Quote:

Quote:
(Psssssssssst! Stands are snake oil.)

No, silly. Stands are based on sound engineering principles. They are NOT like those other things, those snake oil things - the ones that aren't based on scientific principles and cannot be explained... the ones that never come with any data.

Yes, silly, consider the conflicting opinions concerning stands and you have what?

Snake oil.

If we can't measure it, it's what?

Snake oil.

Consider the cost - most stands are well over the $3 "rationality" limit of the naysayers - and you have what?

Snake oil.

Consider "data-schmata" - ever buy a Target stand with an Owner's Manual?

"Snake Oil!" I say!!!

Quote:
Could not beat the sound of that system with a stick.

"Sticks" are snake oil too.

Know why?

Quote:

...The Nakamichi system, which comprised a Transport, CD Player and Control Module...

...Could not beat the sound of that system with a stick.

Quote:
"...cassettes -- regardless of any technical limitations -- get to the heart and soul of the music. Unlike uh, CDs."

Quote:
"The CD is an excellent demonstration of the failure of technology to provide the musicality of even the humble cassette. CD technology is plagued - after 27 years!! - by a number of inherent problems, most notably (1) the inability of Reed Solomon ECC to be of much value except in limited cases, (2) the inability of the CD player's photodetector to discriminate between real signal and scattered background laser light, (3) the suceptablity of the CD to jitter from airborne and structureborne vibration.

Quote:
Having said that, it is true that the CD, as it is, is good enough for most people."

Too bad you guys didn't use a Nakamichi cassette deck, instead!

Fortunately for us audiophiles, if you just go after #3, the CD goes from being a failure of technology to not being able to be beaten with a stick!

That's good news!

Quote:

I have a basement. The foundation of the house is made up of several feet worth of big stone and mortor which the subfloor rests on. The floor of the basement is poured concrete which I don't believe the foundation rests on as other similar homes in the area have dirt floors only.

There are audiophiles who have been 'crazy' enough to install supports under their floors, racks, or speakers and put adjustable jacks below the joists of specific areas of 'sprung' floors.

It's pretty cheap and can change your floor from one where footfalls can affect your playback to being much more tolerant of the slings and arrows of outrageous floor vibration.

Link to product...

Lots of fun to had, despite the Earth's constant shaking of your house and Hi Fi.

You just have to know how to beat the limitations of the Reed Solomon Code, Bubbha. Well, actually, you have to realize the Reed Solomon Code is limited in the first place.

An ordinary man has no means of deliverance. ~ wm burroughs

About the Earths' shaking... on Dec. 16th 2008 I woke up at 5:20 am. The reason I woke up was an earthquake, actually the most powerful we have ever experienced in my part of the world. You Californians may laugh, but 4.8 on the Richter scale can be felt. It felt like someone was pushing the head-end of my bed a couple of inches back and forth a few times with something around 5 cycles/sec. First I got a picture in my head of the neighbours going at it, but I soon realized that would not be possible. Then the thought struck me: An earthquake! I got right out of bed, and went on the web. It turned out the Danish Geological Institute had already confirmed the quake. What a way to wake up! Anyway I'm glad I didn't play records at that precise moment, but I'd love to have watched it play. I still wonder if it would have moved the cart out of it's tracks...

No my point is that except during an earthquake, solid ground is probably one of the most vibration free areas you could get- also assuming you aren't near a subway. Normally, if your system was on some kind of stone that went right into the ground and it was stone below, you'd have an ideal place for vibration-fee equipment.

And I'm not all about form over function- just take a look at my pics in the DIY section. As a former industrial designer I look for both! I went to great lengths to build in a shelf for my TT that dissipates vibrations and isolates (somewhat) the setup from the local environment. My floors are still pretty springy, and as it's on the 2nd floor their is not much to be done about it.

Buddha: I put a few of those jacks in a basement one time right below my stereo and it worked wonders for both leveling and getting the bounce out of my record playing! And they are crazy cheap!

Quote:
No my point is that except during an earthquake, solid ground is probably one of the most vibration free areas you could get- also assuming you aren't near a subway. Normally, if your system was on some kind of stone that went right into the ground and it was stone below, you'd have an ideal place for vibration-fee equipment.

