Ohlala et al: It is simple, just try it in your systems. Who cares what Shannon Dickson wrote in November, 1995? What mkes him an authority on vibration control? I happen to agree with Stehno. My previous house had concrete slab on the ground floor. My present listening room is on sprung hardwood floor. I have experimented in both environments. |
My guess regarding the first paragraph of the portion of the article I quoted (I assume "skimming" means "reading the first paragraph") is to make his point about the relationship between floor and component as they are attached. Dickinson mentions vibrations via air in the second paragraph and more in the article. |
I just read it. It appears the article was written with the express intent of promoting certain products which kept getting mentioned over and over again. Of course, I could be "biased". :^) A couple of points I noticed. He is quite right about some things like the need for rigidity and structural integrity of solid type stands. He's also quite right about some of the various damping materials and their limitations. Where I seem to have difficulty agreeing with him, are the parts where he seems to be convinced that vibrations can be transmitted up from the floor, but cannot be transmitted down from the equipment "like a hose"(as he puts it). Part of his reasons seem to stem from his description of "cones" as having a good function at the tip, but a poor function at the broad top surface. This is actually one of the main aspects that we(Starsound) address in our product(Audiopoints) design. The Audiopoints design uses reduction of the Coulomb Friction at the top surfaces of the "cone" to improve the ability of these vibrations to move continuously(in real time)from the component through the Audiopoint. A high coefficient of Coulomb Friction at the top of the "cone" will cause delays and inefficiencies in this vibration transmission, reducing effectiveness. By lowering Coulumb Friction(using proper materials and mechanical grounding) this allows a real-time continuous transmission of vibrations without the buildup or reflection of the vibrations back into the component. Additionally, the use of rubbery materials or air bladders just aggravates the problem instead of curing it, by creating more resistance(Coulomb Friction) in the juncture, and thus causing the equipment to behave as a "resonance capacitor" or resonance storage device, storing and returning the vibrations back to the equipment instead of effectively dealing with the airborne resonance problems. For another bit of interesting reading, complete with mathematic scientific calculations and proofs about how reducing Coulomb Friction can improve vibration management in the audio environment, please refer to the Coulomb Friction White Paper on our website, written by a Mechanical Engineeer. http://audiopoints.com/coulomb.html As you can see, there is more than one side to this story, and much has transpired since that Stereophile article has been written. Perhaps the author himself may even have some different opinions today. Tom Lyons Starsound Technologies |
Since the entire house/apartment structure is moving due to the sesimic vibrtation, rigid structures will only ensure the component vibrates along with the seismic motion. That is the point of Shannon Dickinson's article! -- that something besides rigid structures is required to isolate the component from the very low freq. vibration (0-10 Hz) caused by traffic, Earth's crust motion, etc. Recall this article was published soon after advent of Vibraplane, perhaps the first highly effective isolation device, one that set audio on its ear (as it were) as isolation was quite a new concept back then. Geoff Kait, machinadynamica.com Machina Dynamica, maker of Nimbus Sub Hertz Platform |
