Equipment isolation and vibration damping.

[Forehaven]

Hi Chris,

 

This has been my experience with almost every DAC I've compared to the ULN/LIO-8.

They either sound clinical and fatiguing (the one's with the most rave reviews) or they sound "softened" in an effort to make them less "digital."

I've referred to these two "schools" in many posts as the "detail enhancers" (providing "detail" that is not in the recording, i.e., spurious harmonics, which we used to call "harmonic distortion") or the "silky smooth" (rounding out the sharp edges of both bad recordings and good recordings alike).

 

To keep this post on topic, here's my ULN-8 "afloat" on Hip Joints:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]19540[/ATTACH]

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com

Barry Diament Audio

 

Barry, totally agree about that summary, and on topic, I gotta try that soon lol

 

Another thing you could (I'd even say 'should', as you might like it!) is to offline convert your WAV rips to DSD128 prior to sending them to the DAC (offline or real-time, but I get better results to my ears and in my system with offline).

 

YashN, I've not tried that, never even thought if it to be honest. I'll futz around with a few this weekend and give it a listen. Thx

 

Chris

[YashN]

YashN, I've not tried that, never even thought if it to be honest. I'll futz around with a few this weekend and give it a listen. Thx

 

Cool, let me know your thoughts on SQ.

[YashN]

Probably the commercial solution most highly-regarded in the industry:

 

1. Stillpoint Ultras

 

2. Stillpoint ESS Rack (there are videos linked at the bottom)

 

 

For some reason, Stillpoint also has a whole section on their website devoted to Entreq (which is amply talked about in the thread on AC filters, Balanced Power, Grounding Boxes and Linear PSUs), probably because these products are all part of out-of-signal accessories.

 

[YashN]

The steeper the slope, the higher the gradient, the more resistance to motion, a higher mechanical impedance.

 

Yes.

 

At a ratio of infinity (a flat, frictionless surface), zero impedence. (useless for us)

 

Nope, not useless at all.

 

This is why a mostly flat surface, with curves at the very end, is better.

[AnotherSpin]

Probably the commercial solution most highly-regarded in the industry:

 

1. Stillpoint Ultras

 

2. Stillpoint ESS Rack (there are videos linked at the bottom)

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]19575[/ATTACH]

 

For some reason, Stillpoint also has a whole section on their website devoted to Entreq (which is amply talked about in the thread on AC filters, Balanced Power, Grounding Boxes and Linear PSUs), probably because these products are all part of out-of-signal accessories.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]19576[/ATTACH]

 

 

I was thinking we are discussing no-bullshit affordable practical solutions? If we go beyond, my favorite from Entreq is 6-pcs set of cardboard cable-lifters for $160

 

[YashN]

I was thinking we are discussing no-bullshit affordable practical solutions?

 

I'd be weary of blanket assumptions like that. The other thread is more appropriate for discussing the Silver Trellus and the like. Proper power and shielding and grounding is no trivial matter.

[esldude]

 

The point of going to a smaller ball is not about its mass, but the degree of curvature the ball encounters as it moves laterally.

 

 

I have used other sizes to experiment with. I once used billiard balls, and some 4 inch ceramic plates that were dished in a smooth circle. This worked rather well under a large turntable. If you want to add damping, you can also use a layer of thin felt like a billiard table. I found it better without such damping myself though a bit more fiddly. Who knows what you might decide.

[AnotherSpin]

I'd be weary of blanket assumptions like that. The other thread is more appropriate for discussing the Silver Trellus and the like. Proper power and shielding and grounding is no trivial matter.

You dismiss Entreq? You just mentioned Stillpoint has a whole section on their website devoted to Entreq... I am lost.

[YashN]

You dismiss Entreq? You just mentioned Stillpoint has a whole section on their website devoted to Entreq... I am lost.

 

Where?

 

Wasn't it you who wrote 'I was thinking we are discussing no-bullshit affordable practical solutions?' after I mentioned the Entreq Silver Trellus?

 

I never dismissed Entreq nor Tripoint. Join us in the other thread so as not to further derail this one, thanks.

[YashN]

I have used other sizes to experiment with. I once used billiard balls, and some 4 inch ceramic plates that were dished in a smooth circle. This worked rather well under a large turntable. If you want to add damping, you can also use a layer of thin felt like a billiard table. I found it better without such damping myself though a bit more fiddly. Who knows what you might decide.

 

Hadn't thought of billiard tables, they might work because of their hardness. I think I remember from Symposium that after testing, they settled on the size of 1/2" balls, so I'd probably just stick with these smaller size balls.

[YashN]

Speaking of Symposium, their Isis rack looks great:

 

 

 

 

[jabbr]

I have used other sizes to experiment with. I once used billiard balls, and some 4 inch ceramic plates that were dished in a smooth circle. This worked rather well under a large turntable. If you want to add damping, you can also use a layer of thin felt like a billiard table. I found it better without such damping myself though a bit more fiddly. Who knows what you might decide.