And I'm not all about form over function- just take a look at my pics in the DIY section. As a former industrial designer I look for both! I went to great lengths to build in a shelf for my TT that dissipates vibrations and isolates (somewhat) the setup from the local environment. My floors are still pretty springy, and as it's on the 2nd floor their is not much to be done about it.

Buddha: I put a few of those jacks in a basement one time right below my stereo and it worked wonders for both leveling and getting the bounce out of my record playing! And they are crazy cheap!

I don't think you realize how sensitive low level signal carriers such as cartridge, tonearm wires, internal wiring in preamps and amps, CD players and DACs, etc. are to low amplitude, low frequency microseismic vibration that is produced by the continuous, quotidian movement of the Earth's crust, traffic (especially trucks and buses), wind, ocean wave action on the shore, big fans, A/C units, low flying aircraft, esp. helicoptors, etc.

If it were true that rock and cement slabs were vibration free, as you say, there would be no requirement for exotic vibration isolation tables for laser holography experiments or scanning electron microscopes in situations where the rooms are built on massive cement slabs. But, of course, exotic isolation platforms are required.

I have installed hundreds of isolation platforms on both cement and wooden floors for everything from Raven Black Knight and Verdier maglev turntables to $30K tube amps to $15K CD players and DACs. Take it from me, It's relatively simple to demonstrate - even on cement slabs out in the boondocks, away from urban hubbub - that there's a significant amount of residual vibration, esp. low frequency vibration, that manages to make its way up through the cement floor and into the audio components.

"Everything is relative." - old audiophile axiom

OK- that makes sense ---to a point. And for my TT I do use isolation. But until I install a scanning electron turntable I think I'd be very happy depending on solid ground to keep things steady.

Quote:
And I'm not all about form over function- just take a look at my pics in the DIY section. As a former industrial designer I look for both! I went to great lengths to build in a shelf for my TT that dissipates vibrations and isolates (somewhat) the setup from the local environment. My floors are still pretty springy, and as it's on the 2nd floor their is not much to be done about it.

But if the shelf doesn't address (fully) the springy floor issue, isn't that more or less a case of form before function? I mean, the springy floor really is the primary issue, isn't it?

Hey- most of life is accepting that there are a lot things we can't "fully" address. I'd like the room to be another 5 feet in every direction, but that's not going to change anytime soon either! I've dealt with mostly all the micro-vibes and a little on the macro bounces, and that's how it's going to be.

The springy floor? I refrain from dancing nearby the stereo when I've records on, and try and keep my little boy from running around the room too much either. That's my addressing it.

Quote:
It's relatively simple to demonstrate - even on cement slabs out in the boondocks, away from urban hubbub - that there's a significant amount of residual vibration, esp. low frequency vibration, that manages to make its way up through the cement floor and into the audio components.

Interesting.

How?

No music playing, nothing else plugged in that vibrates (such as a refrigerator, dryer, etc.)?

Quote:

Quote:
It's relatively simple to demonstrate - even on cement slabs out in the boondocks, away from urban hubbub - that there's a significant amount of residual vibration, esp. low frequency vibration, that manages to make its way up through the cement floor and into the audio components.

Interesting.

How?

No music playing, nothing else plugged in that vibrates (such as a refrigerator, dryer, etc.)?

Are you asking,

"What is the source of the vibration coming up through the cement slab out in the boondocks, if there is no traffic, no refrigerator, no speakers, no big fans, no wind, no wave action on shorelines?" or,

"How do you demonstrate that the Earth's crust motion is sufficient to degrade audio systems without other sources of vibration present, even when the audio system is located on a cement slab?"

"How do you demonstrate that the Earth's crust motion is sufficient to degrade audio systems without other sources of vibration present, even when the audio system is located on a cement slab?"

I'm all ears as it were. Please tell.

Quote:
"How do you demonstrate that the Earth's crust motion is sufficient to degrade audio systems without other sources of vibration present, even when the audio system is located on a cement slab?"

I'm all ears as it were. Please tell.

It comes from experience with installing hundreds of isolation systems in rooms with cement slabs, wooden floors, in cities, suburbs and boondocks, in many geographical locations. You could look at it as a controlled scientific experiment: eliminate all the other sources of vibration and you are left with Earth's crust motion that must be causing the vibration, even with a cement slab as the floor.

