0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 9613 times.
Ethan,have you actually tried any of the products you are dismissive of? I haven't tried the cd solution so I have no idea if it works or not. I was skeptical of using spikes under my electonics but gave them a try anyway. Contrary to my expectations they made an improvement. Another of Mapleshades products (the rubber/cork thing) that I expected to work, after my experience with the cones, did not, at least not beneficially. They got sent back for a refund. For the benefit of all those following this thr ...
Phil,> Most speaker manufacturers and audiophiles I know talk about coupling a speaker to the floor in order to keep the speaker from floating and "adding mass" to the cabinet <I would expect any competent loudspeaker to have enough mass on its own to prevent it from rocking or vibrating in sympathy with the woofer.> Spikes are used to couple, not decouple <That doesn't make sense to me. The best way to couple a box to what it rests on is to let its entire bottom rest on that surface. It seems to me that spikes would reduce the amount of contact surface to a minimum, not maximize coupling. ...
That's why I added the qualification competent speakers. I'm not sure I agree that "most" speakers are so flimsy that they wobble around. Certainly my big JBLs are very stable, but so are the cheaper speakers I own. At least I don't feel much vibration as music plays. ...
But can spikes prevent a speaker from rocking forward and back? And again, does anyone have some hard data showing measurements with and without spikes? Hard data is the only way I'll ever be convinced that spikes improve things. And I'm not arguing that spikes are always worthless on speakers. Maybe they can help. I honestly don't know. My skepticism is mainly about the value of isolating electronics and CD/DVD transports ...
I can believe that assuming the coupling really is effective. But is it? And again, isn't decoupling what's really wanted anyway?...
John given the constraints of your statements do you have any idea why ballbearing isolation of a loudspeaker system from a suspended wood floor should yield a dramatic improvement in resolution at all frequencies.Specifically the the bass exhibits better pitch definition and the fine details in the music are easier to hear. It is as if the transient response of the speaker has been improved as well as it's settling time. Interesting enough almost no improvement occurs when ballbearing isolation is ...
John,But how does that translate audibly? What audio parameter is affected, and by how much? Is frequency response affected? What are some typical values? This is what I'm asking, not whether or not a speaker cabinet might slide around or rock or whatever. ...
In the end, the burden of proof is on those who sell spikes. If there's an improvement to be had, let them prove it with hard facts. ...
When I was much younger I worked as a tech for a company called Anzac Electronics, and I built a number of devices that were sent out on moon launches. We had a special shaker table that vibrated the crap out of these things (basically RF signal splitters) because they had to work under extreme vibration and failure once in space was not an option. If vibration really affected solid state electronics, the history of space exploration would have turned out very differently!
Yes, bass traps and acoustic treatment do make a profound improvement. But that improvement is easily measured, and is also immediately obvious to untrained listeners.
As opposed to cones and iso pads which have neither supporting data nor unanimous agreement among even experienced listeners. Doesn't that tell you anything?