Isolation feet for Audio Gear

[Blackmorec]

Hi wdw,

Just like to point out that the sound changes you get from footers of any kind depend entirely on what the treated device, in this case Devialet amps are sitting on. If they are sitting on something resonant and highly coloured the changes will go in one direction. If on the other hand they are sitting on resonance controlled shelves of a optimised rack with properly engineered vibration grounding and isolation you’ll get entirely different results. In one case you may get solid improvements, in another you may just get exaggerated frequency extremes, depending on how the footers interact with their support base. 

 

[Blackmorec]

Actually I haven’t come across a piece of electronic hi-if gear that doesn’t repond in some way or another to its support, regardless of how good quality it may be. That’s because vibration is ubiquitous and has 2 sources; external floor and hi-fi-furniture borne and internally generated from things like transformers, power supplies, motors etc. 

In order to treat both types of vibration, the component needs to be isolated from external vibration and provided with a grounding path for internal vibration, 2 measures seemingly in conflict with one another. The efficacy of something like footers depend on 4 things; how well the original suppport isolates and grounds and how well the footer works in the same regard. If the original support structure does a poor job at both and you use a footer that say only isolates, you will hear an improvement. If on the other hand your original support does a good job at both and you insert the same footer it will increase isolation while actually preventing grounding and will make SQ worse. So results depend very much on where you’re starting from in terms of vibration control.

How does something simultaneously isolate and ground? Take a Symposium shelf as an example. The shelf is multi layer, starting on the outside with materials that closely match the hard surfaces of support structures and components. This provides vibration with a well matched impedance to ensure both external and internal vibrations pass into the shelf. Once in the shelf the vibration encounters increasingly ‘lossy’ layers which convert vibration into work and thereby heat. So very little vibration can pass through the shelf from support to component whilst providing a ‘ground’ for internal vibration to be removed from the component. 

Before anyone buys footers, they should consider how well their current set up isolates and grounds vibration and they really ought to get hold of footers on a trial basis  to evaluate exactly what they add or subtract in terms of sound quality.  

Personally I have read many rave reviews for footers that in my system failed to deliver because my rack had already taken care of both isolation and grounding. That’s not to say they didn’t change sound quality, the did, just not in a good way. 

[Blackmorec]

32 minutes ago, Dutch said:

I agree with WdW. Considering how its built one would not immediately think (not intuitively anyway) the Devialets would be very much susceptible to vibrations. But of course anything receives outside and generates its own vibrations. For any layman it’s impossible to say how/what, which and where.

 

The 250 Pro I own and it is very similar to the 220/440 model looks like this. Milled from a single alu block, no wires inside (none!), height 4 cm so relatively small caps and everything mounted on a PCB. The bottom plate is pure, thick copper.

 

Mine is on a ‘plate’ support containing layers of ‘sand like’ minerals, some type of EMI blocking plate, ceramics all encased in wood. Yet I have not experimented much on this subject. Reading WdW’s experience tells me I perhaps should!  

 

 

 

Devialet components include a DAC which of course requires a quartz crystal oscillator.  Depending on the oscillator’s design, vibration can cause increased jitter with the corresponding impact on sound quality. 

[Blackmorec]

Here’s the thing. From a great number of posts it has become clear that fast42 believes that there’s a certain standard that audio has to reach, which is essentially the ability to fool the brain into building a 3 dimensional soundscape from the 2 stereo signals received by your ears. 

 

In some respects, he’s right in that a number of design and set-up shortcomings will hide/blur/damage/destroy the essential signal differential elements such that all you hear is 2 discreet  signals, one from each speaker. A great number of stereo systems i’ve heard, especially at hi-if shows do just that....left and right sound sources that are missing sufficient information for the brain not to be able to integrate the 2 sources into a single soundscape. 

 

What his posts don’t consider is that the 3D soundstage is just another staging post along the journey and that once achieved, that becomes the new starting point in achieving a completely realistic and immersive performance of the recorded music. 

 

His position is that if you are using ‘toys’ to enhance your system you are somehow making up for shortcomings in the basis designs. But audio is like cars. No matter how good the basic design it can always be improved upon....in automobiles this is called tuning. Take some of the highest performing cars in the World, Porsche, Ferrari, BMW or Mercedes, spend money with a good tuning shop like Ruf, M-sport or AMG and the performance of every single car those manufacturers  build can be improved on. 

