|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
99.139.64.51
In Reply to: RE: One last thought posted by stehno on May 07, 2015 at 00:32:16
Maybe similar, but not the same.
Isolation can produce the results you're describing. That is, if it were truly just a containment function, and I'm not so sure that's always the case.
Damping is actually the dissipation function, so the vibes do go somewhere and get converted to another form of energy, usually heat, or into another part of the sonic spectrum that is less annoying to you. At least that's been my understanding.
For boxed components I use damping and coupling, rather than isolation. Then I use isolation/damping for the platforms they sit on. Pretty much the same for speakers I use.
You are absolutely correct that music (and the universe for that matter) is all about vibration, so any notion of totally eliminating vibration is not only infeasible but also antithetical to sound.
Follow Ups:
I disagree with your comment about finding similar results using isolation. Vibration isolation (an impossibility) and mechanical energy transfer are diametrically opposed strategies and methodologies.
That's like saying God sits on a mountain top and there are many paths to Him. In essence you'd be saying God (or in this case superior vibration management) speaks with forked tongue,
One of the difference is your use of the word containment. The better word is trapped. I would never attempt to contain or trap mechanical energy. That's what everybody is already doing and I have no desire to be like them in their endeavors to defeat basic laws of physics.
Sounds like a good plan. one can dampen the shelf, isolate the chassis and then dampen the isolated chassis. With DIY that's not too expensive.
I think ecumenical is the appropriate word here. No thanks.
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: