Do equipment stands have an impact on electronics?


Mechanical grounding or isolation from vibration has been a hot topic as of late.  Many know from experience that footers, stands and other vibration technologies impact things that vibrate a lot like speakers, subs or even listening rooms (my recent experience with an "Energy room").  The question is does it have merit when it comes to electronics and if so why?  Are there plausible explanations for their effect on electronics or suggested measurement paradigms to document such an effect?
agear
You may or may not hear very soft artifacts, depending on their makeup and what else is playing at the same time. But you can measure them, and you can ask people to identify them in a blind test. So again, this is not unknowable or even difficult to sort out. Yes, it is just barely possible to hear certain combinations of tones when one is 80 dB below the other, but not at 90 dB as far as I know. So if we measure artifacts (including aliasing), and they’re at least 90 dB down, then nobody will ever hear them. Again, with most digital gear such junk is 110+ dB down. But I said 80-90 dB down because it requires a very special contrived test to hear -80. Heck, even -40 can be difficult in many cases due to masking. Have you ever done tests like this? I have, many times. I wish more people would! Here’s one that plays a very nasty harsh noise under gentle classical music, and then under a synthesizer based pop tune:

http://ethanwiner.com/audibility.html

All the other stuff you said about why people believe [whatever] about digital audio could be resolved in a single 5-minute blind test. (Likewise for isolation platforms.) These tests have been done. Many times. There is no legitimate dispute. There’s only willful ignorance by the Geoff Kaits and Dave Cockrums of the world.
There is nothing jarring about digital audio. In controlled tests people are unable to tell when a 44/16 "bottleneck" is inserted into an analog playback chain. This is well known and well documented. The key is "controlled tests" which apparently many people here are unfamiliar with. :->)
Hmmm.  I would be interested to see that study.

I am sure you and others are familiar with this one:  http://www.stereophile.com/features/203/#um3KMoxJTFAhwZAf.97
agear, I’m not willing to read 11 pages of Stereophile blather. Can you quote the one or two key paragraphs here?

Below is one test that proved people are unable to identify a 44/16 "CD quality" bottleneck inserted into a "high resolution" playback chain. They tested 60 people having an interest in audio and music over a period of one year in 554 separate trials. So it was a serious study indeed with little room for error. This is a for-pay article, but the summary tells the story, and I have the article and can answer any questions about it:

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=14195

Here’s another, this time with an analog playback chain, from 1984 when even expensive digital convertors weren’t as good as the today’s budget stuff:

http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_speaker/abx_testing2.htm
Its not a hard read Ethan. Anyway, it was a study conducted by Psychologists in Germany looking at blinded listening preferences (both audiophiles and non) comparing an all tubed system fronted by vinyl and an all SS system fronted by digital. People preferred the tube/vinyl rig to a statistically significant degree.

no participant said that the analog system had impaired their sense of well-being, but 16 participants said so of the digital system! This must be one of the most astonishing, and irritating, results of Ackermann's experiment. How can it be that we spend a lot of money on something that makes us feel worse?!
Read more at http://www.stereophile.com/content/god-nuances-page-4#76KVPhAqoldXrRYq.99

Here is your paper: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1105/0b42c641807bbcf24ba7f6e11af49f135e8f.pdf

The result does not surprise me.  I have had many a recording engineer tell me Redbook is enough.  That being said, this a study of the digital domain only