FWIW - the DIY bearing blocks are installed. I have them under the pre-amp. The set up looks a little "odd" due to height (Herbies Tenderfeet>> 1.5" plinth>>1.5" diam. SS ball>>Freya). The movement the Freya displays when tapped from the side is striking. It looks exactly as though it is suspended between springs allowing 360 degree movement in a horizontal plane.
Gear had been powered down the last day or so, so playing some warm up tracks before listening "critically". Might have to experiment next with suitable spring(s) to replace the Tenderfeet.
I have had tremendous success with Feet of Silence by Solid Tech. I think the greatest advantage to the FOS is that you can use them on virtually any surface and get consistent results. I found this review on Audiogon. I have used FOS in my system for years- I would be hard pressed to ever change.
Changing the subject a bit, but would Large DH Cones work under a turntable? The TT sits on a bamboo platform with Herbies footers underneath. Looking for footers that would drain vibration from the TT to the platform. Need a budget solution.
Thanks, @geoffkait . If the DH Cones function the same way as brass cones do, but at a low cost, I will give them a try. Not sure if I should use the Large or Jumbo for a heavy TT.
The DH cones can all support enormous loads, no problem. I have probably a little more experienced with DH cones than the average bear so I think I can with complete confidence you’ll find the DH cones beat the pants off brass cones.Large size DH cones are the most cost effective but if you want the very best do yourself a big favor and get the Super DH cones. There really is no substitute.
@geoffkait , appreciate the advice. One more thing; the Jumbo look more "rounded" than the Super (or is it my imagination?). If so, I imagine a footer that had more of a pointed shape would offer better results, yes? http://www.goldensound.com/store/c3/DH_Cones.html
And will a TT be stable with only 3 footers? Thanks.
The fatter jumbo is quite good but the more ballistic shaped Super is better. Usually three cones will be fine. It depends on what the underside of the turntable looks like. I can imagine four might be more stable or there might not be convenient places to use only three.
Many thanks. I like the idea of using the Super, they may also provide more stability. I'm using a Linn Axis, which uses "trickle-down" technology from the early LP-12. It has 3 stock feet, which offer no isolation plus a heavy aluminum platter.
Hello, @geoffkait , I'm now using large DH Cones under my DAC and will be ordering the jumbo for my tube amp. Got a question for you; the component slides on the wood shelf when I touch the faceplate. Would using a thin layer of cork under the cone still be effective for draining vibration? I know the Squares are available, but I'd like to save money to buy more cones. Thanks.
The problem with using something between the DH Cone and the component or under the cones is that whatever material you use can and usually does affect the sound. While I do favor cork for some applications as a damper of micro vibrations I avoid using anything between the cone and component or under the cone since whatever you try will slow up the energy that exits the component via the cones. Even the thin adhesive backed paper disc that came with DH Cones a long time ago interfered with the sound and had to be removed. For under the cones those metal discs with dimple in the center might be OK.
@geoffkait, I noticed that DH makes Squares (Graphite based composition pad) and a DH Super Pad made out of the same material as the Squares to be used between their cones and the component. Do you have any experience with the Squares and/or the Super Pad?
I am having a very hard time placing my 3 new Golden Sound Jumbo cones in the recommended way under my amp on the Squares. According to the GS website the rear two should be pointed sound down and the front one should be pointed side up. I find it very hard to achieve this recommended configuration under my rather heavy amp (60+ lbs VAC160iSE integrated), as the cones keep toppling and resulting in other issues, not to say thuds and bangs etc. Getting all the cones to be pointed side up under the amp is much easier to manage. And even this way they did sound better than the Herbie's I had before. Is it a big benefit to moving to the recommended configuration? And is there a simple way to achieve it? BTW I just sent off to replace the Jumbo cones with the Super Jumbos.
I see now that Geoff suggests keeping them all pointed down. This seems very hard for me to manage. When I get the super jumbos from MusicDirect I might give it another try, but I had a very hard time with the jumbo cones and gave up, leaving them all pointed up which was easier for me. To get them underneath pointing down, does one slip them under one at a time which is what I tried? Or is there some other way? It seems you must have a good bit of maneuvering room around the back of the component, and also two people around to get the job done. I wonder, am I missing some simpler way to set the cones under the amp? Thanks
The thing about two points down and one point up is way out of date. All points should be down. All Points up or any with points up hurts the sound relative to all points down. The cones act like quasi mechanical diodes. If the Amp is heavy you might need two people. Place Jumbos under the amp one at a time, points down. Then place a DH Square under each cone one at a time. It’s probably obvious the dimple in center of the DH Square is what the tip of the Jumbo rests in.
@agriculturist to get this to work you need to know how the weight is distributed in your amp. Given the heavy transformers at the back of your amp this is where most of the weight is. In this case you need to place two cones under the rear, and one centered under the front.