 

Nice! So phenolic resin? I assume not ivory:) Aside from the aluminum bowls I'm ordering, I've got a bunch of balls to test -- different metaloceramics -- as well as various ceramic plates & bowls.

 

Aside from when a piece of equipment gets physically jarred -- or a hand is used to manipulate something -- how much lateral movement do you see? On the temporary concave glass lenses that I'm currently using I don't see a whole lot of large amplitude lateral movement when I'm just listening -- that's to say it appears the function of the bowl us to keep the ball centered but operationally the ball is in the horizontal part of the bowl and from a practical point if view within certain limits the bowls act as if they are flat. What do you see in your system?

[esldude]

Nice! So phenolic resin? I assume not ivory:) Aside from the aluminum bowls I'm ordering, I've got a bunch of balls to test -- different metaloceramics -- as well as various ceramic plates & bowls.

 

Aside from when a piece of equipment gets physically jarred -- or a hand is used to manipulate something -- how much lateral movement do you see? On the temporary concave glass lenses that I'm currently using I don't see a whole lot of large amplitude lateral movement when I'm just listening -- that's to say it appears the function of the bowl us to keep the ball centered but operationally the ball is in the horizontal part of the bowl and from a practical point if view within certain limits the bowls act as if they are flat. What do you see in your system?

 

Well I was doing this years ago when I still owned a TT. The arrangement is more stable than most think just from looking at it. At the same time you can be ham handed and move things around. I was using this on a lead filled Arcici TT stand, so it wasn't rickety to start with.

 

Also, yes it was phenolic billiard balls.

[YashN]

Aside from when a piece of equipment gets physically jarred -- or a hand is used to manipulate something -- how much lateral movement do you see?

 

There isn't much visible motion in everyday use (members posted this following my question on this around the first 1/3 of the thread if I remember correctly).

[YashN]

There does not seem to be a lot of similar devices but this is an interesting video:

 

[jabbr]

There isn't much visible motion in everyday use (members posted this following my question on this around the first 1/3 of the thread if I remember correctly).

 

Right -- now let's assume a pendulum and horizontal only vibration for the sake of discussion.

 

Clearly a large amplitude deflection will start the pendulum moving. The size of the necessary deflection depends on the length of the pendulum -- can we all agree?

 

Clearly microscopic deflections will not cause the pendulum to move.

 

So from an engineering point of view the necessary length of the pendulum depends on the magnitude of the vibrations to be isolated.

 

I'm saying that for typical amplitudes a 2" diameter equivalent is reasonable.

 

If you disagree and wish to prove your point you should either provide some actual evidence to the contrary or mathematical equations to the contrary.

 

Of course this is all approximations and theory and the real world has complexities so actual measurements are always necessary. Just for the sake of argument.

[jabbr]

Now let's look at some more practical aspects of bowls as horizontal vibration isolators:

 

Above we have assumed the interface is frictionless but in the real world we know that there is always some friction. The bowl itself provides a variable degree of friction to horizontal motion which varies from 0 at the center of the bowl (0 degrees) to infinite (theoretically) at the edge of a bowl (90 degrees) -- so where (a) denotes the angular displacement on a bowl, the horizontal resistance correlates with tan(a). Without understanding the actual horizontal friction at 0 degrees, we can't determine whether the additional friction related to the bowl curvature is at all significant (I suspect not given small angular displacements). We can't even determine whether this is all within measurement error, let alone predictably audible.

[Jabs1542]

There does not seem to be a lot of similar devices but this is an interesting video:

 

 

Pretty cool, it would have been fun to test this on top of the ball and cup method - but at $2000 it's too expensive for testing (at least for me). Normally the little vertical rods that it uses to keep the levitating platform centered could be a source for vibration, but if it were sitting on a properly implemented ball and cup arrangement then any horizontal displacement would be absorbed and not transferred to the little vertical rod. This would be a good x-y-z solution if someone can figure how to DIY one for way less $$$.

[esldude]

Pretty cool, it would have been fun to test this on top of the ball and cup method - but at $2000 it's too expensive for testing (at least for me). Normally the little vertical rods that it uses to keep the levitating platform centered could be a source for vibration, but if it were sitting on a properly implemented ball and cup arrangement then any horizontal displacement would be absorbed and not transferred to the little vertical rod. This would be a good x-y-z solution if someone can figure how to DIY one for way less $$$.

 

Well this should give you some ideas for DIY magnets :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PNR5eBFXI4E

 

This was one following the shelf you had posted video of.

 

Now of course my first thought is while good for mechanical de-coupling, what does a rather strong magnetic field in the vicinity of an electronic piece of gear do? Is it better or worse than the vibration? Though the shelf will allow small movement to decouple vibration it also necessarily will move the magnetic field an equal amount which will induce currents anew in the device on the shelf.

[Jud]

Well this should give you some ideas for DIY magnets :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PNR5eBFXI4E

 

This was one following the shelf you had posted video of.

 

Now of course my first thought is while good for mechanical de-coupling, what does a rather strong magnetic field in the vicinity of an electronic piece of gear do?

 

Yep.

[bdiament]

It is a cute device but the cylinder is not isolated at all. Zero.

Tap the blue wooden base and the energy goes right up that vertical member the cylinder is "resting" against, though the push pin and into the rest of the cylinder.

Earnshaw still holds true.

 

If anyone ever gets past Earnshaw, then we can consider the frequency of resonance, etc., not to mention the load such would be capable of supporting, and Esldude's point regarding the proximity of the magnetic field to certain gear.

But unless and until someone *does* get past Earnshaw (something on which I would not bet heavily), the devices are cute, but the rest is moot. ;-}

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com

Barry Diament Audio

[sdolezalek]

Humor me, because I am in no way a DIYer, but is there a reason why something like the drawing below couldn't work (using magnetic levitation but without the stabilizer bars that Barry correctly describes as carrying the vibration up the platform)? The idea is that by tilting up an edge around the perimeter of the platform you create both a centering as well as a lifting magnetc force, thereby theoretically giving more than just horizontal or vertical isolation.

 

I can think of two issues: (i) is the magnetic disturbance caused by this worse than the vibration cured; and (ii) would these have to be electromagnets so that the device wouldn't fade over time (which I assume is a problem for the design shown in the video)? Lastly, Barry: I'll need to do more reading on Earnshaw's levitation work to see whether, if using electromagnets, this would run afoul of his work.

 

Anyway, more food for thought.

[esldude]

Humor me, because I am in no way a DIYer, but is there a reason why something like the drawing below couldn't work (using magnetic levitation but without the stabilizer bars that Barry correctly describes as carrying the vibration up the platform)? The idea is that by tilting up an edge around the perimeter of the platform you create both a centering as well as a lifting magnetc force, thereby theoretically giving more than just horizontal or vertical isolation. [ATTACH=CONFIG]19599[/ATTACH]

 

I can think of two issues: (i) is the magnetic disturbance caused by this worse than the vibration cured; and (ii) would these have to be electromagnets so that the device wouldn't fade over time (which I assume is a problem for the design shown in the video)? Lastly, Barry: I'll need to do more reading on Earnshaw's levitation work to see whether, if using electromagnets, this would run afoul of his work.

 

Anyway, more food for thought.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earnshaw%27s_theorem

 

Earnshaw's theorem proves that using only paramagnetic materials (such as ferromagnetic iron) it is impossible for a static system to stably levitate against gravity.

 

For example, the simplest example of lift with two simple dipole magnets repelling is highly unstable, since the top magnet can slide sideways, or flip over, and it turns out that no configuration of magnets can produce stability.

 

However, servomechanisms, the use of diamagnetic materials, superconduction, or systems involving eddy currents allow stability to be achieved.

 

In some cases the lifting force is provided by magnetic levitation, but stability is provided by a mechanical support bearing little load. This is termed pseudo-levitation.

 

Pseudo levitation is what the video up thread shows and is why the two little posts are needed to keep things in place. I wouldn't be worried by those little posts as they can be made to not corrupt the action much. I still would worry about the magnetic fields myself.

[sdolezalek]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earnshaw%27s_theorem

 

Earnshaw's theorem proves that using only paramagnetic materials (such as ferromagnetic iron) it is impossible for a static system to stably levitate against gravity.

 

For example, the simplest example of lift with two simple dipole magnets repelling is highly unstable, since the top magnet can slide sideways, or flip over, and it turns out that no configuration of magnets can produce stability.

 

However, servomechanisms, the use of diamagnetic materials, superconduction, or systems involving eddy currents allow stability to be achieved.

 

In some cases the lifting force is provided by magnetic levitation, but stability is provided by a mechanical support bearing little load. This is termed pseudo-levitation.

 

Pseudo levitation is what the video up thread shows and is why the two little posts are needed to keep things in place. I wouldn't be worried by those little posts as they can be made to not corrupt the action much. I still would worry about the magnetic fields myself.

 

This is why it is good that we have really smart people on this site! ;-)) I assumed that with regular magnets the platter would just spin rotationally until it was no longer "levitating" but thought that maybe there might be a fix with electromagnets. Fully agree about the magnetic field concern.

 

Oh well, back to bowls and balls it is...

[jabbr]

This is why it is good that we have really smart people on this site! ;-)) I assumed that with regular magnets the platter would just spin rotationally until it was no longer "levitating" but thought that maybe there might be a fix with electromagnets. Fully agree about the magnetic field concern.

 

Oh well, back to bowls and balls it is...

 

Well as has been pointed out (Barry and John?) aside from the technical issues, at the end of the day magnets are typical springs and isolate no better.

 

The Euler spring has a static force needed to start the process ... think of this as the weight of the platform and equipment. Once this static force has been reached, the Euler spring "gives" and allows further deflection easily, and this is how the isolation works.