Free TWEAK that works


For those who have still not decided if I'm certifiably crazy, I have your proof. The latest tweak I've tried is beyond belief, I just have to tell the world. I use all Neuance shelves to support my equipment. I wrote a review on the benefits of using Neuance on a light rigid steel rack with up-turned spikes to support the shelves. The results were quite incredible and I strongly urge people to try this product.
Anyway, I was sitting in my music room the other day looking at a pile of bubble wrap that was protecting my latest toy (another story) when I got to thinking that bubble wrap might make a great support for the Neuance, allowing the shelf to act on the component alone. The vibrations from the rack would be isolated from the shelf by air! After trying a few sizes of bubbles I settled on the 1" diameter wrap. First off I used a MDF shelf supported by the up-turned rack points. Then a sheet of bubble wrap (bubble side up) that covered the entire shelf, next the Neuance. This provides an extremely even weight distribution, thus even pressure to the under side of the shelf. The equipment sits on the Neuance as it did in my review. I first tried the pre-amp, this was good so I went to the cd player. I listened for a day and decided to do the amps and power conditioner too.
The results are stunning. The depth of the sound stage is at least twice as deep. The bass is deeper and better defined, midrange and treble are not as noticeably altered in this regard. What is most noticeable across the entire frequency band is the clarity. Now I'm sure you've all read about the removal of layers of fog or haze from the presentation, this is quite different. I'm talking about the focus, like a camera. Everything appears clearer and much crisper. Now this is not subtle, it's stunning! The space between images is clear, the image itself is better defined, everything is simply easier to see. The bass is tight, I mean it's pin point now where it was a round note before. It's not like anything I've experienced before in audio, maybe like a different speaker with the exact same tonal qualities as before. All this but not artificial in any sense, no simply more palpable, more life like.
Yes, the tone has not changes what so ever. The system simply is better by a large amount. I wrote Ken Lyons of Neuance with my findings and he had stated that he has tried air suspension and he found it smeared the leading edge of the notes. He feels that any sideways motion will effect the signal, especially with the digital. I have experienced just the opposite. The pace is superb, the music is alive, exciting and extremely involving. More so than at any time in my past. I believe it's the bubbles and the size. My theory is the bubbles are large enough to produce separation. The bottom of the bubbles is fixed so the walls of a bubble when weighted are in tension in an outward direction 360 degrees. The bubble next to the first bubble is also in tension in the opposite direction. Given that my shelves are 15"x 17" that makes for approx. 250 bubbles working with opposing forces to each other. I'm thinking that the sideways motion is not possible, I know it takes a lot of sideways force to make the shelf move with my hands. I believe the smaller bubbles had much less side wall to work with and thus the lesser result with them.
I'm wondering if simple MDF shelves would experience similar results if set up in a similar fashion, or are the qualities of the Neuance enhanced by this form of isolation?
One concern, I have had this up for a week now. I see no signs of the bubbles deflating, but I'm thinking they might. This could make for a real pain if it happened too often, time will tell.

128x128jadem6
I used to use bubblepak under MDF before I got into the BDR products. I also found that bubblepak worked and have suggested it to some budget minded audio friends.
Hi JD:
Well, I certainly have respect for your tweaks after reading Bob Bundus' remarks. Here is a quote from a site about equipment racks I'd like your opinion on.

[start quote]
" Every material has a resonant frequency which is determined by its mass. Every object or substance converts energy into its resonant frequency and so stores energy. The willingness of a material to resonate cleanly and loudly at one frequency is called its "Q". A low Q is desirable for Hi-Fi furniture as this means the material resonates over a wide frequency band with no one dominate resonance. Metal not only has a high mass, but also a high Q, which is why bells are made of metal, and why it is an unsuitable material for equipment supports." [end quote]

Of the many things in hifi I haven't thought much about this is surely another one. Is the reason the tweak is so pronounced in your system because you are starting with metal racks that need damping? Have you tried the bubble wrap on different racks? I'm curious, have others had great success with metal racks? Does the quote make sense?

