Speaker Spike Philosophy


This is a learning exercise for me.

I am a mechanics practitioner by training and by occupation, so I understand Newton’s Laws and structural mechanics and have a fairly effective BS-detector.

THE FOLLOWING THINGS PUZZLE ME, and I would be glad to hear from those who believe they understand so long as the responses are based on your actual experience or on sound mechanical arguments (or are labeled as conjecture). These are independent questions/musings, so feel free to weigh in on whichever ones you want, but please list the number(s) to which you are responding:

  1. Everything I have read recently ("Ask Richard" (Vandersteen) from 15 Feb, 2020, for instance) seems to indicate that the reason for speaker spikes is to hold the speaker fixed against movement induced by the drivers. I have seen in the past other explanations, most employing some use of the term "isolation" implying that they decouple the speaker (from what?) Evidently the "what?" is a floor that is fixed and not moving (let’s assume concrete slab foundation). So to decouple the speaker from the floor, which is fixed, is to . . . allow it to move (or not) as it wishes, (presumably in response to its drivers). These two objectives, "fixity" and "isolation" appear to me to be diametrically opposed to one another. Is the supposed function of spikes to couple the speaker to "fixed ground" so they don’t move, or is it to provide mechanical isolation so that they can move (which I do not think spikes actually do)? Or, is it to somehow provide some sort of "acoustic isolation" having to do with having some free space under the speaker? Regarding the mechanical isolation idea, I saw a treatment of this here: https://ledgernote.com/blog/q-and-a/speaker-spikes/ that seemed plausible until I got to the sentence, "The tip of a sphere or cone is so tiny that no vibration with a long waveform and high amplitude can pass through it." If you have a spike that is dug into a floor, I believe it will be capable of passing exactly this type of waveform. I also was skeptical of the author’s distinction between *speaker stand* spikes (meant to couple) and *speaker* spikes (meant to isolate/decouple, flying in the face of Richard Vandersteen’s explanation). Perhaps I am missing something, but my BS-detector was starting to resonate.
  2. Spikes on the bottoms of stands that support bookshelf speakers. The spikes may keep the the base of the stand quite still, but the primary mode of motion of such speakers in the plane of driver motion will be to rock forward and backward, pivoting about the base of the stand, and the spikes will do nothing about this that is not already done by the stand base without spikes. I have a hard time seeing these spikes as providing any value other than, if used on carpet, to get down to the floor beneath and add real stability to an otherwise unstable arrangement. (This is not a sound quality issue, but a serviceability and safety issue, especially if little ones are about.)
  3. I have a hard time believing that massive floor standers made of thick MDF/HDF/etc. and heavy magnets can be pushed around a meaningful amount by any speaker driver, spikes or no. (Only Rigid-body modes are in view here--I am not talking about cabinet flexing modes, which spikes will do nothing about) "It’s a simple question of weight (mass) ratios." (a la Holy Grail) "An 8-ounce speaker cone cannot push around a 100/200-lb speaker" (by a meaningful amount, and yes, I know that the air pressure loading on the cone comes into play as well; I stand by my skepticism). And I am skeptical that the amount of pushing around that does occur will be affected meaningfully by spikes or lack thereof. Furthermore, for tower speakers, there are overturning modes of motion (rocking) created by the driver forces that are not at all affected by the presence of spikes (similar to Item 1 above).
  4. Let’s assume I am wrong (happens all the time), and the speaker does need to be held in place. The use of feet that protect hardwood floors from spikes (Linn Skeets, etc.) seems counterproductive toward this end. If the point of spikes is to anchor the speaker laterally (they certainly do not do so vertically), then putting something under the spikes that keep the spikes from digging in (i.e., doing their supposed job) appears to defeat the whole value proposition of spikes in the first place. I have been told how much easier it is to position speakers on hardwood floors with the Skeets in place, because the speakers can be moved much more easily. I was thinking to myself, "yes, this is self-evident, and you have just taken away any benefit of the spikes unless you remove the Skeets once the speakers are located."
  5. I am making new, thick, hard-rock maple bases for my AV 5140s (lovely speakers in every sense), and I will probably bolt them to the bottom of the speakers using the female threaded inserts already provided on the bottoms of the speakers, and I will probably put threaded inserts into the bottom of my bases so they can be used with the Linn-provided spikes, and I have already ordered Skeets (they were a not even a blip on the radar compared to the Akurate Exaktbox-i and Akurate Hub that were part of the same order), and I will end up doing whatever sounds best to me. Still, I am curious about the mechanics of it all...Interested to hear informed, reasoned, and reasonable responses.
linnvolk
a speaker or subs that sit directly on the floor will transfer a vibration into the floor . Much like a tin can with a string , your basically turning the floor into a speaker smearing and coloring your sound , you have to decouple your subs and your speakers with rubber isolators , if you want to be extra most guys are here then you can add spikes under the rubber , I chose the isolation only and works wonders and you dont have to break the bank either SVS makes a great kit 4 $50. also any vibrations that make it to your center will smear the sound , isolating your center is key to keep vibrations going both ways 
Springs, are you know.. “springy”, and would not be be best at damping vibrations.  The spring action would just add their own color or even potentially, resonance to the vibration
Then add some carefully calibrated damping to address the vibrations and you have ...........  Townshend Podiums
Springs, are you know.. “springy”, and would not be be best at damping vibrations. The spring action would just add their own color or even potentially, resonance to the vibration
Then add some carefully calibrated damping to address the vibrations and you have ........... Townshend Podiums
If my fine tuned and double set of 4 springs boxes under and another set of 4 on top of each speaker and under the load,  finely tuned by the  load under an heavy precise weight but with a different compressive force applied onto them is more than good....THEN,

I dont doubt the platform by Townshend must be more refined and more efficient...

But for 100 bucks for my 2 speakers with NO negative impact at all but only a better timbre perception a better imaging etc...I dont plan to buy one for my 500 bucks system for sure....It does not make sense ...

Those who bash springs dont know what they speak about.... I know.....I devised my own method with total success...
Or could it be, because I called out that your preferred method - Springs, are you know.. “springy”, and would not be be best at damping vibrations. The spring action would just add their own color or even potentially, resonance to the vibration. Springs might be good at suppressing vibration transmission (from one send to the other), but this is a different application altogether.

No, that is EXACTLY the application! Could it be you have totally missed this? How?! It has been explained clearly several times. Max Townshend has a whole video on this!

Springs do not damp. Never said they do. Nobody said they do. That would be nuts!

Springs isolate. They allow the speaker to vibrate independently from the floor. This allows the speaker to damp itself and stop vibrating much more quickly than when coupled to the floor such as with spikes. This is why the seismograph clearly shows less ringing with Townshend Podiums than spikes. NOT because the Podiums damp anything, but because they break the coupling with the floor.

Honestly, it seems there is a small but very butt hurt group who just can’t get past their being butt hurt long enough to read and understand. Try and see through the pain. There is no shame in being wrong. Some of this stuff is not that easy to understand. Took me a while. But I find it a whole lot easier to TRY AND UNDERSTAND than to go around trying to blame someone else’s attitude or whatever other excuse I can dream up.

Just accept the fact that you blew it. You blew it so bad that what is the essential element- decoupling- you thought was "a different application altogether." You got it absolutely bass ackwards. Admit it. Accept it. Move on. In other words, grow up.
Post removed