To Rack Mount or Not

Installing a performance-oriented racking system with performance-oriented points, cones, or spikes can make a rather substantial improvement.

Depending obviously on the quality of equipment, tweaks, and room acoustics/flooring system.

But I would suggest you consider adding a few other name-brands to your list of potentials. As the names you mention above typically are not given serious consideration when it comes to sonic performance.

-IMO

Stehno is right. You can get better performance from a well executed stand than you can from loading all that stuff onto the 'springboard' that passes for a rack in most cases.

Isolation, and dampening are much more easily accomplished on the better stands like you mentioned.

Nrchy mentions isolation and dampening, which obviously is not the vibration handling methodology TimUnder is talking about.

Isolation and dampening is but one methodology of dealing with air-borne vibrations and resonance and in my opinion does not work.

The other more modern vibration handling methodology is the 'mechanical transfer to ground of air-borne vibrations and resonance.'

The isolation and dampening method, though might seem logical, is simply an impossible task. You can alter a system's sonics by executing this method, but rarely is it for the better.

The mechanical transfer to ground methodology, when done right, will transfer the air-borne vibrations and resonance away from the components and away from the racking system, via a one-way street (such as Star Sound's Audio Points) sending the vibrations to the sub-flooring system and/or ground.

According to one white paper, vibration is seeking to be grounded much like electricity. And properly isolating and/or dampening vibrations is impossible to acheive as this methodology actually traps those resonating frequencies inside the component and rack and thus causing havoc on the sonics primarily in the micro-dynamics and a bit in the macro-dynamics. Traps them kinda' like standstill freeway traffic in Los Angeles on a Friday afternoon.

The mechanical transfer to ground is a one-way street that provides a quick and efficient exit path to keep the adverse affects to a minimum rather than allow them to accumulate.

The best analogy I can think of is sitting in your car at a traffic light and somebody 4 cars aways is blasting his subwoofer. The other car is sitting on radial tires and so are yours. One would think that the radial tires and distance between cars would be an excellent isolator and dampener. Yet, you can still feel the bass in your chest and you can see your rearview mirror vibrate to the beat.

starsound.biz has several papers that goes into much detail and they also have an excellent reputation as being the best performance-oriented rack and point mfg'er.

Since installing their Audio Points under all of my equipment recently and especially under my racks, I can easily see why. Especially after mechanical break-in.

-IMO

Agree with Stehno. I use the StarSound products and find them to be excellent performers. The Sistrum racks and platforms are engineered to evacuate the vibrations from the system, and work very well to do it. The AudioPoints are at the base of these racks, and are available separately. The Sistrum racks and platforms go further than just the Audiopoints to bring this vibration evacuation closer to each component on the rack or platform. This is a well thought-out and engineered system of products that look great and work great. I think they should be on your short list for a support system for your components.

Actually stehno you are quite wrong about the ability remove airborne vibrations. I have had some discussion with a gentleman who custom builds stands designed to eliminate the specific frequency at which a piece of gear is prone to vibrate, but also has worked out a method of eliminating the airborne frequencies. As I am at work at the moment I cannot provide the specific details but he was at the last Chicago Audio Society meeting and Jolida, Great Northern, and many other companies have used his platforms and are very happy with the results.

The impression I got from the original post was that he wanted to improve the sound quality of his system. If that is indeed his goal, I think the advice supplied would have been helpful.

I may not be as perceptive as stehno and could still be wrong in my attempt to help. If this is the case I apologize for my attempt.

Hey, Nrchy. Thanks for the info and your gentlemanly response. And I'm sorry if I came across a bit too dogmatic.

In recent months I too have been doing a bit of research as I've been protyping a new Post & Beam styled racking system that I designed. I have some pics in my virtual system if you care to view it.

I do not claim to be an expert by any means, but in time past, I've dabbled with the isolation/dampening side of the fence. And to be honest, I never noticed any real difference in my limited experience with that methodology.

But like some to many, my limited experience with both methodologies has brought about a certain excitement that leads me to believe there's no comparison between the two methodologies and their ensuing effects.

Again, I am no expert. Just picked up a few things by reading and trial and error. And I've had the benefit of consult from the good people at Star Sound, who some consider to be the performance leaders of those products found in the 'mechanical transfer to ground of air-borne vibrations and resonance' camp.

The overwhelming sonic improvement of my rack as a result of Star Sound's consultation and Audio Points after mechanical break-in certainly has not helped in lessening my dogmatism.

Hope this clarifies my position a bit.

-IMO