[Tweaker]

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 thread (all two of us) perhaps you can explain why the claims made for mechanical isolation are based on "pseudo-science".

[Adz523]

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 ...

There has to be a technically correct answer to the advantages/disadvantages of spikes vs. platform & whether its coupling or de-coupling.   Is there anyone out there with the educational background to answer this?  

Also, I think we can be dismissive of a magical potion to rub onto CDs to improve sound and onto DVDs to noticeably improve sound and picture without sampling.  By the way, I tried their Silclear and I could not discern any audible or video quality difference at all.

[Tweaker]

Adz523,
Well, I'm sorry, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. If you haven't tried the cd polish you can't dismiss it. The explanation of how it works doen't seem so far fetched. His claims as to the extent of the effect seem pretty overblown, though. But,he's not the first one to use hyperbole to try and sell a product. The Silclear that you tried, the claims for that seem outlandish, but at least you tried it before blowing it off.
 I've just learned from experience that it's a good idea to be an open minded skeptic. Especially when it comes to this particular hobby. Definitely a fair amount of snake oil out there, but not all of it is. I may just have to try the cd treatment now and see which category this one falls into.

[Ethan Winer]

Tweaks,

> have you actually tried any of the products you are dismissive of? <

I understand how CD players work so I don't have to try an iso platform. It's like asking if I tried howling at the moon to cure my arthritis. I know what causes arthritis, and howling at the moon is unrelated.

To be clear, I don't dismiss something just because I don't understand it. But I understand electronics very well, and as a musician I also understand the psychology of the perception of audio and music.

> Contrary to my expectations they made an improvement. <

Before I'll be a "believer" I need to see hard data showing which of the four audio parameters* is improved and by how much. Yes, it's remotely possible that a -120 dB noise floor might be raised by 1/4 of a dB with the application of extreme vibration. For example, the triboelectric effect could cause small amounts of noise to be generated by the wires inside an electronic device. But noise that low is already orders of magnitude below inaudibility. So far, the only claims I've ever read have been "sounds clearer, more open" and so forth. I need hard data before I'll change my mind. If you know of any such data, please post a link.

--Ethan

* The four audio parameters are noise, distortion, frequency response, and time-based errors.

[John Casler]

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.

...

Any and all physical action forces have opposite "reactive forces".

If the reactive force is of a significant degree, it can "add" distortion to the sound of a speaker, in two ways:

1) The speaker may not be stable enough and the active force will cause it to move.  This may cause a less accurate response to the signal.  This could be compared to a couple boxers on roller skates.  They may strike each other, but the the blows will not be as crisp and powerful as if they we standing solidly on the boxing ring floor.

2) The reactive forces from a speaker driver cause vibrations (resonances) of the cabinet itself, as well as sound from the drivers that travel through the cabinet material, which are released as sound.  

Floating or "decoupling" a speaker system from the floor will offer no benefit from either of these potential problems.

De-coupling is only a useful option "IF" the speaker must sit on a hardwood floor that is "itself" too flimsy to battle the vibrations.  If this is the case, the floor may absorb enough of the vibrations and also release them as "sound energy" (distorted)

Spikes are used to couple simply because they pierce carpet and provide a "high pressure" mechanical coupling.  The distributed pressure of a speaker cabinet on carpet will not offer efficient coupling.

The speaker then "takes on" the mass of the floor, meaning the strength of the vibrational energy has to be far greater to make the cabinet move.

Reduction of the negative vibrations can also be acheived by adding "mass" or additional weight to the speaker (I add over 100# each to all my subs)

While we might think that most quality speakers have enough mass to solve all vibrational problems...Most do not.

Adding mass, "and" mechanical coupling will go a long way towards reducing much of the potential for sonic damage to the signal.

And one more thing, contrary to the "marketing mysticism", spikes "do not" DRAIN energy off.  They simply add the mass of a large body (the floor) so that the vibrational energy has to be greater to affect a larger mass, and the smaller vibrations will have less effect.

As I have said many times, much of our hobby is the creation of music through electrical impulse and mechanical vibrations.  The rest of our hobby is destroying and dealing with the resulting remnants of those very vibrations.

Talk about a love    hate    situation

[Ethan Winer]

John,

> The speaker may not be stable enough and the active force will cause it to move. <

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.

> Spikes are used to couple simply because they pierce carpet and provide a "high pressure" mechanical coupling. <

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.

> They simply add the mass of a large body <

I can believe that assuming the coupling really is effective. But is it? And again, isn't decoupling what's really wanted anyway?

--Ethan

[PhilNYC]

Ethan,

Rather than wait for some scientific study to be done, wouldn't just be easier to try it?  I mean...I've tried howling at the moon before, and while it didn't help any arthritis, it did make me feel better...  

[John Casler]

 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. ...

Hi Ethan,

Well it certainly "does" have to do with the degree of potential damage due to reactive forces.  That said 2 years ago at CES, Brian had a 100# plus subwoofer sitting flat on the carpet, which was sliding all over the place.  He added 2 unused amps on top and the bass was much better.

