AV Racks. What difference does it make?

Stehno...My use of the word "ridiculous" really applied to the pricing policy of firms that sell racks, not to the people who buy them. Sorry if I offended. As sean pointed out, a low cost home-brew rack can be good. Figure out what characteristics to want heavy or light, rigid or compliant (shock mounts), enclosed or open (to acoustic input) etc. and then build it. It's not rocket science.

Of course, I forgot microphonic problems of tube gear (because it's a few years since I fought that battle)... it too could benefit, although my experience was that good mechanical design of the equipment, tube selection, and tube dampers or metalic tube covers were most important.

My source equipment mounts in a custom-build alcove that I constructed for extreme solidarity. Power amps live in the cellar. I have never experienced any problems with vibration...the background rumble level recorded on most LP's is greater than what I get from my turntable/pickup despite an elaborate subwoofer system that is good for 20 Hz.

Finally, cosmetics is a very valid consideration, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Hey TWL, you dont need to get so butt-hurt about it, i was wondering why people have these racks that is why i asked.

And research is exactly what im doing now. Why else would i ask? Is this some kind of hobby where you have to go out and learn everything yourself to be a true audiophile or something? If so, hold in, i will go get an engineering degree real quick. Am i not supposed to ask questions and get tips and advice? isnt that thge point of forums?

Sheesh! lighten up!

So,
What i see is that vibration affect turntbles and tubegear more than anything else. If i stay away from tube gear and turntables (which i plan on, im going to stay SS for the time being, might go for tubre and turntables later down the road) then i should not have much to worry about eh? But it would probably be wise to build a rack out of maple? (i love bulding furniture, some day im going to have my own furniture line)

Im buying a new house soon, my existing gear is probably going to be a living-room HT type setup, in the basement i plan on building a dedicated theater once i get it finished, and i plan on eventually getting a 2channel setup in the loft/art-studio.
i get my best inspiration when i am listening to music and in an open space.

I dont think i will ever really worry about getting a really high quality rack untill maybe i have a dedicated listening room, but that will probably be another house later.

i really dont think i can ever get as far into this hobby as some of you. I like the great gear because i like the way the music sounds, but i really dont need "Perfection"
I guess im more of a Tech-file or a Gear-head than a true "Audiophile". I love hardware, i love technology, and i love seeing and hearing what cutting edge technology and craftmanship can create.

thanks for all the great responses! Lotta educated 'files on this board.

personally, I was taken aback by twl's tone. The last thing we need in this over-hyped hobby is people who use the poor logic of twl. Things are better because someone else says so? HUH? I have many years in this hobby, and don't expect anyone to defer to my opinion because of it. Somehow we've gotten to the point that buying expensive equipment justifies itself, how'd that happen? I am not some techno-dweeb who rejects anything that isn't proven by double-blind tests, nor am I likely to believe that just because some writer for stereophile says it, it's therefore true. One of the best articles I ever read in stereophile was a few years back, and related to the incremental improvements in our hobby. It was an honest, backward-looking piece about how all those "must have" tweaks and upgrades haven't moved us as far forward as we all think. To read all the hype, you'd think that anything made over three years ago is garbage. Luckily for me, I have the chance to evaluate my system against a baseline (so to speak) quite often. I have a very close friend who bought a complete system identical to mine about seven years ago. Now my friend is one of those lucky types who can be happy with "very good" and not yearn for "great", I on the other hand, can't go a month without an upgrade, however minor. In the intervening seven years, my buddy has only tried the few upgrades I recommeded, and rejected most of them as too minor to merit the cost. To get down to brass tacks here, the only thing that our systems still have in common are the loudspeakers, and yet, depending on material, his system can still sound as good or better than mine. How does this relate to this discussion? My basic philosophy on audio has developed into this: most changes we all make are based on creating a different result, not necessarily a better one. Racks, spikes, cables, whatever the topic, in most cases you are creating a difference that may be an improvement, or not. The very fact that so much good, high-priced gear sells here every day pretty much proves this point. Slappy, if you can hear a difference, and be sure that you prefer it to your previous set-up, keep it and don't look back or listen to any pompous, sneering blather from others. Your ears, your system, your enjoyment.

Exactly, Tplavas. Slappy, if YOU can hear the improvement, it was worth it.

I've tried various iso-tweaks with varying results. I don't pretend to know how all these different cones and platforms, and isolation or vibration draining theories work, but in many instances I have been able to hear noticable differences in the way claimed.

A little tidbit from my days at the IMB Academy. "Absorb What's useful and reject What's useless" - Bruce Lee.

Keep what sounds good, and put up for sale on Audiogon the stuff that doesn't. Heheh.

Personally, I read TWL's posting as directed toward Eldartford only. Not to the originator of this thread nor anybody else. And it also appeared to me that TWL responded in a certain way because of that individual's use of the word rediculous in describing what I thought was directed toward the owners of certain performance-oriented racks and associated pricing.

Eldartford was kind enough to clarify later what he meant by his use of that word and it obviously was a misunderstanding.

I also misunderstood Eldartford's original choice of words in his first post and applaud TWL's willingness to go out on limb via his response to that poster.

Sure it was a misunderstanding this time. But all too many times there certainly are some to many on this web-site who believe simply because something has not worked for them, therefore, it cannot work for anybody else and will even resort to rediculing those who's experience has demonstrated otherwise.

For example, we've all heard of component and cable burn-in time periods where the sonics improve over a certain amount of hours. Some to many believe burn-in is real whereas others believe it's snake oil.

But who would believe there is also a mechanical burn-in or break-in period of time for certain products i.e. racks, points, etc.? I'm sure there are some people would just snicker at such a thought and then look to ridicule and belittle anybody who believes such a concept as this.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that it is this ridiculing attitude that TWL thought he was responding to.

-IMO