Thus, if you built your system on a cement slab in a rural area, turned off the fridge and eliminated other sources of vibration, played music through headphones (i.e., eliminated the effect of speakers), then listened *with and without* proper vibration isolation, your EARS would tell you the Earth crust's motion *must* be coming up through the cement slab and degrading the sound. As you isolate more components and cables and cords in the system this becomes even more obvious. I'm not referring to a "simple shelf that dissipates vibration," but proper isolation systems with very low resonant frequencies, you know, ones that actually work for the low frequency vibrations I've been talking about. It also helps to know that Earth's crust motion energy is primarily located in the frequency range 0-5 Hz, where more, uh, stringent methods are required.

You can also examine other physics experiments where vibration isolation is necessary to reduce or eliminate the effects of structural vibration on the experiment, e.g., laser holography, scanning electron microscopes, measurement of gravity waves. Even when the experiments are carried out on cement slabs or underground! Or you can read up on the physical characteristics of cement slabs, if you really want to get tedious about it.

"When you control the mail you control information." - Newman

Won't the transformers in components also cause vibration?

Quote:
Won't the transformers in components also cause vibration?

Yes, but they don't vibrate at frequencies that correspond to the resonant frequencies of CD player laser suspensions, stereo cartridges, tonearms, and turntable platters. It's the low frequency, structureborne vibration coming up through the floor that's the more serious problem and by far more difficult to deal with. Transformers that hum can usually be decoupled from the chassis or damped, no big deal, not like Earth crust hum. Can we say that vibration produced by the component is a separate issue? Ditto airborne vibrations. Recall that resonant frequencies of cartridges, CD laser suspensions, tonearms and platters are circa 8-10 Hz. And the (primary) energy of Earth crust and other microseismic type vibration is circa 0-10 Hz. Hel-looo! There's significant microseismic energy below 2 Hz, so you'll never be able to get rid of all of it, no matter what you do.

Quote:
And the (primary) energy of Earth crust and other microseismic type vibration is circa 0-10 Hz. Hel-looo! There's significant microseismic energy below 2 Hz, so you'll never be able to get rid of all of it, no matter what you do.

That is why we must send men to Mars - good hifi.

IMO it's much easier and more effective to make your equipment float than it is to attach it to a solid base, eg concrete slabs etc. to avoid vibrations of any kind. Anyone?

Quote:
IMO it's much easier and more effective to make your equipment float than it is to attach it to a solid base

Another good reason for hifi on Mars - weightlessness.

Plays hell with a tonearm's tracking force though.

Quote:
IMO it's much easier and more effective to make your equipment float than it is to attach it to a solid base, eg concrete slabs etc. to avoid vibrations of any kind. Anyone?

If it were really possible to "float" the component as you say, I would not have said in my previous post, for the very low frequency vibration, esp. below 2 Hz, "you can never get rid of all of it." Even magnetic levitation devices which appear to "float" the component don't actually succeed in completely decoupling the component from the environment.

Most DIY devices such as air bladders, bicycle inner tubes and bubble wrap operate as mass-on-spring isolators, you know, low pass mechanical filters. The characteristics of the low pass filter dictate how much low frequency vibration will be transmitted from the floor up to the component. Example: If the resonant frequency of the isolating device is 4 Hz, everything below 4 Hz will be transmitted. At 10 Hz about 50% will also be transmitted. Finally, around 25 Hz, there will be very low percent of vibrations transmitted. See the problem?

Freako, you're only thinking in one direction now. Any device which produces internal vibrations will, more often than not, prefer to have some sort of mechanical coupling to a support surface to provide a drain for those vibrations and the noises they produce. If you are decoupling the device by way of floating the component, you're simply establishing a closed loop within the component itself for those internal vibrations to remain within the chassis. In such a system the deleterious effects of transformer based noise problems might be made even more obvious than had you simply allowed the component to sit on a shelf which would allow some amount of bleeding effect.