Subs generally are some of the heaviest and sturdiest of speakers, and most find that spiking, (or some other form of coupling) and or adding mass is helpful at high SPL's

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 don't think most speakers "rock", but is they have large woofers, they are subject to "reaction" to those forces.

As far as isolating electronics and CD/DVD transports, my mind is still rather open.  I have been to meets and "thought" I heard differences, but would prefer to have a blind demo to see if it was worth entertaining.

 I can believe that assuming the coupling really is effective. But is it? And again, isn't decoupling what's really wanted anyway?...

I can think of no advantage to de-coupling unless the floor is so light that it actually transmits sound (as sound).

Other than that, decoupling makes the speaker, more subject to its reactionary forces, and the negative potential of those forces.

To give you an idea of the forces involved, I have placed over 80# of barbell plates on top of a 100# plus speaker.  These plates were "neatly stacked" on top of each other.  I have found that the plates actually have "moved" and are not in their "neat stacks" after a hard session.

This would lead one to beleive that their is significant vibration and power released.  That movement also means that energy that should have been used to move the driver, had infact produced a "reactive" force that physically moved the mass of the speaker.

This theoretically would tranlate into a start and stop of the individual driver that was not as powerfull or effective as it could have been.

Did (does) this affect the sound?  In many cases, I beleive it does.

[Tweaker]

Ethan,
So you haven't tried any of the things you  are dismissive of, you just know based on your complete understanding of the behavior of electrons carring a complex analog or digital music signal through a circuit and how they might be affected by resonance, vibration, etc. There is nothing more to learn in that regards, That field has been thoroughly researched and now the textbook is closed.
  What I find most curious is that unless there is "hard data" explaining why something should be happening it can't exist. What if some morning you turned on your system and noticed it sounded quite a bit different, maybe even better? A friend of yours reveals that he has placed (God forbid) some brass cones under all your electronics and that is why you are hearing a change. Then what would you do?  Deny what you are hearing untill some "hard data"  becomes available? I guess I should remove all the cones from my gear,replace the stock rubber feet, and live with a less enjoyable sounding stereo untill someone can come along with some technical paper explaining to me why it's o.k. for me to be hearing what I'm hearing. You sell a product which I'm sure has a profound affect on the quality of music reproduction (I may even try some someday, if I can get my wifes blessing). Do I need to read a technical article explaining why they work before I will be able to hear the improvement? Of course not. That would be a strange way to go through life. Remember we observe first, then try to explain. The science of acoustics has not always existed yet long before anyone published articles about noise, distortion, frequency response, and time-based errors people have been using drapes and such to improve the sound of theatres and concert halls of old without knowing the technical explanation of why it worked. There are discoveries made all of the time that we observe in some fashion that cannot be explained with our existing knowledge.(Astronomy is a good example of that). We often have to revise our thinking as a result. Some don't like doing  that, though.

[Ethan Winer]

Phil,

> wouldn't just be easier to try it? <

Actually, it would be hard for me to try spikes. The big JBLs in my home studio are way too heavy, and they're already up three feet off the floor on large metal stands. It takes two strong people to even lift them. And my home theater speakers are small bookshelf types sitting on 2 inches of 705 which in turn rests on $6 plastic step stools from Walmart.

I suppose I could buy some spikes, set my receiver to Large, and try them with and without. But I'm not sure what I'd be listening for. When I experimented with isolation pads I couldn't really hear any difference. I continue to use the isolation pads because 1) I know the principle is sound even if it makes no difference in practice, and 2) the 2 inches raises the tweeters to exactly ear height.

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. I'm in no rush. And apparently neither are the companies that sell spikes. If none of them have any data after all these years, why should I bother to test their claims?

--Ethan

[Ethan Winer]

John,

> decoupling makes the speaker, more subject to its reactionary forces, and the negative potential of those forces. <

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.

I had an experience similar to yours. A few months ago I was fiddling with my Sunfire sub and decided to remove the stick-on rubber feet. A few days later I noted that the sub wasn't at a 45 degree angle in the corner anymore. Oh, so that's what the rubber feet are for! So I got some new feet and put them on. I can't say I noticed a change in sound one way or the other, though I admit I wasn't expecting or listening for a change.

--Ethan

[fabaudio]

I've been using 12" wooden plant caddies that support 150 lbs. They are especially handy with heavy floorstanders - you can move them around quite easily and experiment with placement. I"m currently using them with subwoofers. I've been having trouble trying to download pictures of these  things. BTW they are also nicely finished. Anyone interested just Google 12" plant caddy for a photo.

[_scotty_]

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 used with the same speaker placed on a concrete floor.  The speakers weigh 190lbs. each and
40lbs of that is in the two 12in. woofers.
Scotty

[John Casler]

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  ...

Hi Scotty,

I think in the case of a "wooden floor" enough of the speakers vibration can be transfered to the floor if "mechanically coupled" and the floor itself will create a "muffled" sound.

This sound then "blurs, and negatively impacts" what you hear from the listening position.  

The Reimers are probaly of sufficient mass to no have significant reactive distortions and simply removing the "floor noise" would make them sound better, clearer, cleaner.

