Halcro
Further expansion of my last question....
Are you saying that, with accoustical excitation, the material will ONLY vibrate if the excitation frequency is the resonant frequency of the material?
IOW. Accoustical excitation at frequencies other than the materials resonant frequency will result in NO vibration in the material, regardless of the energy level of this excitation?
cheers.
|
Accoustical excitation at frequencies other than the materials resonant frequency will result in NO vibration in the material, regardless of the energy level of this excitation? "Acoustical excitation"....? I'm unfamiliar with that term in the scientific sense. Can you please explain its meaning? As I stated, acoustic theory as I studied it, related to materials science and air-borne sound transmission accepts that there are only three physical observable factors. - Reflection
- Absorption
- Transmission
Apart from the sub-atomic level at which some say everything is vibrating.....a material cannot vibrate unless its resonant frequency/frequencies are excited. And even then it may not be noticeable or destructive unless the amplitude (volume) is sufficient. That is why the famed 'myth' of the glass of wine/water being made to shatter when a singer hits the resonant frequency has only been scientifically observed when the volume was increased to 115dB if I recall correctly? |
Now here is a serious new turntable... http://www.analogplanet.com/content/dietrich-brakemeirs-apolyt-turntable-aims-be-worlds-finest-and-m...Dietrich knows a thing or two about turntables, arms and cartridges. And gosh....what are those? They look like tonearm pods and did he say in the interview that the tops of the pods are totally isolated from the plinth and structure? Just like the famed Continuum Caliburn turntable with its arm support divorced from the platter bearing support via suspension cables and bottom magnets. They are obviously all mad....😱 |
Halcro
accoustic excitation....
firing sound at the material.
putting the material in an environment where sound is present.
Ok again for clarity....
Under circumstances where we fire sound at a material.....
Are you saying that the material will ONLY vibrate at its resonance frequency, assuming that this frequency is present in the sound?
If any other sound frequency is used there will be NO vibration in the material? This with any energy level in the sound?
|
Under circumstances where we fire sound at a material.....
Are you saying that the material will ONLY vibrate at its resonance frequency, assuming that this frequency is present in the sound?
If any other sound frequency is used there will be NO vibration in the material? This with any energy level in the sound? Correct....unless you define the transmission of sound through the material as caused by vibrating molecules. During Sound Transmission Testing of walls for apartment buildings, we test at all frequencies from 20Hz to 20,000Hz at SPL up to 100dB. The resonant frequencies of all masonry and combination plasterboard/stud/insulation fall well below the audio band and no vibrations are detected. Glass walls of certain sizes and thicknesses can be induced to vibrate at their resonant frequencies (20-30Hz) at high SPLs. |
Fixed Pillars/Armpods with a Suspended table ? Lewm
Would you use an outboard arm pod with a suspended turntable? I don't think so. Bdp24
True, a suspended-subchassis table will always have a plinth common to the platter bearing and arm pillar (at least as far as I know!), while a non-suspended doesn't have to, the later fact the impetus for this discussion. I agree with both Lewm and Bdp24. So then, is this setup some type of Optical illusion ? http://www.whatsbestforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=19961&d=1429540940 The turntable appears to be stock to me. The Armpod has been carved to fit around the plinth. The outboard Pillar/Armpod is an accessory product made by Acoustical Systems. Now Henry says - Dietrich knows a thing or two about turntables, arms and cartridges. So Henry, any idea why Dietrich has put what looks like a fixed pillar/armpod on this customers suspended turntable ? |
Halcro
That is the most unlikely scenario. Airborne induced vibrations in the platter/tonearm/cartridge synergy are virtually non-existent as the turntable world would have ceased to exist if this were not so. I am very disappointed that you did not tell Ralph to yell at his cartridge. just sayin.... |
Haha...
Yes Chris, I remember that from years ago.
Everyone can try that test.
Just place your mouth close to the cartridge while playing a record and yell at the cartridge/tonearm.
If airborne sound waves are ever going to be heard it should be under this test.....
|
For me... all of this is very simple...
Before one considers TT that commands thousands of $'s X 10... this person should first buy a VPI HW-19 and try all sorts of experiments.
This TT, along with an owner that has the willingness along with the machinery to try all sorts of mods, will have had enough experience in which to make the OP's post irrelevant.
|
Verdier photo: It looks to me like Dietrich simply replaced the OEM flimsy tonearm mount (an inverted L-shaped affair that never looked to be very stable, to me) with a nice solid pillar and then attached it directly to the granite "plinth". Nothing really radical but certainly better than stock.
Slaw, I may be wrong, but isn't the HW19 a suspended type? The OP's post contained a perfectly reasonable question that brought out all the usual suspects to comment. |
Most people follow this belief but if you had studied acoustics and the
science of materials, you would know that materials react to air-borne
sound by a mixture of:-
- Reflection
- Absorption (as heat)
- Transmission (passing directly through)
It
is only when sound pressure of a sufficient volume (and that's
important) at a material's Resonant Frequency occurs...that the material
can 'vibrate'.
You do know of course that the Resonant Frequency of
most tonearm/cartridge combinations is 6-15 Hz and this is well below
the frequency reproduction ability of all commercial loudspeakers and
almost all subwoofers as well?
It in only in this frequency band that
any vibration of the tonearm/cartridge can be observed. There is no
'alternate' vibration phenomena unless you can direct us to the relevant
scientific papers Halcor, the second to last statement here is plainly ridiculous- and may be why you are having trouble understanding how this works. The resonant frequency of the arm and pickup is irrelevant- that affects tracking and the ability to play bass but has no bearing on the fact that higher frequency vibrations can be transcribed by the cartridge. Were this not so as you state, it would be impossible for the cartridge to put out anything at all! You seem to use the term 'vibrate' as if somehow it were a different genus to 'resonate'? It is unimportant whether the vibration is occurring at a resonant frequency or not- its vibration either way- just more of it if its at a resonant frequency. If air-borne sound pressure is a problem in the turntable playback
system, then every increase in volume would of necessity degrade the
sound. Correct. There are tens of millions of turntable systems where turning up the volume is heard to IMPROVE the sound quality noticeably. This statement is false. Dietrich knows a thing or two about turntables, arms and cartridges.
And gosh....what are those?
They
look like tonearm pods and did he say in the interview that the tops of
the pods are totally isolated from the plinth and structure?
They look like pods but they are part of the plinth. Go look at the video again. This looks like an excellent machine! It does not support your position. If any other sound frequency is used there will be NO vibration in the material? This with any energy level in the sound? Correct....unless you define the transmission of sound through the material as caused by vibrating molecules.
Not in an imperfect world. I am sure the word NO was capitalized for a reason. Damping material damps, but cannot remove all vibration, unless its perfect. It isn't. Its very effective for sure, but not 100%. No strawman argument from me Ralph, at least not intentionally. I’m with ya, man! Got it- I sorted that out a bit later. |
It is unimportant whether the vibration is occurring at a
resonant frequency or not- its vibration either way- just more of it if its at
a resonant frequency
Again, I tend to agree with Ralph on this
one and find it hard to believe that airborne vibration, even not at the resonance
frequency, has no effect on the turntable system playback.
I would propose yet another simple test,
similar to the one I proposed before:
Lower the
cartridge on a stationary platter / LP, ideally the turntable system should be
on an anti-vibration platform to filter out the structural borne vibrations, Play music through the CD system, Connect the cartridge to the phono / preamp as
usual, Listen to the phono system with a headphone,
preferably in another room.
I am pretty sure you could hear the music through the
headphone (although it would sound funny as it has gone through the RIAA
stage).
|
Yes the capitalized "NO" was deliberate.
Halcro
Can you please explain how we can hear and clearly understand someone talking on the other side of a closed window?
Horrid music, which sounds like a broken washing machine, coming thru the walls of my sons bedroom?
Cheers
|
Now here is a serious new turntable...
http://www.analogplanet.com/content/dietrich-brakemeirs-apolyt-turntable-aims-be-worlds-finest-and-m...
Dietrich knows a thing or two about turntables, arms and cartridges.
And gosh....what are those?
They look like tonearm pods and did he say in the interview that the tops of the pods are totally isolated from the plinth and structure?
I saw that video. The tonearm pods are themselves on the same plinth as the turntable if I am not wrong. So then, is this setup some type of Optical illusion ?
http://www.whatsbestforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=19961&d=1429540940 That Verdier setup is incorrect. I have owned the Verdier too and have tried various setup configurations. In the setup cited in the link above the motor housing and the turntable are placed on different platfoms, one is on a vibraplane while other is on a regular raised platform. This may give the sound some added transparency due to the seperation but they dont sing like one. The coherency is affected, I have tried it first hand. Probably the person who set it up would never agree to this because he first of all doesnt believe this can happen (hence he set it up like that) and secondly he did not hear this problem after setting it up like that. With all those expensive tonearms, cartridges, isolation platforms, one has invested very well and it is expected that he knows very well what is doing but simple things are some times elusive |
Lewm
Verdier photo: It looks to me like Dietrich simply replaced the OEM flimsy tonearm mount (an inverted L-shaped affair that never looked to be very stable, to me) with a nice solid pillar and then attached it directly to the granite "plinth". Nothing really radical but certainly better than stock.
Optical illusion Lewm. (an inverted L-shaped affair that never looked to be very stable, to me) An Aluminum block rigidly mounted to its plinth .....unstable ? ok...... Look again. the turntable has been rotated counter clockwise. 90 degrees. The stock pillar is still there holding up the other tonearm. The external pod is not touching the same plinth that the platter is attached to. Nothing really radical but certainly better than stock. Well ok if you think so. But "Earth" for both of them, Tonearm Pillar and Plinth that holds the Platter, is now the Vibraplane. I think you just jumped over to the other side and became one of them Copernicans with your comment ? |
Excellent comments Pani :^) Pani
I have owned the Verdier too and have tried various setup configurations.
This may give the sound some added transparency due to the seperation but they dont sing like one. The coherency is affected, I have tried it first hand. Did I read on here in the past that you owned a Nouvelle Verdier ? IMO/IME it’s very easy to fall into the trap of listening to "sounds" (Audiophile), rather than the flow of the music created by the musicians (Music Lover). I have been in these phases. fwiw - they (phases), imo can be very therapeutic especially during difficult times. But it becomes about the gear, and not the music anymore. Now that linked table is a naked design; meaning all parts easily accessible. To the "ever wanting change" vinyl audiophile - it is crack. I resisted change with it, and spent time on setup with dialogue from its maker-designer. May he rest in piece. Pani - I think your personal experience answers the question in your original post quite well ? Cheers |
It’s a little bit difficult to isolate (no pun intended) the vibration caused by airborne Acousitc Waves from the vibration caused by mechanical vibration including seismic type vibration without making some rather elaborate arrangements. But if you could I’m confident you would find that low frequency seismic vibration of the type produced by Earth crust motion, traffic, subways, etc. is by far the worst offender as regards exciting the resonance of tonearm, platter and cartridge, all of which have resonant frequencies around 10-12 Hz or thereabout, well below the lowest frequencies almost all high end audio systems are capable of producing. So, the solution for Verdier and other high mass designs is high performance (very low resonant frequency) seismic isolation. The airborne stuff, by comparison, is relatively inconsequential IMHO.
geoff kait
Machina Dynamica |
The airborne stuff, by comparison, is relatively inconsequential IMHO. Correct Geoff.. It is unimportant whether the vibration is occurring at a resonant frequency or not- its vibration either way- just more of it if its at a resonant frequency. It really doesn’t matter much to me if people wish to create a fantasy parallel universe in which the laws of physics, evidence and data don’t exist. Audiophiles are renowned for indulging in such shenanigans. But when some, proffer nonsense as ’fact’ without a skerick of scientific evidence and insist that we swallow it as gospel.....it begins to matter. |
Halcro
Can you please explain how we can hear and clearly understand someone talking on the other side of a closed window?
Horrid music, which sounds like a broken washing machine, coming thru the walls of my sons bedroom? Err...perhaps you should read my post again? Or does "Transmission" not mean the same thing in New Zealand? |
If air-borne sound pressure is a problem in the turntable playback system, then every increase in volume would of necessity degrade the sound.
Correct. The defence rests....😎 |
It really doesn’t matter much to me if people wish to create a fantasy
parallel universe in which the laws of physics, evidence and data don’t
exist. Audiophiles are renowned for indulging in such shenanigans.
But
when some, proffer nonsense as ’fact’ without a skerick of scientific
evidence and insist that we swallow it as gospel.....it begins to
matter. Halcro, we are on the same page in this regard. Unless, that is, if you are claiming you have a damping system so profoundly effective that ***zero*** vibration is the result- if that is the case, then you will have been successful where no-one has been before and the world will beat a path to your door. In the meantime, I am the one with the skerick (sic) of evidence (actual measurements) whilst no-one else seems to have caused their hand to move to produce any. On top of that, I get accused of having no evidence... Ironic to say the least!
If
air-borne sound pressure is a problem in the turntable playback system,
then every increase in volume would of necessity degrade the sound.
Correct. The defence rests....😎
We do agree on this point. We both recognize that air borne vibration can be a problem. I've seen exactly this affect turntables in the past, which is why I went through the lengths to create the machine I did. I also recognized that no matter what I did, I would never be able to rid the machine of all vibration, so I made the plinth as rigid and dead as possible to prevent the cartridge from being affected by what vibration there was; allowing the mechanism to work for the goal (minimum pickup of noise other than the information in the groove) rather than against it. The result is it is quite impervious to the volume level in the room; even at 110 db the sound is still very relaxed. @thekong, I know that test tones are less appealing, but if you substitute a sweep generator in your test you outlined, then you can produce a chart showing at what frequencies the weaknesses lie and also display the waveform on an oscilloscope, allowing for a quantitative result. This is very much what we did in our test; only we did it with a silent groove since it was with the attempt to use an arm pod where we first noticed that there was a problem. Most audiophiles don't have access to a silent groove, and you don't really need one. Whether the platter is rotating or not really isn't important, since the noise we are looking to eliminate is not originating in the turntable to begin with. |
Ct, I if I misinterpreted the photo of the Verdier, mea culpa. But would it be possible to have this discussion without the heavy air of sarcasm and condescension? Most of us are trained professionals in some specialized area or other. And most of us must have been fairly successful in our field, in order to be able to afford the toys that allow for these discussions to go forward. I take it as a given that none of us is stupid, in other words. My eyesight may rightly be faulted, if I did not see the single photo of the Verdier correctly, but I am not stupid, either. You're certainly not the only one who is guilty of the insult approach to debate, so I apologize if you feel picked upon.
Now, to get back to the Verdier, I DO feel that the OEM tonearm mount on the Verdier is a weakness of the product. It does include a sturdy vertical pillar, as you say, but then the actual platform for mounting the tonearm is attached to that vertical pillar and hung out in space (see my reference to an inverted L-shape). This allows for easy adjustment of P2S distance, but it is not the greatest idea for structural rigidity. The new pillar-shaped pedestal looks better to me, no matter whether it is attached to the granite or not. |
Sorry, Ct. I just took another look at that photo, and I still think that the new brushed aluminum or steel pillar that holds the tonearm closest to the viewer is NOT sitting on the shelf; to my eyes it is attached to the granite base that also supports the bearing and the platter. IOW, not Copernican. Not super optimal for the other school of thought (the linkage school), either, but in that general direction.
|
Atmasphere wrote,
"Unless, that is, if you are claiming you have a damping system so profoundly effective that ***zero*** vibration is the result- if that is the case, then you will have been successful where no-one has been before and the world will beat a path to your door."
i don’t think anyone is suggesting that damping techniques are 100% effective. Nor is anyone claiming that vibration isolation techniques are 100% effective. However, there are two points I’d like to make. One is that - generally speaking - vibration damping techniques, e.g., constrained layer damping, are regegated to frequencies, say, above 30 Hz, whereas vibration isolation techniques, e.g., mass-on-spring methods, are primarily regulated to frequencies between 0 Hz and 30 Hz. And for the latter, vibration isolation, one should address as many of the 6 directions of motion as technically feasible for best results, not to mention attempt to produce as low a resonant frequency for the iso system as possible. Since the resonant frequencies of the cartridge and tonearm as I mentioned previously are circa 10-12 Hz then even such heroic iso means as Vibraplane and some other examples, with resonant frequencies around 3Hz, can provide isolation effectiveness of perhaps only 50-70% at 10-12 Hz. Obviously, obtaining a resonant frequency below 2 or even 1 Hz would be great. Nevertheless, one should do the best one can, including isolating the other gear from seismic type vibration, too.
geoff kait
machina dynamics |
i don’t think anyone is suggesting that damping techniques are 100% effective. Actually Geoff, I was being accosted about that very thing when I pointed out that it was impossible for any damping system to be 100% effective (perfect). |
Halcro.
Yep, transmission, WRT vibration, means the same thing here in NZ.
You mentioned transmission at resonance (FR) and at this frequency, it is obviously at is maximum since the excitation frequency and resonance frequencies are the same. At excitation frequencies below FR, transmissibility approaches 1, so we more or less get out (vibration) what we put in. At excitation frequencies above FR, we get attenuation (partial isolation} as Geoff has explained above. The further we move above FR the greater the isolation. The curve being asymptotic to zero as the excitation frequency is increased.