This becomes the incongruity of many component's needs. They require both isolation (decoupling) from and simultaneous coupling to a support surface. In items such as pre amps and digital players this becomes at least a partial reason for external power supplies which keep transformer induced vibrations away from the sensitive components housed in the main chassis. For those who remember the introduction of the original "TipToes", they were sold as mechanical diodes. The large surface at one end provides a substantial surface area for vibrations to enter from a component's chassis while the extremely small point of the downwards facing cone has such a minimal footprint area that vibrations in the support surface had no direct route into the component through the footer.

If you try floating a turntable, you'll be violating one of the cardinal rules of table set up, establishing a closed loop at the stylus tip. Vibrations and resonances created within the player (not taking into account any external forces) by the very act of playing a disc become random motion at the stylus tip when they cannot be grounded, stabilized or converted to some other form of energy. Random motion at the stylus results in both random noise generated by the cartridge and loss of information due to inadequate tracing of the LP's groove. Ever wonder why those lightweight plastic tables sold at Best Buy sound so bad? Well, that's one reason, random noise in the closed loop.

Should you select an isolation device which has its own resonant frequency in the same areas where the table's systems have their resonances, then you might actually make matter worse there too.

One solution to many of these issues is to float a large mass and couple the component to that mass. That solution, however, takes us right back to the first entries in this thread which were shown to have trade off's of their own.

Quote:

Quote:
IMO it's much easier and more effective to make your equipment float than it is to attach it to a solid base, eg concrete slabs etc. to avoid vibrations of any kind. Anyone?

If it were really possible to "float" the component as you say, I would not have said in my previous post, for the very low frequency vibration, esp. below 2 Hz, "you can never get rid of all of it." Even magnetic levitation devices which appear to "float" the component don't actually succeed in completely decoupling the component from the environment.

Most DIY devices such as air bladders, bicycle inner tubes and bubble wrap operate as mass-on-spring isolators, you know, low pass mechanical filters. The characteristics of the low pass filter dictate how much low frequency vibration will be transmitted from the floor up to the component. Example: If the resonant frequency of the isolating device is 4 Hz, everything below 4 Hz will be transmitted. At 10 Hz about 50% will also be transmitted. Finally, around 25 Hz, there will be very low percent of vibrations transmitted. See the problem?

I do actually see the problem. The problem is, I don't hear it or feel it in my toes. What problem?

Quote:
Freako, you're only thinking in one direction now. Any device which produces internal vibrations will, more often than not, prefer to have some sort of mechanical coupling to a support surface to provide a drain for those vibrations and the noises they produce. If you are decoupling the device by way of floating the component, you're simply establishing a closed loop within the component itself for those internal vibrations to remain within the chassis. In such a system the deleterious effects of transformer based noise problems might be made even more obvious than had you simply allowed the component to sit on a shelf which would allow some amount of bleeding effect.

This becomes the incongruity of many component's needs. They require both isolation (decoupling) from and simultaneous coupling to a support surface. In items such as pre amps and digital players this becomes at least a partial reason for external power supplies which keep transformer induced vibrations away from the sensitive components housed in the main chassis. For those who remember the introduction of the original "TipToes", they were sold as mechanical diodes. The large surface at one end provides a substantial surface area for vibrations to enter from a component's chassis while the extremely small point of the downwards facing cone has such a minimal footprint area that vibrations in the support surface had no direct route into the component through the footer.

If you try floating a turntable, you'll be violating one of the cardinal rules of table set up, establishing a closed loop at the stylus tip. Vibrations and resonances created within the player (not taking into account any external forces) by the very act of playing a disc become random motion at the stylus tip when they cannot be grounded, stabilized or converted to some other form of energy. Random motion at the stylus results in both random noise generated by the cartridge and loss of information due to inadequate tracing of the LP's groove. Ever wonder why those lightweight plastic tables sold at Best Buy sound so bad? Well, that's one reason, random noise in the closed loop.

Should you select an isolation device which has its own resonant frequency in the same areas where the table's systems have their resonances, then you might actually make matter worse there too.

One solution to many of these issues is to float a large mass and couple the component to that mass. That solution, however, takes us right back to the first entries in this thread which were shown to have trade off's of their own.

Yep, you're correct. I did in fact forget to mention that it helps to add a freaking lot of weight onto the piece of equipment first. That should get rid of most of it. We'll never get there 100%, and I am fully content with 95%.