 

Hi-fi equipment is no different. Take the World’s top components, put them together in a well matched system and you’ll achieve fantastic results. But enhance the room, the mains supply, the vibration control, the network, the connecting cables etc. And that performance can be further enhanced and refined and this seems to be the bit that fast42 doesn’t quite get. His assumption is that people are using ‘toys’ to compensate for poor performing components but while this may be true in some cases, its a frustrating position for the many audiophiles who are using ‘toys’ to enhance an already excellent system.  

 

To Fast42, your message is important...”if you’re not getting an integrated soundstage your system needs work”. But please don’t assume that every single tweak discussed on this forum is born of ignorance and performed by an audiophile whose currently listening to a flawed system, because that really isn’t the case but it is why you’re getting so much push back. 

[Blackmorec]

4 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

I'm not quite sure where you got that impression - 3D soundstage, completely realistic and immersive presentation, invisible speakers, are all part of the one package when enough optimising has been done; there are certain attributes to the full-blown illusion, that I've mentioned many times - these are all part of the checklist, to use to 'measure' how far one has progressed.

 

Quite satisfying SQ can be experienced when a rig isn't quite at that level - but one shouldn't mistake that standard as being an endpoint to what's possible.

Get to the ‘full blown illusion’ point you mention and i’ll tell you what comes next....

• additional air and space around each instrument
• More shimmer, sparkle and energy to the treble
• More solidarity and extension to the bass
• Texture and presence for the air around each instrument
• the feeling that someone is playing the instruments you’re listening to, for example solo violin with breath sounds....guitar with fingers moving up and down the fretboard. 
• The height dimension within the sound stage
• the way musicians shape the notes they play
• the artistry of the sound production engineers as they take the music and create a 3 dimensional sonic ‘painting’
• A body for vocalists
• individual beats for ultra low frequencies 
• A ‘wetness’ to mouth sounds 
• Greater focus to the instruments within the soundstage
• More clearly delineated depth definition
• increased rhythmic interplay between musicians
• increased musical energy 
• Increased listener involvement and excitement

You don’t hear the absence of the above as deficiencies...in all likelihood the music already sounded perfect. Brilliant.  But then you get some new speakers and hey presto, better still

You think there’s an end point when perfection has been achieved; what you call the full blown illusion. But there isn’t.....wherever you are, it can get better when you take any one of dozens of set-up parameters to the next level. The ‘full blown illusion’ simply becomes more profound, more impactful, more believable, more joyous. You start experiencing the same emotions that musicians likely have when creating the music.   

Assuming that audiophiles want to improve their systems because they haven’t yet reached your definition of sonic nirvana is in many cases simply an incorrect assumption. Many want to improve their systems simply because they know they can be better still.  

[Blackmorec]

Ivor Tiefenbrun of Linn was the first manufacturer that I am aware of to do what you propose. He developed, built and sold a TT called the Sondek that was as good as he and his engineers knew how to make. It certainly outperformed most of its competitors at the time and its price reflected its pre-eminence.  

So here's a challenge. Can anyone name any other product that has spawned so many tweaks, accessories, updates and upgrades?

[Blackmorec]

Hey Ralph,

I think there’s quite a rational explanation for that.  First, why would anyone buy something that made their system sound worse? Given that most dealers these days sell products with the right to return if not satisfied, I imagine the majority of products sold would make an improvement to SQ, while those that didn’t would be returned. 

Then there’s the reporting side. How many audiophiles are going to be motivated to write a post about products that made their system sound worse ...a) because it perhaps makes them look like a twit if they actually bought it and b) it makes for very boring reading and c) there’s not much motivation to write about negative experiences. 

There are however lots of articles written by Audiophiles who trial several products and pick one as the best,  whilst reporting the shortcomings of the others. 

On a personal level I’ve had several experiences trying products with stellar reviews that didn’t improve SQ for exactly the reason you gave...the product it was replacing or enhancing was damned good in its own right. But I didn’t bother reporting my experience for exactly the reasons I listed above.  

In statistics, dealer trials and writer motivation would be classed as confounding variables....something that influences the results without being considered in the statistical analysis. 

[Blackmorec]

Hey WDW,

I was looking at my system the other day and it occurred to me that one of my power supplies is poorly situated on the glass shelf of a large TV stand. The power supply replaced a nasty little SMPS brick, so of course it sounded a lot better, but as I stated in my posts, all components’ sound is coloured by their support. I remembered your post about the IsoAcoustics Orea Bronze and their excellent value proposition, so I’m going to give them a try under my PS. Thanks for the heads-up