It all depends upon the FR of the material or structure, So in your apartment wall example, the FR of the wall is well below the audio band and this fits perfectly with what has been said.... Your excitation frequencies are well above FR so no vibration would be detected.
So we have the question of what is the FR of the structure of the TT or pod? If this falls within the audio band then there is a potential problem.
Maybe a test would be to suspend one of your pods from a thread after removing any damping you have applied. Tap it to ascertain its FR.
Cheers.
|
atmasphere
4,796 posts
05-09-2016 5:00pm
Geoffkait: "i don’t think anyone is suggesting that damping techniques are 100% effective."
to which Atmasphere replied,
"Actually Geoff, I was being accosted about that very thing when I pointed out that it was impossible for any damping system to be 100% effective (perfect)."
Oospy daisy! In that case consider my post to be in defense of your position. As for your point about damping, I actually didn’t address damping effectiveness, only vibration isolation, in my previous post.
Cheers
|
We do agree on this point. We both recognize that air borne vibration can be a problem. No we don't.... I pointed out that:- If air-borne sound pressure is a problem in the turntable playback system, then every increase in volume would of necessity degrade the sound. You said that was correct.... You then contradict yourself by writing:- The result is it is quite impervious to the volume level in the room; even at 110 db the sound is still very relaxed. The two statements are logically incompatible. No amount of plinth dampening will avoid the effects of air-borne sound waves on the vinyl, cartridge, stylus and tonearm. The fact that you and many others can listen to vinyl played back at excessive volumes demonstrates conclusively that air-borne sound waves have no effects on the turntable system. |
The trouble is that the instabilities and so forth in the Earth’s crust and other sources of low frequency vibration actually force the entire building structure, house, apartment building, converted ICBM missle silo, whatever to move like a carpet being shaken such that everything inside the building is also forced to move and all attempts to control this very low frequency vibration with damping methods won’t accomplish squadoosh. This is not to say that damping doesn’t have it’s place. I’m actually a big fan of contrained layer damping in applications such as CD transports, output transformers, the top plate of iso platforms and capacitors, among other things. Even very rigid structures and stiff materials have their place in vibration isolation inasmuch as they can help control bending forces produced by Earth's crust motion. |
You said that was correct....
You then contradict yourself by writing:-
The result is it is quite impervious to the volume level in the room; even at 110 db the sound is still very relaxed. The two statements are logically incompatible.
No amount of plinth dampening will avoid the effects of air-borne sound waves on the vinyl, cartridge, stylus and tonearm.
The
fact that you and many others can listen to vinyl played back at
excessive volumes demonstrates conclusively that air-borne sound waves
have no effects on the turntable system. Actually I'm not contradicting myself at all- merely point out that the design is successful. I assume from your post here that you did not actually read the post from which you quoted or such would have been rather obvious. |
|
I've been digging through this to the point of multiple circular thinking all leading to nowhere. My comprehension, while not fully through, does lead me to question many of the tenants expressed here, if only due to being invested in a TT/plinth?/tonearm which violates almost every principle presented here for superior SQ.
Trans-Fi Terminator tonearms , linear tracker with air bearing. Salvation TT with magnetic bearing, floating for all practical purposes. Resomat platter pad which further isolated the LP from the platter. nothing is connected with respect to vibrations being transmitted concurrently during playback. Sounds great.
I did follow Terry9 and place a little damping material on the arm wand to some good effect.
Maybe it's my tin ears but it sounds really great to me.
|
Dear Halcro, You wrote, "The fact that you and many others can listen to vinyl played back at
excessive volumes demonstrates conclusively that air-borne sound waves
have no effects on the turntable system." But that is an incorrect assumption based on all my past experience. I have been present many times, in many different listening venues, when acoustic feedback causing distortion was sound-pressure-dependent. Backing off the volume control could reduce the effect and eventually eliminate it entirely, in these instances. Perhaps this is not a problem in your house, but it is a real phenomenon in some others. In the case that Atma-sphere (Ralph) describes, perhaps conditions were such that there was no appreciable acoustic feedback, even at 100+ db. It's possible. Careful set-up and room damping can indeed eliminate or remove the problem, but that does not mean it does not exist.