However, if you were on carpet over concrete, likely spikes to "couple" would be equal to, or superior.

[Ethan Winer]

Tweaker,

> you just know based on your complete understanding of the behavior of electrons carring a complex analog or digital music signal through a circuit and how they might be affected by resonance, vibration, etc. <

Yes.

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!

> What I find most curious is that unless there is "hard data" explaining why something should be happening it can't exist. <

I didn't say it can't exist. I was even careful to explain that I don't dismiss something simply because I don't understand the mechanism. But based on my understanding of electronics I'm pretty darn sure isolating preamps and CD players is a waste. Therefore the burden of proof is on those who sell these products. Since they're the ones with a vested interest in proving that isolation products improve the sound of electronics, why has no such evidence ever been put forth? Why are their only selling points testimonials and vague flowery descriptions?

> A friend of yours reveals that he has placed (God forbid) some brass cones under all your electronics and that is why you are hearing a change. Then what would you do? <

I guess I'd have to kill myself. What other option would there be?

Seriously, if it were that easy to hear an improvement from using cones under electronics we wouldn't be having this discussion. I visit a lot of audio newsgroups and web forums, and the threads that generate a dozen or more pages of argument are always those about the benefits of questionable technology. Nobody argues about the value of 16 bits over 8 bits, or whether 56 bps lossy compression is audible. These things are easily heard and easily measured.

What people do argue about - all the time - is the value of a 192 KHz sample rate (puhleeze), the benefit of 24 bits versus 16, expensive speaker wire versus 14 gauge lamp cord, the improvement from clocking an overpriced D/A convertor with an equally overpriced outboard word clock, and of course isolation cones.

Tweaker, if cones really did anything - anything at all! - vendors would have data showing exactly what is improved and by how much. And then I'd buy some and surely hear the improvement too, and we'd both be in full agreement.

> Remember we observe first, then try to explain <

You are overlooking all the times researchers were certain they observed something, only to find out they were wrong when the theory was properly tested double-blind. This is exactly what's missing with cones. In fact, I'd be surpised if cones haven't been properly tested at some point and found to have no improvement. Do you know of any double blind tests that show cones making an audible change? Or a tests that concluded no change?

> You sell a product which I'm sure has a profound affect on the quality of music reproduction <

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?

--Ethan

[John Casler]

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.
...

Hi Ethan, and there lies the question.  How much is the sound affected?

I notice distinct differences in tone, dynamics trainsiets, and impact.

It stands to reason that if a woofer begins it's forward launch to create the leading edge of a Hz, that if the cabinet moves backwards (ever so slightly) that the energy/rise time of that cycle will be affected.

The desireable, situation of course would be to have "instant" acceleration and deceleration, but it is not possible.  Second best would be to have a "stable" launching structure, that provides the least amount of reactive movement, upon each cycle.

In this world of mega decimal distortion numbers and what we can hear and can't hear, I think as we further reduce the amount of factors that can affect the sonic purity of the signal, it might be worth the effort.

I think I can hear a difference in some of the applications.  

Since you deal with released energy and the dissipation of such, I know you can appreciate what getting rid of it quickly can mean to the sound.

It surely obscures and negatively impacts the signal we want to hear.

I think its all an effort to maximize the "good vibrations" (thanks Brian Wilson) and minimize the bad guys on as many fronts as possible.

[PhilNYC]

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. ...

Well, every floorstanding speaker I've ever bought comes with spikes, so apparently the speaker manufacturers believe they help...

[Tweaker]

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!

Did any stereo systems get sent to the moon? I have cones underneath my gear because they make an improvement to the sound (in spite of the lack of data to tell me it's ok), not because I'm worried about the stuff vibrating apart!

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.

The improvements are easily measured because we have developed the means to do so. That has not always been the case

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?

 
Yes it does. It tells me that because of personal bias,agendas,and beliefs that there will be those who will hear differences because they want to, those who won't because they don't want to...and the rest of us!
   I believe we too will have to agree to disagree, but it has been an interesting thread an perhaps more revealing about us than we might realize.

[Ethan Winer]

Phil,

> every floorstanding speaker I've ever bought comes with spikes <

They also come with a jumper strap and extra terminals for bi-wiring, and I hope you won't now argue that bi-wiring is worthwhile.

Smart companies provide what their customers demand, even when their customers don't know any better.

--Ethan

[Ethan Winer]

John,

> I notice distinct differences in tone, dynamics trainsiets, and impact. <

There's no way I'll try to convince you that you're imagining this. But I assume/hope you've had personal experiences in the past that show how frail human auditory perception can be. I know I sure have!

> It stands to reason that if a woofer begins it's forward launch to create the leading edge of a Hz, that if the cabinet moves backwards (ever so slightly) that the energy/rise time of that cycle will be affected. <

Yes, but the magnitude of the effect is the only thing that matters. That's why I mentioned earlier adding 1/4 dB of noise to a noise floor of -120 dB. Yes, the noise was increased a measurable amount. No, it doesn't affect sound quality even a little.

--Ethan