[sts9fan]

f a peer review study found that an item was effective, but you could not personally hear a difference when using the item in your system, would you continue to use it solely because a peer review said it worked? I wouldn't. Conversely, I don't require a peer review study to confirm what my ears tells me is effective.

I think you are focusing on thw wrong aspect of my post. My point is i want to see an experiment from a scientific journal. Not one preformed by the maker of the product.

Can you point me to a peer review study that concludes the Aurios bearings are ineffective?

come on now that rediculous

[tvad4]

come on now that rediculous

No more ridiculous than what you are asking of me, and I understand you are asking for a published study from a scientific journal.

I pointed you to a 32 page study complete with measurements and footnotes listing the associated measuring devices and test gear. Have you waded through that paper? I can’t blame you if the answer is no. It's a heck of a lot easier to install a set of Aurios and listen for yourself over a week or so.

You must agree that a 32 page study is an awfully extensive length to go simply for the purpose of marketing hype. I’d say the company is going to great lengths to demonstrate the efficacy of their products.

Look, if you don't want to use the products because you cannot find a peer review study to convince you of their worth, then that's fine, but if you have never tried them, then you have no basis on which to offer any opinion of their efficacy. Furthermore, their benefits become more apparent as a system's resolution improves.

Frankly, I believe you would be a naysayer if "Scientific American" devoted an entire issue to the efficacy of isolation bearings on audio equipment.

From my perspective, this discussion has reached the point of diminishing returns. I'll leave it to others to read the white paper, and to read your thoughts and then to decide for themselves if it's worthwhile to spend a few hundred bucks to experiment with isolation bearings on their audio gear.

[michaelv]

many people i know say to me one sentence " isolation device is good only for tube , not solid state"  .  The isolation device works on my dvd player. I can see better picture , less noise.   For cdp, not only i have Vibrapod, but also  maple wood block (cutting board).  The change is not like day and night, but it is there.  So i am just curious that amp has no moving device like a in cd player. How can it be affected by isolation device.

Also, many folks mention about cone isolation  type. Does isolation depend on type of cone or just the material of the isolation device. If we could afford to try all types of isolation,  it would have been easier to find out.   And there are lots of isolating brands on the market.

[tvad4]

many people i know say to me one sentence " isolation device is good only for tube , not solid state"  .  The isolation device works on my dvd player. I can see better picture , less noise.   For cdp, not only i have Vibrapod, but also  maple wood block (cutting board).  The change is not like day and night, but it is there.  So i am just curious that amp has no moving device like a in cd player. How can it be affected by isolation device.

Also, many folks mention about cone isolation  type. Does isolati ...

Cones are not isolation devices. They are coupling devices intended to work by "draining" vibration from the device upon which the equipment rests, through the rack and into the ground. Theoretically, the shape of the cone pointing away from the equipment reduces vibration returning to the equipment. Coupling methods are different than isolation methods which attempt to reduce vibration sourced from outside the gear placed on the isolation device. Each camp has their adherents.

I have never seen sensitive scientific devices resting atop cones, however these devices are often placed upon isolation bearings.

Isolation is accomplished by products like Aurios bearings, Rollerblocks, sorbothane, rubber feet, mouse pads, Neuance platforms and the like.

I have seen manufacturers recommend a combination of isolation and coupling. Adding ball bearings to Aurios theoretically allows for draining of vibration from the equipment akin to a cone. Also, Greater Ranges, the manufacturer of Neuance platforms, suggests the use of ceramic cones placed point side down, used in combination with the Neuance shelf.

Of course, none of these companies have independently published peer reviews of the efficacy of their products, although as I have mentioned above, Aurios has published white papers explaining how their products work. Also, Vistek, the manufacturer of Aurios, produces industrial and scientific isolation devices used in many industries.

