More to ponder...
It seems logical to me that a group of interested parties (audiophiles) would benefit from the establishment of some baselines or minimum standards by which to judge or quantify the effectiveness and advantages of products in question. But, this is difficult if not impossible to achieve due to the subjectivity of the individual listener and the myriad variables which must be considered.
If one cannot personally listen to a specific product, one is relegated to the evaluation of reviews, testimonials, word of mouth, and finally, the manufacturers claims. Nevertheless, the educated buyer has the distinct advantage of insight, because he or she can understand the fundamentals of the product.
In addition, it would be hard to argue that a product has little or no merit if after significant time in the marketplace, it has apparently sold very well or better than others within its price range. On the other hand, there are a few excellent products which by virtue of the reclusive nature of their designers, and a total lack of advertising, remain virtually unknown.
The reasons why so many products sell is because many are actually good or effective. But what does good mean? I t only means the product out-performed or performed differently in a pleasing manner, than the product it replaced!
If it was the first product of its kind, it merely fulfilled the buyers expectations.
Therefore, a product may be deemed good, especially by only a few people, dispite its limited effectiveness and marginal performance.
Most significally, a product may be good for some even if the manufacturers claims make no sense or at worst, contradict established fundamental engineering and the laws of physics!
Audiophiles buy racks or furniture that dont satisfy their expectations. Next they buy a certain shelf or platform which still doesnt do it, so they buy couplers or footers to place between the component and the platform. If this isnt good enough, they replace the shelf and the couplers. Then it becomes apparent that the rack itself is to blame, so that gets replaced. When everthing finally seems perfect, a large or heavy component that you must have wont fit in the rack!
People use cut-up tennis balls, hockey pucks, plumbing washers, marbles in spoons, and all kinds of tweaks that somehow please them. One adds warmth the other is bright or dark .... it goes on forever.
Im not ridiculing anyone because I did my share of experimenting.
In my opinion, a rack system must do THREE THINGS to produce ultimate component performance;
1. Expeditiously drain and damp harmful component-generated, and air-to-component
vibration. (this requires direct coupling to the chassis if the stock feet are rubber)
2. Isolate the component from rack-borne vibration.
3. Provide the rack with isolation and damping of floor-borne and air-borne vibration.
As a bonus, I would look for extras to add to the prerequisites;
1. Capacity to accommodate large and heavy components.
2. Flexibility/versatility, which requires adjustable-height levels.
Any rack or support system which accomplishes only one of the three prerequisites may be good or effective. A rack that offers two out of three is even better, and the one that accomplishes all three is the best.
Finally, Ill answer Budrews question... to get the best performance from your transport and DAC, you should buy the best (true) bearings that you can afford. No other device offers the benefits of damping and lateral isolation while simultaneously coupling and decoupling the supported equipment.
We all want the best we can afford, and I hope everyone gets what he or she wants.
Yours Truly,
Joe Ciulla
Equa Corp. / EquaRack