TIA
I remain,
The quote does indeed make sense.
I used to have a 6" sandstone base for my equipment to rest on. The problem as described to me is the ability of stone to "store" low frequency energy (high Q) and release it at unpredictable times. The same effect applies to wood shelves and wood racks, only at a higher frequency. In both these cases it's the large low frequency waves that cause the problems. The high frequencies are a different problem, mostly vibration from within the components and high frequency vibration from the air and frame. The concept of light rigid racks vs. shot or sand filled racks is to first stop the high Q. The high frequency would remain an issue, but is much easier to deal with. The old concept was to reduce the flow of vibration by using down turned points. The idea is cones will "drain" the components internal vibration and limit the vibrations coming from the shelf by only allowing the point as a conduit. I believe this is still a valid concept, and I continue to use cones on my amps (large transformer vibration).
The entire concept of the Neuance shelf is to absorb and disperse a large band of vibration frequency within it's foam core and thin rigid skin. The core has differing densities from the surface to the core giving it a low Q factor. The problem with Neuance is it's limited in it's low frequency performance. This is resolved with the light weight rigid steel rack It has low mass, thus it does not absorb or transfer low frequency vibration. The concept of the bubble wrap is to completely isolate the Neuance from any frame vibration. With the even weight distribution I believe the Neuance is able to preform more efficiently by not having the point load/ density the support spikes would cause, plus the shelf is not asked to absorb the frames vibration.
The concept of isolation is the same as used in the "bearing" support products. I have limited knowledge of these products but I'm evaluating them now. The concern with these products has been that they allow the component to move while releasing the inner vibrations. The fact that it is able to move gives the same isolation as the bubble wrap, but the movement could cause smearing of the leading edge of the note. Thus the incredible celerity I've discovered could be lost. Other air suspension concepts may also allow movement, again something we want to avoid. As I stated in the original post it appears to me the bubble wrap is not allowing any movement.
The concept of bearings used to isolate the floor (a huge low frequency vibration plane) from the speakers seems to hold the greatest promise. This is the focus of my trials right now. I will later try some different set-ups on the cd player to see if it performs better than what I now have.
I should also say that metal supports, cones and bearings tend to add a tonality to the sound. I have found titanium cones to be the smoothest with the least coloration. One concern with the bearing products is this very issue. This is why they offer high-carbon steel bearings, this could help tune the sound out of edgy. I'm trying different isolation from the bearings with wood, MDF and Black Diamond Racing pucks. The pucks are used with my reference speaker set-up in combination with BDR cones.
Hi again

Thanks JD. Very interesting.
Do you use cds vinyl or both? If both, have you noticed a difference in performance in your set-ups between the two sources? Are you particularly careful where you place your stuff - Nodes/anti-nodes etc... any generalizations on that?

TIA again

I remain,
I'm a CD and SACD guy. Placement and room acoustics are the most important to get right. All the tweaks in the world will go to waste unless your set-up right. I place my speakers on the long wall, 1/5th into the room. The speakers are that distance (1/5th) plus 1/3 of that amount away from the side wall. In other words, the tweeter is 34" from the back wall and 46" from the side wall. They are toes in about 30 degrees. My ear is 1/3 of the distance into the room. In the perfect world I'd have a room twice as large and have the speakers and myself 1/3 and 1/3. I use home made (acoustic ceiling tiles with carpet cover, $20.00 total)12" wide corner bass traps and home made accoustic panels on the side walls. The back wall (behind me) has a fur rug hanging over a hutch with a teddy bear collection on top of the hutch. Accoustic bears!
I use a test disk 'XLO' that is played on repeat to adjust (fine tune) the speaker location to avoid any node problems. Before I used my bass traps and accoustic panels I did have a few nodes. Now it's relitively flat across the spectrum. The listening position now has a range of about 6' front and back with very little change in the soundstage.