I mean like placing a cdp on a very heavy slab, decoupling it both top and bottom, and enjoy. This works for me. But of course, as you mention, there's tradeoffs in all solutions. It's all about compromises.

Quote:
If it were really possible to "float" the component as you say, I would not have said in my previous post, for the very low frequency vibration, esp. below 2 Hz, "you can never get rid of all of it." Even magnetic levitation devices which appear to "float" the component don't actually succeed in completely decoupling the component from the environment.

This has now come of interest to myself as I have been looking for a reasonable rack, but I have to say it seems there are quite a few products out there that are pushing the boundaries on their description and cost a lot more or equal to those few products that utilise springs/ball bearings/resonant tuning/etc.

Coming back to your quote, please can you explain what is meant by "float", is this the same as utilising a spring suspension as say the Townshend rack does between the floor and rack-shelves?

While I am sure the measurements cannot in any way be translated to terms of sonic improvements, it seems interesting that one company is providing some sort measurements showing the reduction in vibration by two of their products (appreciate there is still a fair amount of info missing).
This is interesting as they show both vertical and much horizontal vibration.
They tend to favor the Townshend approach of spring suspension between floor and rack-shelves, and also then vibration absorption on top of this for each rack (top and bottom rack though cannot be suspended) or product.
What I like about their products are that they seem pretty well priced compared to many other rack and their associated products on the market.

Any thoughts on their approach? cheers.
http://www.solid-tech.net/Vibrationstest.PDF

Another company that seems to be more content and possibly some measurements with their solutions is finite elemente with their resonator tuning, but then thats waaay out of my price league for their Pagode master reference rack, although it does look seriously nice quality.
http://www.finite-elemente.de/extern/finite-resonator-handout.pdf

Two different approaches but on paper seems both have merits compared to some of the more basic racks out there that say they improve sound quality but seem to be just basic frames and shelves.

As I cannot justify the expense for the really nice racks such as from finite elemente, the solid tech seems to have a fair bit going for them with their budget (still expensive-ish but seems to do a lot) rack and isolators.

Cheers
Orb

Mass on spring is the primary concept behind most vibration isolation systems, although there can be many implementations. Whereas audiophiles were once limited to the Townshend Seismic Sink, the Vibraplane and some air bladder type bases, the competition has grown to include magnetic levitation, a flurry of roller-bearing products, as well as laboratory grade active devices such as Halcyonics, a Swiss German design that is marketed to audiophiles. Well, actually Vibraplane was initially a Newport Corp. product modifed for audio applications. IIRC the Minus K device used to be the Newport Corp. sub-Hertz platform.

Since it is quite easy to measure the performance of a mass on spring isolating device by timing the oscillations with the second hand of a watch there is little need to obtain detailed graphs from manufacturers. It is also a point of interest that the "specs" don't necessarily tell the whole story, since sonic performance is not totally a function of the device's resonant frequency, or even the number of directions of motion of the isolating device as there is quite a bit of art/technique to the science of isolation. Generally speaking, one should look for very low resonant frequencies in as many of the 6 directions of motion as possible. Some devices offer isolation in the vertical direction only or primarily, others in the vertical z direction and the horizontal x-y plane. A few offer isolation in more than 3 directions,including rotational ones. Rotational directions are important since microseismic vibration can be in the form of waves, with rotational components. Like a small boat on the ocean with waves passing under it. All things being equal, a 6 degree of freedom device should perform audibly better than one with, say, only 3 directions of motion.

Hope that helps.

Sure does thanks and clarifies some things I was thinking of.
So coming back to the floating discussion (appreciate you did not raise that aspect but joined in the conversation), what products do you see as a "floating" solution, the Townshend spring isolation type or some of the other products?

Also you feel spring/suspension isolation (if tuned/specced) and the resonators such as I mentioned above are preferable to that of a solid rack with extra mass?

Thanks again
Orb

I'm not a big fan of racks, even if there are some interesting designs out there. I think it's more of a convenience and organization issue. But if I HAD to use a rack it would short and rigid and not too wide.