Dentdog, More to the point, is your Terminator tonearm mounted on your Salvation turntable or is it on an outboard arm pod, separate from the turntable? The Resomat is indeed a contrarian design in that it specifically decouples the LP from the platter, whereas most platter mats make an attempt at coupling to facilitate the dissipation of spurious energy delivered into the vinyl by the passage of the stylus in the groove. Many do say the Resomat works great, however. Which should make us re-examine the theory of the platter mat.
|
Lewm, the Terminator tonearm actually pivots vertically on two contact points of an underslung carriage. This is joined to a sliding metal inverted V bearing which slides horizontally on a similar inverted arm,separated by a thin cushion of air. A pump with very low pressure allows for a long thin surface, decoupled by air. Thus the arm can pivot vertically while the sliding inverted bearing moves without resistance, [air cushion]. The support arm under the inverted bearing is attached to the plinth, with the air cushion separating the bearing from the support arm. The air cushion completely separates the inverted bearing and the undercarriage from the support arm and the plinth.
As to the resomat, I have experimented with three other mats and in each case the dynamics I was accustomed to hearing were sucked out of the music.This was without doubt the most dramatic negative change I have heard in the system. The music just died. Needless to say the resomat is in place permanently.
While I have formally studied physics on a basic level and have some limited understanding of airborne/foundational vibrations, in no way am I qualified to refute or support either of the theories being bandied about here. I do know however that the above methods put into effect, including the magnetic bearing supporting the platter all work to decouple all the working parts. This to me seems to reduce the chances of resonant/non-resonant vibrations being transported throughout the playback system. Totally contrarian I realize, but it works and to me it works better than what I have heard otherwise, particularly in the case of high db playback.
My ego isn't really attached to this, so anyone who wishes to shoot it down, have at it.
|
Dentdog, There is no need to be apologetic regarding your affection for the Resomat. You have lots of respectable company in that regard. Like I may have written elsewhere, if not here, I am curious to try one myself. In the past year, I had an epiphany in the opposite direction. Since the mat (of any kind) sits in contact with the platter, more or less in the case of the Resomat, I don't think this directly pertains to the arm pod discussion. I was long an enemy of record weights and the like devices, believing that they "killed" the dynamic extremes of music, in parallel with your experience using other platter mats. Then I acquired an original record weight and peripheral ring made by Kenwood for the L07D, just to have them, since I own an L07D. By chance I have found that the L07D record weight used in conjunction with a Boston Audio Mat1 or Mat2 or the stainless steel mat on the L07D sounds much better, even more "lively", than the mats without the record weight. I don't believe for a minute that there is any magic in the L07D record weight, by the way; the experience merely suggests that my earlier suppositions were incorrect. Probably any good weight of similar mass would work as well. It's a weird hobby.
By the way, I also think that maglev of the platter mostly acts to relieve pressure on the bearing and possibly contribute to a lower rumble figure, but I don't think it does much to isolate the platter, at least not in a major way. So, your findings there do not add or subtract from the debate about arm pods.
I do take your point about the Terminator tonearm; because they are riding on a cushion of air that would seem to isolate the arm itself from the underlying structure, the Terminator and other air bearing tonearms could be said to mimic the effect of an outboard arm pod, albeit I do believe from what you wrote that the understructure of the Terminator is directly bolted to the plinth. In which case the coupling or lack thereof would be a function of the air pressure and other aspects of the interface between the moving arm wand and its carriage. |
Throughout this thread arguments on both sides seem to have merit. I will say Ralph's data is the most convincing given that he has measurements to support his viewpoint. It would be interesting to see some data involving the turntable setup where the turntable functions from a different room isolated from the airborne and to some extent transmission through the structure of the playback room.
During my college years I often listened to a system in which that was the case. In this case it was absolutely necessary or the stylus would fly off the table otherwise. We listened kinda loud! I still do.
I really enjoy these kinds of discussions, always a lot to learn here. A similar discussion about spiking vs isolation of speakers on WBF is equally intriguing. Even the propagator of Stillpoints began to question his product and we all know what a wonderful system that is. |
Does this plinth-tonearm arrangement represent "closed loop" solution ? |
The Resomat is indeed a contrarian design in that it specifically decouples the LP from the platter, whereas most platter mats make an attempt at coupling to facilitate the dissipation of spurious energy delivered into the vinyl by the passage of the stylus in the groove. This is again against the principle of "closed loop". I have the resomat too and it does bring a lot of goodies due to the "isolation" of the vinyl from the vibrating motor/platter, especially in terms of reducing noise floor and presenting a more airy sound. But music looses on the timing aspect, it doesnt sing as one, probably due to the decoupling. I have since moved to a Funkfirm Achromat which is the best compromise I have heard yet. And yes, it tightly couples the vinyl to the system. |
|
