|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
69.156.196.162
In Reply to: simple, affordable relatively speaking, pro isolation posted by tonemaniac on March 20, 2007 at 11:02:13:
Hi.Are we dealing with audio or precision lab test instruments?
For audio use, I think I could save the big bucks to pick up a natural granite slab, of much denser & massy weight from a garden or stone outlet, cheaply.
Add underneath the granite slab three jellylike vibration absorbing cushion pads, available from sports shop or drug stores. I did use some jelly stuff as my shoe sole insert before.
Here you go.
But, this vibration-absorbant platform alone is still NOT good enough for me. ALL my components, which include heavy weight tube power amps, are DIY fitted with strong steep spikes at their chassis bottom plate. My LP turntable, DVD-audio player, CD player & tspe deck are all seated on tuned acoutical tip toes, pointing upward, with the tip toes bases mounted on rubber cushion pad before landing on the stone platforms.
It works & yet all these cost me so little.
Follow Ups:
not all similar looking things perform anywhere near alike... my own solution is expensive, passive, and simple... two black diamond racing heavy "source" slabs held apart with Herbie's heavy feet... the sucker is dead quiet... however you could order up a Silent Running Audio base... which is the best value ? I dunno... I'm assuming, and only assuming, that a product which is marketed to precision consumers, those who need scales to *not* wiggle and jump, and so on, might possibly do a good job at dissipating low frequency energy...
Hi.Let's get real. Does the realworld audio situation demand flat sub subsonic response? I don't think so. I doubt our programme sources, e.g. LP, can go down to a few hertz response where those costly lab anti-vibration platforms claim to work best.
What I found out years back was the equipment got to be seated 'floating' on any platforms, wood or natural stones regardless. I compared the sonic difference of a equipment placed on a massy granite slate on its original housing rubber legs
VS 3-in-a-set acoustical tip toes or steel spikes.I could hear the noticeable improvement in transparency, clarity & overall soundstaging with equipment 'floated' on the tip toes or steel spipes.
My experience told me we should use both: mass & effective isolations.
Surely I don't want to be another victim of money greedy vendors offering exotic equipment.
c-J
about the extra bang from good subsonic isolation.... they reviewed the Minus-K... a mechanical and somewhat fancy approach to subsonic isolation... their conclusion was that it mattered, how much it mattered depended a lot on the resolving power of your active circuits, the room, and so on...
Hi.You know what I mean. Don't take in whoever tells you. It could be smoke mirrors with undisclosed agenda behind.
c-J
Hi.....that vendors out there spying on.
I'm pretty sure my phone is tapped.
nt
Yes, all of which has been known for 10 years. Since the introduction of the Vibraplane.
of the active isolators, the semi-passives (minus-k), and the constrained viscoelastic shelves, etc... and out of that, is there any substantial gain from reducing sub-sonics ? The fans of SRA, i.e. Silent Running Audio think that a precision tuned base which accounts for the resonance characteristics of a *specific* component in the design of a particular base make a substantial difference... so there's one vote for well structured passive design...
As I recall someone on the asylum attempted what you suggest a couple yrs ago, but he limited the eval to around 8 products.I imagine it would be quite an undertaking to do a thorough evaluation, with who knows how many products out there (are there more than 20?!). Who will pick the condenders and by what criteria? And what system should be used for the evaluation, and whose ears? LOL
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: