|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
72.130.96.11
In Reply to: RE: BDR "The Pit" Mk 3 posted by Duster on March 23, 2014 at 17:01:32
BDR, when Dennis (?, can't definitively remember his name) was still alive was very active in experimentation. is pads and pucks employed some kind of epoxy center fill which served to dissipate some of the energy, The exact composition was a secret and he eventually settled on a mk 3 or mk 4 version. I generally preferred the mk 4 version which had a bit more top end extension, but of course, everything is system related.
In my systems the BDR were superb performers besting brass ceramic and many other cones of other materials. I liked the Still points better but there was a big penalty in over all cost. Then I discovered spruce , and everything else crumbled; although I occasionally use my spruce with the BDR cones
Stu
Follow Ups:
I tried out mark 4's and do understand what you mean. We're keeping the 4's since we were given the option for either.
============================
Hey! I have a blog now: http://mancave-stereo.blogspot.com or "like" us at https://www.facebook.com/mancave.stereo
You wrote,"BDR, when Dennis (?, can't definitively remember his name) was still alive was very active in experimentation his pads and pucks employed some kind of epoxy center fill which served to dissipate some of the energy,"
Well, that would certainly explain the generally hollow and peculiar sound of the BDR cones. Maybe they would do well to put a crystal inside.
"Everything is relative." - A. Einstein
Edits: 03/27/14
what I hear. Maybe to paraphrase your comments, "Its your equipment".
YRMV.
;-)
The BDR cone is a classic vibration control device.
I'm currently testing a set of Black Diamond Racing Pyramid Cones MK4 while configuring a new vibration control system for a preamplifier unit enclosure (not the IPS outboard DC power supply unit) of an Aragon 18k MKII preamplifier.
The BDR MK4 cones sound uncolored, open, nominally linear but midrange presence sounds a bit too forward when implemented in conjunction with a tonewood plinth positioned upon an MDF rack shelf. Next DIY modification within the configuration will test a Herbie's Audio Lab "Thin" Fat Dot (dBNeutralizer pad) placed between the base of the cones and the surface they interface with (choosing either point-side-down, or point side-up to one's ear).
A different tonewood plinth material is likely next in line...
Image: Herbie's Audio Lab "Thin" Fat Dots
When implemented for the previously mentioned application, I've gladly found without caveats:
When a Herbie's Audio Lab "Thin" Fat Dot (dBNeutralizer pad) is placed between the base of each BDR cone and the surface they are placed upon, the presentation became more full-bodied, with better fleshed-out images, a notably more authoritative bottom end, and more relaxed treble energy (no sense of hollowness nor peculiarity).
In this particular case, the BDR cones are positioned point-side-up, with a "Thin" Fat Dot adhered to the base of each BDR cone with RTV silicone, then placed on a 0.75" thick acacia tonewood plinth supported by a set of six thin felt pads, which rests upon a rigid MDF rack shelf surface.
Next step might be to try a 0.75" hickory tonewood plinth rather than acacia, but I'm currently satisfied as-is.
Hi Duster,
What will be the result if the thin Fat Dot are replaced by Grungebuster Dots? Thanks
While I've not used grungebuster Dots with the BDR cones, I have used them with a number of other cones, coupling discs, and various other vibration control footers. I find a thin grungebuster Dot for the purpose (not the regular grungebuster Dot) tends to allow the energy transfer function of a cone/coupling disc/footer to be more efficient and to reduce the microphonic influence of the interface for a lowered noise floor, while essentially maintaining the sonic signature of a cone/coupling disc/footer. On the other hand, the dBNeutralizer pad does more to actually block vibration while the grungebuster material tends to function as a more subtle vibration control "assistant", if that makes sense. For some applications, I've successfully used a dBNeutralizer pad stacked with a grungebuster Dot (either thin or regular version) to good effect. Even which pad/dot is stacked upon the other tends to make a difference from a system tuning POV. YMMV
I wrote some time ago about a curious observation I had.
Although standard thought is to use three cones ( three points determine a plane from Euclidean geometry), I find that four feet actually sound better: more even FR and greater detail and dynamics, even though one foot may be literally be partially floating against the chassis.
Also I find that placing the four feet asymmetrically between corners works the best.
Be curious of you ever tried this and your results, too, would be welcome.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: