robert

PS - I spoke with any old touring friend of mine who worked live sound as an FOH Engineer for thirty years prior to retiring from the road. He is an Industry specialist and repairs both sound reinforcement mixers and elaborate recording desks (one of the few in the country that can repair any make, model, etc). He works out of Bauder Audio Systems in the greater Philadelphia, PA area. I told him the story about the covers being removed from the studio mixers and the response that followed cannot be printed here ⌣. I am definitely under the opinion you will not gain too many followers or walkers from that part of the “plug and play” industry.

@geoffkait,

Uh, Robert, we’ve already covered the dodgy subject of why low mass systems have advantages over, you could even say they’re superior to, high mass systems.

No big honking 🦆 transformer or one that has been removed and relocated elsewhere.

Solution: I really enjoy the big sound and dynamic headroom generated from “big honking” transformers and high power. There is no need to relocate it. For the DIY or serious learner, simply remove the rubber gaskets and mechanically ground it to the chassis (there is a cone for this application). The majority of mechanical and electromechanical noise will transfer at high speed to the chassis. Then mechanically ground the chassis to the racking mass to complete the high speed resonance transfer process and you are rewarded with more quality of sound, a cooler running temperature and most importantly - layered harmonics and dynamics that will soar through the roof!

No big capacitors that vibrate and shift the phase.

Solution: Mechanically ground the caps too! The transformer and power supply are the primary culprits for forming resonance. The caps as well as all key parts (outputs and circuit) should also be grounded separately to the chassis. This leaves each part to independently vibrate on its own accord without the influence of vibration affecting other parts and transfer resonance to chassis mass as it forms. The component operational efficiency will increase substantially without affecting the sonic character of the amplifier. Phase issues are a direct result from resonance build up without an effective mechanical grounding plane.

No large chassis that vibrates.

Really? Even small chassis vibrate. Any device that demands AC or DC power to operate will vibrate and form resonance but you already knew that.

No fuse to worry about.

Never had any issue with fuse protection for safety reasons.

Minimizes internal wiring, about 50% of which is soldered in the wrong direction anyway. Plus there is simply LESS things to distort the signal or vibrate.

GK, you can manage vibration - right? I would not know what music would sound like without distortion properties. After all that is how tubes establish their sonic profile as well as musical instruments - they distort! In a perfect world with no vibration or distortion would music have sound?

Lightweight components are easier to isolate from vibration.

We cannot comment on isolation as that was part of our past where those theories have long played out over time. I know isolation techniques; specifically springs always had issues dealing with various component weights. Need a thin spring for this two pound product and require a different version for that hundred pound device and an automobile sized spring for that three hundred pound speaker has always been the stumbling block. We no longer deal in that realm as weight is never an issue with our technology.

In your opinion GK, are we walking yet?

My personal tastes require a sound system that generates both mind and physical stimulus. I need to feel the kick drum in my chest and the bass guitar moving my feet where headphones do not satisfy my personal listening requirements. 

There are no industry related findings or proof that differences between high mass and limited mass systems exist. They all vibrate alike. It appears to be just personal opinions that are being presented here where ‘solutions’ on the other hand appear to be in limited supply.  

Give me that “big honker” of a transformer, lots of power with a 4 kHz snap in a kick drum and I’ll vibrate the world… ⌣

Robert

To jf47t  who plays both sides of the fence.

As the trolls on this thread become more desperate as well as former short term employees of Michael's (guys who didn't cut the grade) they are talking without actually walking.

Guess you’re attempting to spout off at Peter or me in referencing your difficulties understanding why we are no longer employees of that guy who has only twenty-five (25) year old images of himself posted on his site?

According to your discrediting statement we talk and do not walk however in our meager defense, please examine our list of talkers or whatever name calling you wish to provide today.

We are a professional organization in comparison to your extremely limited current vision of audio related talent. Here is a list of our company “runners”.

http://starsoundtechnologies.com/aboutUs.php

Now please show us yours…

Star Sound

Geoff,

Why anyone would wish to drive the circuit boards and everything else with 60 Hz vibration is beyond me. If it doesn’t make sense it’s not true.

Our newfound technology is scalable, increases sonic in comparison to old school techniques and can adapt and serve multiple purposes in advancing the art of sound reproduction and also serves several purposes in other industry applications. The fact that you are unwilling to audition or believe something other than isolation exists because it violates the LIGO agenda, we cannot help you.