The Seismic Sink was a floater, with air bladders, as was Vibraplane, which incidentally employed a 100 lb steel plate as ballast connected to the top plate to lower the resonant frequency of the device. The guy with the sand boxes also has some air bladder bases. Not sure what's in the submarine guy's bases, though. Critical Mass is another newer company. Essentially, for low frequency vibration isolation, it's all about mass and spring rate; isolation effectiveness is a function of mass and spring rate. The Relaxa employs magnetic levitation, I suppose you'd call it a floater. The Minus K is a floater, with some exotic implementation of mass on spring. BTW there's nothing that says you can't place one of these floater type isolators on a rack or that you can't use roller bearing assemblies, which address horizontal isolation primarily, in concert with vertical isolators.

Quote:

Quote:
If it were really possible to "float" the component as you say, I would not have said in my previous post, for the very low frequency vibration, esp. below 2 Hz, "you can never get rid of all of it." Even magnetic levitation devices which appear to "float" the component don't actually succeed in completely decoupling the component from the environment.

This has now come of interest to myself as I have been looking for a reasonable rack, but I have to say it seems there are quite a few products out there that are pushing the boundaries on their description and cost a lot more or equal to those few products that utilise springs/ball bearings/resonant tuning/etc.

Coming back to your quote, please can you explain what is meant by "float", is this the same as utilising a spring suspension as say the Townshend rack does between the floor and rack-shelves? That would be a way of doing it. Either make the single pieces of equipment float ignoring the underlying material, or placing all equipment on individual shelves that float, preferrably on heavy sandwich construction materials, or the third way: Make all shelves float AND make the whole rack float. There's many ways to go.

I would prefer heavy sandwich shelves that float individually, for example by springs, plus a form of decoupling of the rack as a whole. <as it is, I have no room for a rack, so I had to go with a special sort of sticky-springy absorpsion/damping method under each piece, totally ignoring the (much too) light bookshelves. To further sonically insulate the equipment, I would like to use very heavy granite slabs, but no such luck yet.

While I am sure the measurements cannot in any way be translated to terms of sonic improvements, it seems interesting that one company is providing some sort measurements showing the reduction in vibration by two of their products (appreciate there is still a fair amount of info missing).
This is interesting as they show both vertical and much horizontal vibration.
They tend to favor the Townshend approach of spring suspension between floor and rack-shelves, and also then vibration absorption on top of this for each rack (top and bottom rack though cannot be suspended) or product.
What I like about their products are that they seem pretty well priced compared to many other rack and their associated products on the market.

Any thoughts on their approach? cheers.
http://www.solid-tech.net/Vibrationstest.PDF

Another company that seems to be more content and possibly some measurements with their solutions is finite elemente with their resonator tuning, but then thats waaay out of my price league for their Pagode master reference rack, although it does look seriously nice quality.
http://www.finite-elemente.de/extern/finite-resonator-handout.pdf

Two different approaches but on paper seems both have merits compared to some of the more basic racks out there that say they improve sound quality but seem to be just basic frames and shelves.

As I cannot justify the expense for the really nice racks such as from finite elemente, the solid tech seems to have a fair bit going for them with their budget (still expensive-ish but seems to do a lot) rack and isolators.

Cheers
Orb

Cheers guys.
Geoff; Townshend now utilise springs instead of the air bladder (reasoning I guess was to due the high maintenance air bladder required), appreciate this does not change the concept but thought I would just mention it.

Cheers
Orb

Quote:
Cheers guys.
Geoff; Townshend now utilise springs instead of the air bladder (reasoning I guess was to due the high maintenance air bladder required), appreciate this does not change the concept but thought I would just mention it.

Cheers
Orb

I now use mechanical springs instead of air springs, also for the pain in ass maintenance problem with air fittings, but also because the mechanical springs have certain better characteristics than the air springs or bladders. My Sub Hertz Platform (0.5 Hz) used a single Firestone air spring, which has a much better geometry than the Townshend, Vibraplane or other similar bladder designs, having very low top surface area compared to the volume. Nimbus design incorporated a large auxiliary air cannister (see photo) to lower resonant frequency as well as heavy ballast weight belowdecks to further lower resonant frequency and build up lateral stability of the air spring. All steel connecting rods, nuts, etc. cryogenically tempered. Nimbus employs only one rather floppy air spring, which, when you think about it, is almost impossible.

