|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
72.66.79.112
In Reply to: RE: Yes posted by My name is Fred on October 26, 2016 at 05:19:38
will often appear to improve subjectively when bass intensity is diminished. I don't know whether that is good or bad in this instance. My belief is that cone speakers designed to sit on the floor very often should be raised from the floor by a distance greater than the manufacturer seemed to think was adequate. Doing that effects a kind of decoupling from the floor in relation to reflections. Almost always, things get cleaner and clearer and overall better when you do that. However, that is not the same thing as decoupling in respect to physical anchoring. I am very biased in favor of firmly anchoring speakers to the floor, just not too close to the floor. Sound Anchor and other companies make or made stands that are effective in this way. Lift but couple.
Follow Ups:
That "anchoring" will tend to make the floor variously vibrate or become a resonator depending on the type of floor.
The mass of the entire speaker against the energy of the cone is enormous and hardly needs such anchoring (in my opinion).
Perhaps this is a matter of semantics. When I advocate coupling to the floor, I agree that you do want to isolate the floor from vibrations of the speaker cabinet. Stands with spike footers do achieve that goal. But if you sit a typical floor-stander right on the floor, very often it isn't properly decoupled physically from the floor (some of the more expensive floor-standers do incorporate spiked footers that solve the problem). But in my post, I was referring to preventing the speaker from moving in response to bass transients, by creating a physical anchor to the floor while also decoupling the vibrations. If the speaker is just sitting on the floor or worse, sitting on something that "glides", this wastes speaker and amplifier energy and reduces therefore the amount of energy in the music signal that can be transferred into the air to make sound. If the speaker is capable of deep bass response, this becomes all the more important. Bottom line is that I would not use "gliders". On the other hand, I have a high regard for Herbie. His products are generally BS-free.
So, maybe I should have written: raise, physically anchor and acoustically decouple (which is partly achieved by raising).
... consider spikes to couple not isolate.
My experience, and I emphasise that this is all experimental/experiential and not based in labs or theory, that the negative of having a speaker cabinet influenced by movement directly from sound waves is tiny by comparison with the positive of the loss of vibration transmitted to the floor and this causing some kind of BOOM or even transferring vibration back to the cabinet.
I have found even concrete slabs to be prone to vibration and audibly so.
It's your system, and only your opinion counts.
But to clarify or to reiterate what I said already, a stand that raises the speaker and is itself spiked to the floor would be my preference for most floor standing speakers of modest to medium size. I think the boom to which you refer is due to an interaction between the woofer and the floor that has nothing to do with immobilizing the speaker, or not.
... giving vibration a solid means to move from the speaker to the floor.
However, raising effectively the woofer higher often brings a good result as the sound doesn't either get partly lost in carpet of reflect backup off the floor smearing the music.
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: