jabbr Posted July 9, 2015 Author Share Posted July 9, 2015 Well, all might not be lost. I'm working on getting a test set of the bowls made and will inspect. They may or may not need to be additionally polished. One of the engineers at a firm that makes high end things for me tells me that they use 320-400 pre-anodization and wenol to polish after anodization. These bowls will be smoothed with Emory 320. The tungsten carbide, silicon carbide and silicon nitride balls have arrived. They all look good to gross inspection. Tungsten carbide is *very* heavy. These are all $3-4 each. They are all round smooth and hard Don't expect that these are DoD spec but who cares? (I'm not spending $35/ball) 'sides the marble on the upper surface isn't mil spec either Custom room treatments for headphone users. Link to comment
AnotherSpin Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Hi Jabbr, What might be the cost for these bowls? Link to comment
bdiament Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 I would like to thank Barry for putting up with so much *noise* and still working hard to help folks out. The fact that he did a lot of work to make a practical solution that most folks can implement carries a lot more weight with me than someone who has a lot of untried theories that all seem largely impractical for most folks if they ever went from dreaming to reality. And there is a funny thing about life: everything you know, someone taught you. The only reason we are having this discussion is because Barry taught us it was the right path to follow. I suppose those that disrespect their teachers are the ones who have the greatest problem with people not respecting them...that is ironic at best. Sorry for all this, Barry, and thank you for all your help on my audio journey. John Hi John, Thank you for your kindness. (Thanks also to Foggie, Daudio, groovybassist, zeroing, 4est, and Tom.) To your point about someone having taught us what we know, in post #3 and #345 of the other thread, I named some names. From the latter: "With the caveats in mind that I noted at the end of Vibration control for better performance, I hope others get to enjoy what has had me smiling ever since I tried this. (I am grateful to those who discovered this before I did for sharing it: Max Townshend in his products and writings, Clark Johnsen in his writings, and "Bill" from the Audiophile Society, who brought that commercial product into a meeting and passed it around, arousing my skepticism, curiosity, subsequent testing, learning, and ultimately, joy.)" I think this is important. A shout out to Shannon Dickson too for that article on vibration in Stereophile, from so long ago. Best regards, Barry Soundkeeper Recordings http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com Barry Diament Audio Link to comment
jabbr Posted July 9, 2015 Author Share Posted July 9, 2015 Hi Jabbr, What might be the cost for these bowls? I'm working with Mike at Ingress. He is making a set for me, smoothed with Emory 320 and I will check it out. I'm not sure if a mirror polish is needed -- this may work well. Custom room treatments for headphone users. Link to comment
bdiament Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 I'm working with Mike at Ingress. He is making a set for me, smoothed with Emory 320 and I will check it out. I'm not sure if a mirror polish is needed -- this may work well. Hi j, Try 'em out. In my experience though, the smoother the bowl (i.e., the easier the ball can move), the more effective the isolation. In other words, a high degree of smoothness is key. Best regards, Barry Soundkeeper Recordings http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com Barry Diament Audio Link to comment
bdiament Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 ...Thank you for your kindness. (Thanks also to Foggie, Daudio, groovybassist, zeroing, 4est, and Tom.)... My apologies for not double-checking that auto-correct. The name should say "zerung" (not "zeroing"). Best regards, Barry Soundkeeper Recordings http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com Barry Diament Audio Link to comment
Forehaven Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Keep us updated jabbr please? Interestingly, I've been using Cerapucs for quite awhile, yrs. I know it's not the same as we've been discussing, but it is interesting that it still uses a ball within the cup design. Ryzen 7 2700 PC Server, NUC7CJYH w. 4G Apacer RAM as Renderer/LPS 1.2 - IsoRegen/LPS-1/.2 - Singxer SU-1/LPS1.2 - Holo Spring Level 3 DAC - LTA MicroZOTL MZ2 - Modwright KWA 150 Signature Amp - Tidal Audio Piano's. . Link to comment
Daudio Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 I'm working with Mike at Ingress. He is making a set for me, smoothed with Emory 320 and I will check it out. I'm not sure if a mirror polish is needed -- this may work well. I found a picture of a Ingress bowl block and cropped it some, to show the bowl finish: As you can see the stock Ingress bowl has (relatively) rough machining marks. But then, these are the least expensive of the 4 commercial roller type isolation devices available now. I too believe that the smoothness and concentricity of the bowls and balls are a big contributor to the quality of these type of devices. Link to comment
groovybassist Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 The stock bowl doesn't strike me as smooth enough. Thanks for posting the pic - I probably should have looked more closely myself. Link to comment
jabbr Posted July 9, 2015 Author Share Posted July 9, 2015 I found a picture of a stock Ingress bowl block and cropped it some, to show the bowl finish: [ATTACH=CONFIG]19641[/ATTACH] I too believe that the smoothness and concentricity of the bowls and balls are a big contributer to the quality of these type of devices. That is the design with 1" diameter bowl and was made with diamond cutter. There are many trade offs. Many options. Trying to come to reasonable compromise. Custom room treatments for headphone users. Link to comment
jabbr Posted July 9, 2015 Author Share Posted July 9, 2015 Hi j, Try 'em out. In my experience though, the smoother the bowl (i.e., the easier the ball can move), the more effective the isolation. In other words, a high degree of smoothness is key. Best regards, Barry Soundkeeper Recordings http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com Barry Diament Audio Yes. My understanding is that when very high grade equipment is made there is one shop that does the machining and smooths to Emory 320-400 before being sent to an anodization and finishing shop that anodized and then places a mirror polish. Question is how much that second step costs-- reasonably Custom room treatments for headphone users. Link to comment
Daudio Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 ... the Ingress ... are the least expensive of the 4 commercial roller type isolation devices available now. The FIM Model 305's have a polished bowl, but they are 3 times the cost of the Ingress. The Symposium RollerBlocks also have a 6 micron polished bowl, but at about 7 times the cost ! The Symposium Jr's have an anodized bowl, and the similar HDSE's are hard anodized, and while they both appear to have a nice bowl finish (from small pix, no specs), they are not polished, and at 3 - 4 times the Ingress price. As jabbr is discovering, good, smooth, finishes cost money Link to comment
Daudio Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Yes. My understanding is that when very high grade equipment is made there is one shop that does the machining and smooths to Emory 320-400 before being sent to an anodization and finishing shop that anodized and then places a mirror polish. Question is how much that second step costs-- reasonably jabbr, I don't understand I thought that an anodized finish on aluminium, is a very, very thin coating, almost a molecular layer. I don't think that could be polished, only the underlying surface before treatment. Am I missing something ? Link to comment
Jabs1542 Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 jabbr, I don't understand I thought that an anodized finish on aluminium, is a very, very thin coating, almost a molecular layer. I don't think that could be polished, only the underlying surface before treatment. Am I missing something ? Anodized aluminum can be thought of as a crystalline coating at the molecular level, usually the result is as smooth as the original part. I've never tried to finish anything I have had anodized (always before I sent it to the shop), and note that the crystalline structure is only microns deep (depending on how long they leave it in the bath) - so rigorous buffing could wear through the anodized layer. Analog: Koetsu Rosewood > VPI Aries 3 w/SDS > EAR 834P > EAR 834L: Audiodesk cleaner Digital Fun: DAS > CAPS v3 w/LPS (JRMC) SOtM USB > Lynx Hilo > EAR 834L Digital Serious: DAS > CAPS v3 w/LPS (HQPlayer) Ethernet > SMS-100 NAA > Lampi DSD L4 G5 > EAR 834L Digital Disc: Oppo BDP 95 > EAR 834L Output: EAR 834L > Xilica XP4080 DSP > Odessey Stratos Mono Extreme > Legacy Aeris Phones: EAR 834L > Little Dot Mk ii > Senheiser HD 800 Link to comment
esldude Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Please don't take this the wrong way or too personally. But this approach is fairly typical of high end, and why I think it often puts cart before horse and while the resulting hardware is effective it often is not at all cost effective. For instance, price going up rapidly with more and more polished or smooth surfaces. Yet no one is doing research or testing to figure out is there a point beyond which smoother makes no difference? Is there a point at which you get all your vibrations below and nothing else can help audibly? You know good enough so nothing better is actually better. Nope, not being done. Smoother is better, ad infinitum and in time so is the price. One for instance, through my experimentation I know even surprisingly crude surfaces are indeed effective. Has anyone thought about the fact these are more or less like filters. Meaning you can cascade them for twice the effect. Is it better to triple price in order to smooth the finish picking up maybe 10% in performance (number I just guess at here) or would it be better to use two layers of cup and balls and shelves to double performance for double the price? Can relatively rough surfaces work as well as polished if given a dollop of silicon fluid? It might well be so. Would a less hard bearing on a rough surface metal cup have less resistance than a hard bearing? High pressure tires have less rolling resistance with less pressure on roughened surfaces. At one time I had in mind prioritizing my vibration sensitive components. I would put bottom shelf on cup and ball, and it held my tube power amp, plus another cup and ball set holding my tube pre-amp, and it would hold another cup and ball set holding my TT. TT gets triple isolation (and needs the most), pre-amp gets double, and power amp gets single isolation. Something along those lines would likely get results possibly equal for the whole system of more extensive and expensive systems not put all together in priorities this way. In the high end, it just doesn't work that way. It often results in stunning performance, but an equally stunning price, and then some. Too often available synergies are thrown out rather than taken advantage of because simplicity and extreme measures are easier to market and get people to believe in. And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Nikhil Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Second what esldude said. Here is a picture and video of a cup design I just got. I don't think you need to polish the cup surface too much. Maybe a simple buffing will suffice. From the video you can see that the balls still move very freely on the cup surface. Custom Win10 Server | Mutec MC-3+ USB | Lampizator Amber | Job INT | ATC SCM20PSL + JL Audio E-Sub e110 Link to comment
InfernoSTi Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Very nice thoughts, all. I've been using both Symposium and glass dishes (double sided so they are stable). I would say that the glass lenses are not as good but a huge step forward by themselves and very inexpensive. I like the Symposium products because the Jr HD's have a 1/4 20 thread that I happen to have on my speaker bases and they are big heavy speakers. Do this, folks, whether you go cheap and easy or expensive and nice. The results are tremendous. John Positive emotions enhance our musical experiences. Synology DS213+ NAS -> Auralic Vega w/Linear Power Supply -> Auralic Vega DAC (Symposium Jr rollerball isolation) -> XLR -> Auralic Taurus Pre -> XLR -> Pass Labs XA-30.5 power amplifier (on 4" maple and 4 Stillpoints) -> Hawthorne Audio Reference K2 Speakers in MTM configuration (Symposium Jr HD rollerball isolation) and Hawthorne Audio Bass Augmentation Baffles (Symposium Jr rollerball isolation) -> Bi-amped w/ two Rythmic OB plate amps) -> Extensive Room Treatments (x2 SRL Acoustics Prime 37 diffusion plus key absorption and extensive bass trapping) and Pi Audio Uberbuss' for the front end and amplification Link to comment
bdiament Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 ...Has anyone thought about the fact these are more or less like filters. Meaning you can cascade them for twice the effect.... Hi Dennis, While they are indeed mechanical low-pass filters, unlike the electronic type, cascading them is not a good idea as it will result in *diminished* performance, not enhanced performance. At least that has been my experience -- I wouldn't want more than one "spring" in any single plane of motion. It seems that any additional "springs" prevent all the energy from going into moving the "main" spring, diluting the effects we use them for in the first place. Best regards, Barry Soundkeeper Recordings http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com Barry Diament Audio Link to comment
jabbr Posted July 10, 2015 Author Share Posted July 10, 2015 Please don't take this the wrong way or too personally. But this approach is fairly typical of high end, and why I think it often puts cart before horse and while the resulting hardware is effective it often is not at all cost effective. For instance, price going up rapidly with more and more polished or smooth surfaces. Yet no one is doing research or testing to figure out is there a point beyond which smoother makes no difference? Is there a point at which you get all your vibrations below and nothing else can help audibly? You know good enough so nothing better is actually better. Nope, not being done. Smoother is better, ad infinitum and in time so is the price. One for instance, through my experimentation I know even surprisingly crude surfaces are indeed effective. Has anyone thought about the fact these are more or less like filters. Meaning you can cascade them for twice the effect. Is it better to triple price in order to smooth the finish picking up maybe 10% in performance (number I just guess at here) or would it be better to use two layers of cup and balls and shelves to double performance for double the price? Can relatively rough surfaces work as well as polished if given a dollop of silicon fluid? It might well be so. Would a less hard bearing on a rough surface metal cup have less resistance than a hard bearing? High pressure tires have less rolling resistance with less pressure on roughened surfaces. At one time I had in mind prioritizing my vibration sensitive components. I would put bottom shelf on cup and ball, and it held my tube power amp, plus another cup and ball set holding my tube pre-amp, and it would hold another cup and ball set holding my TT. TT gets triple isolation (and needs the most), pre-amp gets double, and power amp gets single isolation. Something along those lines would likely get results possibly equal for the whole system of more extensive and expensive systems not put all together in priorities this way. In the high end, it just doesn't work that way. It often results in stunning performance, but an equally stunning price, and then some. Too often available synergies are thrown out rather than taken advantage of because simplicity and extreme measures are easier to market and get people to believe in. Excellent points. I agree although I am getting a set polished with Emery 320 which I will inspect. I am prepared to test this against a set of porcelain bowls. I am also prepared to polish and retest this set. I have a range of tungsten carbide (both craigballsales.com and taobao), silicon carbide (higher spec) and silicon nitride. To first listen, they are each pretty good. So in fact there is a large number of variables to test and frankly I often have a hard time telling the difference. Point being that good enough is good enough. Vibration isolation does make difference but I hope I'm able to tell the difference between chrome steel and tungsten carbide, but if I can't then certainly anything that is good enough for Barry Diament is good enough for me:) At $3-$4/ball for tungsten carbide from craigballsales.com, its something people should certainly try. At $35-40/ball from my friend's military spec connection, not so sure I'm going to try:) Custom room treatments for headphone users. Link to comment
chipl3 Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 Hi, guys, First time poster with related but off-thread-title question. Looking for direction. You guys are the right audience though, and I see that Mr Barry D has re-surfaced as well. Have read and re-read the related isolation threads and Soundkeeper stuff since 2013. Re the marble tiles, are there any threads discussing No- or Less-ringy marble tiles? My Home Depots have only one sample, which is about half-ringy as ceramic or porcelain. Flooring shops have small samples on backing boards, or "faux marble", which btw is dead but faux. And online, marble does not seem to be offered by type, flavor or characteristic resonance. Barry had once mentioned his preference for less-ringy marble. I am unable to pick uo any specifics on what type(s) work, or what name they go by commercially. Thanks in advance for any ideas. Link to comment
zerung Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 My apologies for not double-checking that auto-correct.The name should say "zerung" (not "zeroing"). Best regards, Barry Soundkeeper Recordings http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com Barry Diament Audio I actually like Zeroing.....sounds apt'. Best Zeroing Qnap NAS (LPS) >UA ETHER REGEN (BG7TBL Master Clock) > Grimm MU1 > Mola Mola Tambaqui /Meridian 808.3> Wavac EC300B >Tannoy Canterbury SE HP Rig ++ >Woo WES/ > Stax SR-009, Audeze LCD2 Link to comment
AnotherSpin Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 Re the marble tiles, are there any threads discussing No- or Less-ringy marble tiles? My Home Depots have only one sample, which is about half-ringy as ceramic or porcelain. Flooring shops have small samples on backing boards, or "faux marble", which btw is dead but faux. And online, marble does not seem to be offered by type, flavor or characteristic resonance. Barry had once mentioned his preference for less-ringy marble. I am unable to pick uo any specifics on what type(s) work, or what name they go by commercially. Thanks in advance for any ideas. I have bad experience with marble. Selected most beautiful natural mediterranean 2 cm marble which was less-ringy from huge variety to which I compared it to be cut to my measures only to see afterwards that its polished surface was dented by chrome balls when used under heavy speakers. Natural marble is not hard and may be crumbly, and this quality should be considered. My suggestion would be to collect and try several different hardest plates from various materials. I believe hardness is no less important than ringing at least. Link to comment
bdiament Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 Hi, guys, First time poster with related but off-thread-title question. Looking for direction. You guys are the right audience though, and I see that Mr Barry D has re-surfaced as well. Have read and re-read the related isolation threads and Soundkeeper stuff since 2013. Re the marble tiles, are there any threads discussing No- or Less-ringy marble tiles? My Home Depots have only one sample, which is about half-ringy as ceramic or porcelain. Flooring shops have small samples on backing boards, or "faux marble", which btw is dead but faux. And online, marble does not seem to be offered by type, flavor or characteristic resonance. Barry had once mentioned his preference for less-ringy marble. I am unable to pick uo any specifics on what type(s) work, or what name they go by commercially. Thanks in advance for any ideas. Hi chipl3, Resurfaced? Didn't know I'd submerged. ;-} Unfortunately, I don't know of any particular names or brands or types that work better than others. I have several in my system (large 18" x 18" x 1/2" under my subs and under the Maggies, medium size under the amps, smaller one under the ULN-8 converters). In each case, I just went to the Home Depot and spent some time in the tile aisle, gathering the smoothest ones of the size I was looking for, and then trying them one at a time. Trying them involved holding them up by the corner, between thumb and forefinger. While holding the tile near my ear, I'd rap on the center of it with a knuckle from the other hand. Then listen. A dull thunk is preferred to anything like a definite pitch. (Be prepared to get some funny looks from other shoppers.) Where the tile is going to be used makes a difference. Under something larger, like speakers or amps (all of mine do *not* have smooth bottoms), I'm also using a 1" maple ply "platform." The tile, with its smooth side facing down, sits on the roller bearing balls. The plywood goes atop the tile, and the component sits on the plywood. In these cases, the plywood provides additional "deadening" of the tile -- though I still sought out the deadest tile they had. For the converters, I'm using a sheet of felt atop the tile, before placing the device atop this. Here again, I still sought out the deadest tile they had. Of course other materials might work. I'm wary of sheets of metal -- good material for making bells. Experimentation is the key. I've had very good luck with tiles. Once you find a nice smooth (non-textured) one in the right size, the price is reasonable too. Hope this helps. Best regards, Barry Soundkeeper Recordings http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com Barry Diament Audio Link to comment
bdiament Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 I actually like Zeroing.....sounds apt'.Best Zeroing ;-} Best regards, Barry Soundkeeper Recordings http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com Barry Diament Audio Link to comment
Foggie Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 A few addtl thoughts. As to the tile question above, I had a hell of time finding something local that was in stock. Every place I went to had to either special order (typically they won't order just a few, it has to be cases $$) or what they did have in stock was to small, to thin etc... Of course every time I inquired to the salesperson, they always asked "what's this for" I was lucky enough to find something at a local TileShop store that was 18x18 .5" thk, he was basically trying to get rid of them so I snatched a bunch up (~$30ea). No real method to this other then some luck and timing (short of ordering) The bowls cups need to be in qty to be cost effective (obviously) and I had some crazy $ quotes and lead times from various shops, but through my connections was able to get them well under $20/ea (7075, polished). As far as making them, it took a 1 hour machine set up time, but the cut time is very quick. (again thanks to Barry for his time and guidance) My rig Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now