[_scotty_]

Speaking only for myself, the tweaks I have chosen to use have all had to pass an informal single blind test. If I cannot easily and repeatedly distinguish the before and after difference a tweak makes than I don't bother
with it.
Scotty

[Tweaker]

I think the idea of a peer review study seems unrealistic. This is not astronomy or physics or some other scientific discipline we are talking about. It's  audio, entertainment, an industry that is not involved with the furthering of human knowledge on the  kind of level where peer reviewing would be an important part of the process.  And who would those peers be, anyway? Manufacterers of competing products? And if a peer review was done would that settle the issue? I doubt it. People have agendas. Look at the (I would assume) peer reviewed evidence about global warming, and the evidence for the harmful affects of smoking. Both have been challenged. And I don't want this to end up a discussion on the global warming, please! Just using it as an example.
Also, an experiment from a scientific journal? On whether or not placing bits of rubber or machined cones under a piece of audio gear will improve the sound? What scientific journal is going to take that one on?
  I think it unfortunate that the senses that have got us to this point pretty well along our long existence on this planet have suddenly become the subject of so much distrust. I think it is a disservice and side effect of science and psychology over the years that has caused many to distrust ourselves and put all of our faith in machines. Kind of a crippling and even scary way to go through life, I believe.
On the other side of the coin asking to produce a peer reviewed study that shows something doesn't work, in this case the Aurio bearing things, is a bit silly, too. It is up to the individual(s) making a claim to prove it, not the other way around. "By the way, did you know that inside the planet Pluto there is a colony a naked Amazon women? What do you mean there isn't? Prove it to me". Unfortunately for the audio skeptic the only way they can find out if something is bogus is to try it for themselves as peer reviewing and studies in scientific journals are just not ever going to be a part of the picture. And trying it out for themselves is something they seem largely unwilling to do.
This is kind of a strange hobby, audio. But it is one where I think our ears should alwys be the final judge.
 Enough of that. I'm going to go eat some five star Thai so I can lay awake tonight with my lower intestines going up in flames.

[sts9fan]

I have never seen sensitive scientific devices resting atop cones, however these devices are often placed upon isolation bearings.

What type of devices are you refering to? I am a analytical chemist by trade and I have never seen a isolation bearing in a lab. I have seen stone blocks used under balances but never a bearing. I work with very sensitive instruments that work in various ways.(HPLC, MALDI-TOF, Electrospray MS, Realtime PCR)  Most use a form or detection that could be related to a cd player. None of these are on isolation devices. Not one of the makers has told me I will get greater sensitivity with isolation of vibration. As for the journals they will take anything. You should see what is in some. Believe me if an experiment was done it could be in a journal...

[tvad4]

On the other side of the coin asking to produce a peer reviewed study that shows something doesn't work, in this case the Aurio bearing things, is a bit silly, too.

Admitted, and requested to make a point.

However, if a peer review study was ever done on the Aurios, or on another audio isolation device, the review would state as part of the conclusion whether the product worked or not, and the degree of it's efficacy. Therefore, the request is farfetched only insofar as no scientific journal would ever spend the money to conduct such a study of limited interest.

The degree to which a listener can detect the efficacy of isolation tweaks...or any other tweaks for that matter, including wire...is directly related to the ability of the listener's system to resolve low level detail in the music.

Several years ago, before I owned a highly resolving source and preamp/amp combo, I never heard the benefits of wire and isolation, and I thought the whole idea was nonsense. Now that I own some highly resolving gear, I'm fortunate to hear the benefits of tweaks. The important lesson for me was to not dismiss the possibility that tweaks were beneficial.

Vistek, the manufacturer of Aurios, makes bearings for microscopy and life sciences among other disciplines.

If you're interested, here's a link to some Vistek products including isolation platforms tables and bearings:

http://www.vistekinc.com/products.htm

This company's bread and butter is not high end audio. They have nothing to gain by manufacturing smoke and mirrors products intended to dupe audiophiles out of their dough.

[_scotty_]

I think the key thing to remember about the Vistek products is that they do the job that they are intended to do, vibration isolation. They have passed an empirical test of function by the highly demanding industries who use them. Other manufacturers claims are largely untested in comparision.
Scotty

[tvad4]

I think the key thing to remember about the Vistek products is that they do the job that they are intended to do, vibration isolation. They have passed an empirical test of function by the highly demanding industries who use them. Other manufacturers claims are largely untested in comparision.
Scotty

Amen.

[Parnelli777]

12" bicycle inner tubes with low pressure underneath component. Just enough air to lift unit off it's feet. Less than $3.00 ea. almost anywhere.

You can fancy the look up with a large ceramic tile of your liking, for example- place large tile on top of inner tube, again with just a little air pressure, then your CDP on top of the tile. This works.

I've got it under the CDP, amp, and preamp, with fancy Home Depot ceramic tiles for each. Total cost: under $20.00.

If you don't think it works, you haven't lost much.