Wait for reviews to come out on the new studio environment where there are no aftermarket acoustics required as you tend to ignore the existing reviewers’ true findings, customer’s truthful testimonials and refused free auditions over the past few years. In addition you cannot figure out, relate to or simply ignore our explanations so again we cannot help you.

To use the LIGO analogy if you ground the surroundings to the mirrors you see the vibration not the gravity waves. Follow?

We understand your point on LIGO however LIGO has no sound and nothing to do with our research, development and/or product functions. Stay locked in your way and forget about music and sound evolution because if you dare go there, you might “hear” what it is we are advancing - rapidly.

Robert

An observation; and by not mentioning any names here so this post should be free from others clicking on the old report button.

Learned today the moderators first receive a complaint then the post disappears.  No complaints - no removals. I am sure the moderators must keep a level on extreme posts however if summoned to a post by a complainer, they react accordingly.

GK is an excellent example of continuous bashing and demeaning the public yet all his posts appear to remain intact.

However when a topic is exposed containing information that already is public knowledge as displayed fully and taken from a manufacturer’s website, the post on this forum receives a complaint (from someone among us) and poof it’s gone.

Amazing how posts are always being removed on this thread yet rarely happens on others.

The balance of the readership here has thicker skins, nothing to hide and call manure the real thing. At least the majority does not prohibit anyone from saying what they want.  

There is but one business on this forum that always hides from the exposing of falsehoods. Take a guess...

Robert

You say you and Robert both have worked in recording? Room conditioning is priority one so the instruments and equipment work consistently. Sorry but again it raises questions for me about your methods. Michael is meticulous about room conditioning, I'm surprised your not. Is there a reason why you choose not to condition your rooms?

Prof, check this out… the same grammatical mistake by jft as we previously noted earlier that is made all the time by mg in his writing.

MG is jf47t. One in the same  - now it all makes sense!

By the way MG, the correct spelling is you’re and not your…

Ha Ha funny thing happened on the way to the forum!

NOW FOR A DOSE OF REALITY:

Jf47t stated:

And yes you have not only been asked to calm down by other posters but have also had several of your posts deleted by the mods for being "abusive toward other members".

How did you know this?

Moderators do not explain or display their actions.

SO again -

How Did You Know the Exact Reason for Profs’ Posts Being Deleted?

How could anyone know that was the reason, unless………….💡!!!

GUILTY AS CHARGED

Sincerely,

Robert

Something got your many posts deleted prof. As well the Starsound posts and the kosst posts. Anyone can scroll through the pages and see this is the case, so don't be "fake". That's reality and documented.

I tTotally disagree with jf47t or whoever you are.

Like Prof has disclosed previously:

‘Someone’ and not something had the posts removed.

The "reality" of this thread was clearly documented but unfortunately a lot of reality has been deleted. The fakes are actually the individuals removing selective posts that impair their egos and/or challenge the hard-line facts.

Example:    "abusive toward other members"   These complaints must be first filed by a member so two thinned skin someone's are responsible for removing a boat load of posts on this thread. Said individuals should finally stop "laying blame on the moderators" and look in a mirror.

Personally, I never liked people that play on both sides of the fence.

“The Truths” that were disclosed in the many removed posts were the only spot on factors here and not the participants.

@geoffkait - again…

Uh, most likely he uses a different moniker over there. You know, so guys like yourself and the dudes from Star Sound can’t go stalk him there. Just a hunch.

GK, we dudes call the bull as we see it!

Sorry in that your hunch is NOT correct. We would never lower ourselves to play the public or question anyone by using a false moniker but we believe Prof is on the right track towards  discovering why others here remain in hiding.

Our history speaks for itself as there is no need to falsify anything we present as public disclosure. We have no issues taking the personal hits where unlike others, our dudes refuse to file complaints. Say what you will as defending our technology is much easier for us now compared to twenty years ago.

>>>>Oh brother! Here come the word games. Directly coupled. Yuk, yuk! Well, I guess all seismologists can’t be geniuses. Besides, I haven’t been wrong since 1987.

Wow mistake free since 1987 - Is that the year NASA gave you the shoe?

I see. Nothing at all to do with audio systems and seismic vibration. Oh, I almost forgot! You dudes don’t think isolation is possible.