While great minds think alike with respect to mechanical springs vice air springs, I'm quite positive my mechanical springs are considerably superior to Townshend's.

Mortite.

Quote:
What value if any, would the use of a heavy modeling clay have in resonance absorption between the shelves? Maybe even under the feet of a component. I would think that something like clay would be pretty dead in terms of transmitting vibration and or very good at absorbing it.

Clay and viscoelastic damping can be effective for damping higher frequencies, such as chassis vibration or CD tray vibration, but can do little for low-frequency vibration. For the umpteenth time, I differentiate between seismic-type, low-frequency vibration (which requires isolation) and component-induced and acoustic vibration (which requires damping). Clay and other soft, pliant materials can block the exit of energy, reflecting it back into the system. So, it is not a done deal.

I built my own stand. It was a rip off from Michael Green.

What I did was to have 24x17 shelves made from Real marble. I bought some threaded rod and purchased cone points for the feet and round threaded caps to top everything off.

I used a masonary holesaw bit to drill the holes in the marble shelve corners so I could slide them down the treaded rod to rest upon 2 inch washers and nuts.

After that, it was just a matter of leveling everything up.(a small level will suffice). Placed my gear on top of them, and that was it.

Very eye appealing but heavy as HELL! My black aluminum chassis gear looks out of this world on top of the white Venetian marble shelves. But most importantly, the rack is sonically dead!! I noticed a huge difference in overall sound quality, and imaging.

Well done. I'm sure it looks great.

Besides no one is every going to walk off with it.

Quote:
I built my own stand. It was a rip off from Michael Green.

What I did was to have 24x17 shelves made from Real marble. I bought some threaded rod and purchased cone points for the feet and round threaded caps to top everything off.

I used a masonary holesaw bit to drill the holes in the marble shelve corners so I could slide them down the treaded rod to rest upon 2 inch washers and nuts.

After that, it was just a matter of leveling everything up.(a small level will suffice). Placed my gear on top of them, and that was it.

Very eye appealing but heavy as HELL! My black aluminum chassis gear looks out of this world on top of the white Venetian marble shelves. But most importantly, the rack is sonically dead!! I noticed a huge difference in overall sound quality, and imaging.

Exactly why I have chosen to sit my box speakers on marble slabs! (With isolation pads between speakers and marble)

Quote:
...Is there really that much vibration taking place throughout the equipment rack to cause enough disturbance of the electronic components to make a noticeable difference in sound or is the whole equipment rack concept another one of those high end audio world snake oil treatments?

Thanks for any info or opinions you can provide

Vibration will interfere with the mechanical (moving parts) only and not at all with the electronic ones.

Quote:
Vibration will interfere with the mechanical (moving parts) only and not at all with the electronic ones.

Can you prove that statement, or are we just supposed to take your word for it? And, before you start, I'm guessing you've never owned a single piece of equipment using vacuum tubes.

Quote:

Quote:
Vibration will interfere with the mechanical (moving parts) only and not at all with the electronic ones.

Can you prove that statement, or are we just supposed to take your word for it? And, before you start, I'm guessing you've never owned a single piece of equipment using vacuum tubes.

Or equipment with wire. Or integrated chips. Or capacitors. Or transistors. Not to mention lasers.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Vibration will interfere with the mechanical (moving parts) only and not at all with the electronic ones.

Can you prove that statement, or are we just supposed to take your word for it? And, before you start, I'm guessing you've never owned a single piece of equipment using vacuum tubes.

Or equipment with wire. Or integrated chips. Or capacitors. Or transistors. Not to mention lasers.

That would be a cool experiment for objectivists!

Put the item in question on a vibrating support and watch the oscilloscope!

Sounds fun.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Vibration will interfere with the mechanical (moving parts) only and not at all with the electronic ones.

Can you prove that statement, or are we just supposed to take your word for it? And, before you start, I'm guessing you've never owned a single piece of equipment using vacuum tubes.

Or equipment with wire. Or integrated chips. Or capacitors. Or transistors. Not to mention lasers.

That would be a cool experiment for objectivists!

>>>>>>>>Sure, if objectivists would ever get off the couch.

Put the item in question on a vibrating support and watch the oscilloscope!

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Or put the item on a (presumably non-vibrating) rigid, sturdy rack and watch the oscilliscope.

