|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.133.225.106
In Reply to: Mass loading always works...... posted by tubesforever on May 5, 2007 at 23:15:29:
"Mass loading helps eliminate distortion due to resonance."That's odd. In my experience, mass-loading is frequently the cause of distorted musical timing due to its nasty tendency to "slowly" release stored resonant energy back into the system with predictable results; smeared note attack and truncated decay, confused rhythms, and a generally lifeless musical presentation.
Mass-loading can certainly be an effective tool when used judiciously as part of a carefully engineered system - the Avid Acutus is a good example - but baldly claiming that it "always works" is the same kind of tubesforever ignorant bullshit that's been stinking up the VA archives since you first got your grubby mitts on mommy's computer.
"This is why all high end measuring scales are placed on high mass platforms."
Very astute, Professor, except that "high end measuring scales" are static devices and aren't required to reproduce a musical continuum of notes and beats with their subtle pitch and timing relationships more or less intact.
Follow Ups:
"Very astute, Professor, except that "high end measuring scales" are static devices and aren't required to reproduce a musical continuum of notes and beats with their subtle pitch and timing relationships more or less intact."Actually this is incorrect... both cytography and some confocal microscopy experiments are designed to monitor changes in dynamic samples. The pitch and timing relationships that are required for music are trivial compared to the atomic resolution scanning limits that these instruments are capable of.
I stand corrected on the static observation.OTOH, I'd be willing to bet that if the dynamic sample being measured was constantly firing off the sound of kick drums and low bass notes, and those sounds were being amplified and reproduced back into the measuring environment, all that low resonant frequency mass damping might prove unsuitable, especially if reproducing the timing and shaping of those notes was absolutely critical.
The interaction of a turntable and its environment is kind of like a continuous shock wave; the thing being measured is the source of the vibration interfering with the measurement.
The resonant frequencies of the components and their supports all effect the timing of the energy being bounced back and forth throughout the system, and that has a dramatic effect on the subtle temporal relationships between the attack, sustain, and decay components of the notes. Or so my ears tell me.
But by mass loading I do not necessarily mean to say that the turntable needs to be massive.Rather the stand and the foundation for the stand should exhibit high mass.
With some buildings, as has been pointed out to me, a wall mount light but stiff shelf will be the answer.
I am simply stating the obvious. If you want to hear everything in the groove, the platform for the turntable must be immobile. High mass always works even with a light and stiff shelf....think about it. The mass is coming from the structure that supports the shelf.
I appreciate your point of view. But if the base is not immobile, you are leaving music on the table (so to speak).
"Rather the stand and the foundation for the stand should exhibit high mass."Tell that to Mana, Neuance, Symposium, Zoethecus, and Finite Elemente, etc. These companies all build rigid low-to-medium mass supports that sound great, but more importantly, they help your gear maintain a tight grip on the music's PRaT.
I've heard an LP12, several Regas, two Technics, a Spacedeck, a Roksan, a Scout, a crappy suspended Basis, an Avid, a Scheu, and a Michell (my bell) in what was essentially my current system. The only one that sounded better with a massive support - in this case, a thick Mapleshade slab - was the Scheu.
The latter was the forerunner of Teres and its spin-offs and has a massive 4" thick plastic platter. It's an insipid, rhythmically awkward 'table that couldn't out-pace anything short of a Sota with a good headwind behind it, regardless of its support.
In every other case, each massive support I tried - a sandbox, a granite slab, the aforementioned thick maple; all on a massive sand-filled steel rack and/or my Zoethecus frame - sucked the drive and energy out of the music and made the rhythms sound confused and tentative. Granite tended to sound lumpy, edgy, and slow; sand was lifeless, dull and dry, and thick maple was warm, bloated, and lackluster.
There were a few isolated sonic or spatial improvements here and there, but only the Jazz at the Pawnshop crowd cares about that when the music's timing and energy are screwed-up.
So much for "always" when it comes to crude mass-loading. In my experience so far, a well engineered light, rigid support is the ticket if you want to bring the music back alive . A massive support is probably mandatory with a really massive non-suspended turntable, but I've never heard one of those that wasn't sleep-inducing, and as Dylan sez "when ya got nuthin, ya got nuthin to lose."
...the earth is 'high mass' but moving!"If you want to hear everything in the groove, the platform for the turntable must be immobile. High mass always works even with a light and stiff shelf....think about it. The mass is coming from the structure that supports the shelf."
the earth supports my floor, which supports my floor-mounted rack...and the earth also supports my wall, which supports my wall-mounted shelf.
i guess i'm OK then -- or not, since the earth is not immobile.
what's an analog-lover to do? :)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: