Is it fair to say that most acoustical energy introduced into a system comes from the speakers? Unless you live by a subway station or live in a disco. If you could put your source componets in a separate room with no speaker interaction that would be the best example of decoupling I think. Sony made magnetic componet isolators in the Esprit line in the early 80's and did extensive research on the effects of vibration and microphonics on componets. It seems that the control of resonances, microphonics, and RFI is best addressed by the equipment designer. Obviously I don't want to place my turntable next to my speakers but I do want to have both firmly planted on the ground through spikes or stand.
To couple or decouple? That is the question.
This is one of my favorite subjects and pet peeves.Is this just a matter of semantics or a misrepresentation of the principles applied in the set-up of equipment. My experience tells me that coupling is what you work for. This is the principle that is expoused in the early Linn literature. The mechanical connection that doesn't introduce or take away any information. This seems important with componets with transducers primarily turntables and speakers. Different materials, like sorbothane, are used to attenuate frequencies but are used in conjunction with metal cups to physically couple to your stand, shelf, floor, etc. Coupling also allows mechanical/acoustical energy to travel away from a componet. The designers at Mission in the early 80's were right on to this. Questions or comments please.