Isolation is not possible in real world applications - you know Geoff, the real world as in modern day planet Earth…

Isolation is a technique, one of many techniques applied to audio however we live on the planet so everything having or requiring power and function has a grounding mechanism - a footer, a rack, a support system, a tire, a physical structure - something that eventually comes in contact with Mother Earth - even LIGO! We find greater sonic results via mechanical grounding as the key mechanism in comparison to floatation techniques.

High speed resonance energy transfer processes are being applied to audio reproduction where vibrations being the energy containing all the harmonic layers and dynamics listeners seek to hear and feel is used as a tool to further enhance musical qualities. Musical instruments along with our ears take full advantage of vibration so how does one bring this understanding to the mechanical, electromechanical and acoustic levels of function?

Our technology is based on allowing a component or speaker to first vibrate as the device will seek and establish its own level of operational efficiency where the highest level of performance is established. We then mechanically ground or open the flood gates so the resonance that is formed from vibration travels rapidly to earth’s ground. This process results in highly audible increases in full range sonic performance.

Vibration is sound. Resonance formed from many vibrations is the negative result (a signal clog) therefore we manage resonance formed from vibration.

This technology works on all sound and video production equipment, adapts to structural environments and is being used for enhancing musical instrument function as well. Isolation cannot achieve this new standard of multiple applications. That is why we no longer prioritize the inaudible tangibles such as ongoing mini-earthquakes and 1Hz frequencies when discussing sound and physical environments. In our realm of study and progress, those age old theories and stories are now retired to historical content.

Star Sound

Sorry to take up everyone’s time but we must yet again rebut the falsehoods and attacks by one Geoffrey C Kait.

Ah, the pupil uses the teacher’s thread to rant and rave and promote his rather backward ideas at every opportunity. Ooops, I hope I’m not a baiter.

Actually we were addressing the challenges and ramblings on isolation and defending our own from the repetitive Geoffrey C Kait. In our opinion, backward ideas are more defined as selling the public a $39 bag of rocks… $159 for the extra big bag!

Why would the dudes from Star Sound go to Tuneland to stalk MG since they’re doing an excellent job stalking him right here, you know, where their ranting and raving and self promotion has a much wider audience?

Here I find myself replying to the man with well over 10.000 posts where the overwhelming majority involve personality attacks as witnessed and reputed by the masses as a crime of harassing somebody with persistent, inappropriate, and unwanted attention hence the actual definition of a stalker - being Mr. Geoffrey C Kait.

Example: Read GK posts on this thread...or any other for that matter!

Regards to manufacturer’s participation:

We have complained in writing to management requesting that manufacturers should not be permitted to initiate posts on this forum as the results have become quite obvious and defined. This thread was initiated as a marketing strategy and advertising campaign gone awry.

Our efforts failed to have new rules implemented therefore we too decided to share in the excitement, separate the advertising fracas from reality and will defend when challenged or personally insulted. Who wouldn’t? Certainly not the duper with over 10,000 posts?

Why when Star Sound participates in any thread whatsoever, Geoff Kait is the next immediate response tossing in the first grenade? Check it out as this happens every single time. Geoff you are boring us to death with repetitiveness with exception to your newfound adornment to the Walker in chief.

Example from recent activity:

>>>>Send in the 🍑🤡 Hey, whatever became of your “seismologist,” Bobby? My guess is she ran as fast as her little legs would carry her. 🏃‍♀️Seismic vibration has been discussed here many times. And still you didn’t learn anything,

In our defense, she has far surpassed anything you, Geoffrey C Kait have ever accomplished in your entire lifespan - period.

She continues to define and advance Live-Vibe Technology™ and we are extremely humbled by her knowledge, time devotion and willingness to work with us.

As stated many times previously Geoffrey; we too were once committed to the camp of isolation. We even purchased your springs for comparisons but never the rocks as we have real issues concerning those technical devices.

We constructed racking made from exotic woods, supplied products to the OP improving his rack design function, used air bladders, damped chassis inside and out, built Champion IASCA car audio systems, designed and built over 1,000 custom subwoofer systems by our close friend and member, the late Jay Thomas.

You name it Geoffrey and we probably designed it or built it and ‘sold’ it. We learned a lot about sound over time while you were still in college before your employment with NASA or so claimed.

What did you accomplish in sound besides that rack built back in 2000 weighing in at over one hundred pounds, but limited to supporting a twenty pound CD player of which you sold how many? Two? Come on Geoffrey here is your chance… the bait is on the hook… tell everyone what makes you so accomplished that you can constantly insult your peers or better yet insult those believed to be inferior to yourself consisting of the world’s entire population as we see it.