Quote:
Put the item in question on a vibrating support and watch the oscilloscope!

Sounds fun.

Been there, done that.

All depends on the item and the use. Obviously any hollow-state device is going to show some microphonic issues, and be careful not to wreck the tube if you actually try this kind of thing.

Some capacitors are fairly microphonic, others can be if you put a polarizing voltage across them.

Even zip cord can show very small microphonic issues if you polarize it with a high enough voltage.

Unless we're talking about an LP preamp, though, most of this (except for tube and some caps) is simply not relevant to any real-world issue.

Quote:

Quote:
Put the item in question on a vibrating support and watch the oscilloscope!

Sounds fun.

Been there, done that.

All depends on the item and the use. Obviously any hollow-state device is going to show some microphonic issues, and be careful not to wreck the tube if you actually try this kind of thing.

Some capacitors are fairly microphonic, others can be if you put a polarizing voltage across them.

Even zip cord can show very small microphonic issues if you polarize it with a high enough voltage.

Unless we're talking about an LP preamp, though, most of this (except for tube and some caps) is simply not relevant to any real-world issue.

Ah, the old "even though you can meaure it, it's inaudible" maneuver.

Fits well with the "if we can't measure it, you can't hear it" gambit.

Really covers the waterfront, don't it?

Quote:
Really covers the waterfront, don't it?

It was clear as mud, but it cover de ground
Confusion make de world go 'round ...

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Vibration will interfere with the mechanical (moving parts) only and not at all with the electronic ones.

Can you prove that statement, or are we just supposed to take your word for it? And, before you start, I'm guessing you've never owned a single piece of equipment using vacuum tubes.

Or equipment with wire. Or integrated chips. Or capacitors. Or transistors. Not to mention lasers.

Normal light vibrations that occur in a listening room will affect only moving parts (motor of a CD player and laser assemblies for example). Wires, capacitors and integrated circuits (even if in sockets) are not affected by light vibrations, such as walking in a wooded floor.

As for tube amps they are obsolete so that makes them irrelevant.

Quote:

As for tube amps they are obsolete so that makes them irrelevant.

wheres that eye roll icon.....

Quote:

Quote:
Put the item in question on a vibrating support and watch the oscilloscope!

Sounds fun.

Been there, done that.

All depends on the item and the use. Obviously any hollow-state device is going to show some microphonic issues, and be careful not to wreck the tube if you actually try this kind of thing.

Some capacitors are fairly microphonic, others can be if you put a polarizing voltage across them.

Even zip cord can show very small microphonic issues if you polarize it with a high enough voltage.

Unless we're talking about an LP preamp, though, most of this (except for tube and some caps) is simply not relevant to any real-world issue.

Good to see you ackowledge that low level signal devices can be affected by vibration. I agree. However, the degree to which a LP preamp or any preamp - or any amp, for that matter - is subject to vibration is the level of (structural) vibration in the environment to begin with. It's the relative levels between the audio signal and the noise that are important, no? The vibration environment in the city can be, say, an order of magnitude higher than out in the boondocks. So, yes, vibration is an issue for any audio component, including solid state amps, turntables, cd players, or what have you. You can minimize the effects of structural vibration by moving to the country, but that won't eliminate it.

No matter how much you have in the end you would have had even more if you had more to begin with. - An audiophile's lament

Quote:
Normal light vibrations that occur in a listening room will affect only moving parts (motor of a CD player and laser assemblies for example). Wires, capacitors and integrated circuits (even if in sockets) are not affected by light vibrations, such as walking in a wooded floor.

As for tube amps they are obsolete so that makes them irrelevant.

I must say, I am stunned - simply stunned! - by the lengths to which you went to prove your ealier assertions. Who would have thought simply repeating the same unfounded and misguided thinking would serve as such utter proof positive that you are - of course (and I suspect, as you believe, always) - infallible! No further discussion needed!!!

Where's that "knock me over with a cartridge lead wire" icon?

Quote:
However, the degree to which a LP preamp or any preamp - or any amp, for that matter - is subject to vibration is the level of (structural) vibration in the environment to begin with.

And the relative sensitivity of devices to vibration comes into play, which you seem to be omitting here.