The method to do this (which is tried and tested on my 90lb+ VTLs) is as follows -- and which always gives you a stable load to work with (except in step 3)
Lift the back left and maneuver a cone into place -- avoid screws or other obstructions, it may help if you have already removed the amps existing feet if these are bulky and get in the way
Lift the back right and slide in the second cone
And now the trickier part as you will be bearing most of the weight, lift the front (hand just to one side of the center line) and insert the third
Finally adjust the exact positioning of each cone to fine tune the sound, it may make a big difference
I can do this easily in my amps even with limited access so I think you should have no problem especially as from pictures the weight distribution on your amps is symmetrical left to right. The one tricky thing with your amps is that they are deep so reaching to the back is a pain, not sure if you have side access
To ease things you may want to use some dimpled coasters under the spikes, this makes them easier to slide -- this will also change the sound, maybe better, maybe worse. Personally I use Marigo custom slab coasters under my Marigo Mystery Feet, gives most of the benefits of a full Marigo shelf without the expense
@agriculturist I have had the same problem you describe. I ended up placing cork/rubber pads (small 2" x 2" blocks that I had on hand) next to the location that I wanted to place the cone so I could arrange the cone into the position I wanted and then jently lifted up the compoient just a bit and removed the block.
Believe it or not the paper label should be removed from any and all DH Cones as it degrades the sound a smidgen. It has to do with the whole idea that the interface needs to be very hard. The only exception I can think of are DH Squares, which are not particularly hard in the extreme sense of the word.
Thanks again for the tip, Geoff. This makes me think that adhesive might not be such a great idea either. I suppose some adhesives might work better than others. The only reason I thought of it actually was that it should make it easier to ensure the cones stay in place when trying to get them under the amp.
@agriculturist the adhesive is a huge no-no. You want to avoid anything that will introduce another interface between your footer and the amp. Some sort of squishy gluey stuff will just reduce the effectiveness of the coupling amp to footer. Many manufacturers make add on footers with threads that you can swap for the OEM feet but I don't think this is necessary. If you follow the setup method I recommended and/or use some shim blocks as @lak suggested you should be fine. I actually went so far as to buy some low jacks to assist when I needed to swap the feet under my amps stand while leaving the amps in situ -- something like this may make your job easier (although they have a minimum height of 4.75" which is still pretty high) https://www.strombergcarlson.com/rv-steps-step-accessories/stabil-step-jacks/stabil-step-jack-model-jss-4/
OK got it thank you @folkfreak. Very good to know. The super jumbo Golden Sound cones are 1.5 inches so these jacks might be to too tall. But I now have some good working ideas from all your advice how to go about doing what I need. Thank you!
Thanks a lot for the help @folkfreak and @lak. I got a pair of 2 inch high stainless steel block shims from Amazon and that worked like a charm to get the GS cones under my amp.
@geoffkait, since you are quite familiar with the Golden Sound cones, another question for you please. Are the super jumbo cones OK or even better than the smaller GS cones for less heavy components such as a DAC which weighs say 20-30 lbs? I have a second set of these super jumbos on their way to me and I wonder whether I should put them under the DAC or under my pair of stacked BPT balanced power conditioning/isolation units. I am wondering whether I would be better off with one of the smaller cones for the DAC.
"@geoffkait, since you are quite familiar with the Golden Sound cones, another question for you please. Are the super jumbo cones OK or even better than the smaller GS cones for less heavy components such as a DAC which weighs say 20-30 lbs? I have a second set of these super jumbos on their way to me and I wonder whether I should put them under the DAC or under my pair of stacked BPT balanced power conditioning/isolation units. I am wondering whether I would be better off with one of the smaller cones for the DAC."
Hello, it’s a little complicated to answer those questions but I will give it a shot. The DH Cones are all extremely hard and strong so the load you put on them, even the SMALL size, is not really an issue. It really all comes down to the cost as to which ones to use. The reason I say that is the SUPER DH CONES are really the best sounding, even noticeably better than the Jumbos, which are actualy the same basic size, the SUPER DH CONE having a more ballistic shape. I always used SUPER DH CONES for critical applications, I.e., under CD Players, DACS, speakers, amps, and under ISOLATION PLATFORMS, etc. if I could afford to. If funds were tight, though, since these cones ain't cheap, I’d default to LARGE DH CONES, the size just below Jumbo on the price menu. The LARGE DH CONES are a great cost-effective cone. The SMALL DH CONE is a very good value for general purpose non-critical applications OR when funds are limited. I am a big fan of some other, overlooked places for SUPER DH CONES such as on top of speakers and Tube Traps. I also strongly suggest using cones under large couches, bookshelves and other big furniture.
Thanks Geoff that is very helpful. I think I will go with a combination of Herbie’s and GS DH cones for the overall setup. The Herbie’s are pretty good too. And I might skip the furniture.
Geoff: Another question. Did you ever compare the performance of the GS DH Super Pad to the Squares? Is there a big pick up? I am debating whether to get one of the Pads to put under my amp. I hear that the squares get you only half of the benefit of the full super pad because its larger size permits better dissipation of vibrational energy. Does that benchmarking sound right to you? Thanks again
Like others, I struggled with DH Cones under my DAC and pre. Placed onto a bamboo plinth, I found that the slightest movement of the component would cause them to slip from position. Tried up, down, with/without block. Even tried adhesive (a no-no, I know). Reluctantly I returned them as I felt the seating was too precarious. (I tend to swap cables, components, etc. in and out - so my situation may be unusual.) Went with IsoAcoustics Bronze and Symposium Rollerblocks Jr. instead. No degradation to sound as far as I can tell, and I'm more comfortable with the stability on my rack (even through RBJrs do wobble a bit by design.) No doubt I'm missing something about how to seat them properly as they get raves from so many...
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