We await your self-serving reply.

Robert

PS: That picture you have leading to your website with those largest of horn speakers

https://www.google.com/search?q=machina+dynamica&rlz=1C1TSNF_enUS527US550&oq=mac&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j0l3j69i60.4524j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

John the owner of this system is a client of Star Sound. You should hear his system now and imagine how those horns will bloom with Rhythm Platforms™ supporting them? We didn’t see any springs in his system upon our arrival or noticed any of your other products involvement or did you just post that picture from Stereophile archives (with permission we hope) in order to attract people to your site and/or help build up your image?

Do you know John?

Michael Green,

It’s a shame you decided to drag me back into this meaningless thread about walking or talking or whatever (?) based on you being the judge and jury coupled to endless consumer profiling, calling out and insulting listeners posting objections (more on that momentarily), continuations of no cost marketing & advertising ploys, storytelling that cannot be verified and profiteering too!

You stated:

I've always been an odd bird when it comes to money. I put fun way before money. Money is a drain on the soul and I don't buy into the American way of capitalism. When people live for money they become a slave to it, many times become selfish and dishonest. I don't live that way, come good or bad.

Rubbish!  Only a fool would believe that statement, especially coming from a principal business owner. Now that’s one LOL moment...

Regards to your statements referring to my past along with your lack of remembrance concerning timelines:

I arrived on the Audio scene in 1985 leaving a successful career in professional sound due to injury. I toured as both FOH and Monitor sound engineer, employed by a few famous musicians, worked over a thousand shows, spent time in a few studios and unlike your ongoing stories and entitlements from the past, my background is easily proven as factual.

I choose to work with ‘degreed engineers’ of all types and they are listed on our website for your review. What we are doing in sound reproduction is far different than matching and altering frequencies of wood blocks to footer systems. Been there done that a number of years back.

We realized the shortcomings of variable tuning techniques. They are quite difficult to document hence we see your frustration in lacking technical explanation as requested multiple times by the readership. 

The sonic results from tuning techniques are in a continual state of flux - meaning the parts will never sound the same over the course of time. The tuning technique does not provide a standardized point of reference required for developing and expanding a technology. Tuning as you call it will remain forever a technique that bears functionality and will always provide a limited market for retail growth as “sales” appears to be the actual reason you are here.

The tuning technique has remained the same since your beginning. The only difference we noticed is the advertising content has changed where you are now choosing various woods that are no longer “hand chosen by the Amish” as previously advertised.

By the way how does anyone “voice” a 2” x 6” wall joist? And is it voiced before or after it is mechanically grounded as part of the structural framework?

We’ve noticed you are the only one preaching the typical “yours is better than ours” display of words. The same individual who brought you the audio point delivered it to us after someone on your end obviously failed miserably to see the potential development from a smallish brass cone.

Our science is titled Live-Vibe Technology™ and is slowly expanding beyond the borders of audio reproduction. A portion is now protected by Patent as we continue to progress in that direction.

The Original Audio Points™ have evolved into Sistrum Platforms™ which you never auditioned or we would never be participating in silly talk over which cone sounds better.

You are aware that the type of shelf materials and/or racking design the cone is contacting is 100% responsible for the finality in audible performance and not the cone itself - right? Maybe you don’t understand, because the mass of steel and specific geometry designed into each Sistrum Platform commands the frequency (pitch) management of the brass. In your world, the varying wood determines the sound. You should also be made aware that we no longer use the same brass chemistry that you are relating to from back in the day and we both know different brass = different results.

Sistrum Platforms evolved into mechanical grounding of AC electrical panels, structural walls, floors and ceilings, newer cable chase networks and let us not forget - the Musical Instrument Industry where Star Sound continues to expand rapidly.

Tuning functions because applied tension is required to alter sonic and that is defined as a technique. Your passion in believing that tuning will replace all of High End Audio is of admiration but without a core technology based on mathematics, tuning will always reside in the ‘halls of hobby’. It's not for everyone.

 After all, according to your many statements; HEA is already dead. Funny how your atypical opinion defies logic… we both are still “living” off a dead industry.

Another topic:  Hats off to you bdp24. Your post above reflecting on “hobby” is well written with meaning and deserves another read by everyone.

Robert

Star Sound

LISTEN TO LIVE! ℠

Wait for me... of crap have to board a plane.

R