Shelf Material - Neuance


I started a thread a month or so ago trying to find opinions on the best shelf material. I got some good new ideas, and tried them all out - except one, Maple Butchers Block. McMaster did not reply to my emails concerning Maple Butchers Block - not unusual, I have found many US companies turn a deaf ear to anyone from another country. I did try some local butchers block - stips of heart timber glued together, and the spectral balance was very good, but pace was poor. If Maple is better then it must be much lighter than what I was using (Weight = energy storage = poor pace). The best I tried was a very classy looking Neuance shelf, which you can find out about at www.neuanceaudio.com. I think subaruguru was also trying one and so it will be interesting to see what he thinks. It has a sound, but one that is difficult to pin down. It did not work well on my transport, flattening mid-range images for some reason, but worked well on everything else. I will order some more and therefore be able to get a better measure of its performance, and will try again with the transport (I have since learnt that I should not have used up-turned spikes). The Neuance is fast, it almost spotlights mid-range detail (you hear everything a vocalist is doing), it is very extended top and bottom. It might have a tad too much warmth in the lower mids and upper bass, but I am not sure yet. I love the way pianos sound with it - very much like the real thing (my daughter plays piano and so I hear it every day) - no exagerated presence, but all the natural harmonics of a real piano. I find it works best resting on small 1mm thick hard rubber pads, on a sand filled steel rack, with Vibrapods between shelf and component. I did not particularly like up-pointed spikes underneath it when I tried it but will experiment some more when I have some more Neuance shelves - it is hard to get the full measure of this shelf when I have only one. But I suspect this really is very close to an ideal shelf - very light, very rigid, no noticeable resonances - as I am using it at present. If, like me, you have been looking for a top quality shelf, then the Neuance is well worth a try. My only relationship to Neuance is that the man behind it offered me this ex-demo one for the cost of freight in response to my original post. When I order the next three shelves from him I will be offering to pay more generously for the first one.
redkiwi
Thanks Sam: I need to hone my search skills. Looks like US customers can deal direct, which is always nice.
Megasam - what is the approx weight of the Symposium shelf. From what I have heard it seems to have a damping strategy, but just how light/rigid is it? I have the impression that it is perhaps medium mass, between the Neuance and the BDR or Polycrystal.
Red, for the 19x14 "svelte shelf" they list the weight as 7#, they have thicker heavier models also. Surface is brushed stainless top and bottom with various layers/densities of foam between.

www.symposiumusa.com/svelte.html
Thanks Megasam. It sounds like the Symposium, at 7 lbs, is somewhere closer to the BDR and Polycrystal than the Neuance. The heavy/damped shelves can give the best result in terms of neutrality, and clever design can shift smear out of the mid-range. But I find, because they are massy, then they still release the energy slowly somewhere. Usually up top and down below, reducing top-end air, speed of leading edges up top, and slowing upper to mid bass. The light/rigid approach does not suffer such problems but is a lot harder to make sure that it is neutral. There is no perfect answer, just better implementations. I still reckon that light and rigid, yet damped is the ideal. The fact that the Neuance pursues this ideal with a fair degree of success is what draws me to investing in it. But I don't claim it is perfect. My comments are not intended to put down the Symposium - that would be entirely unfair as I have not even heard it - just to explain where my thinking is on this topic.
Hmmm...still enjoying Neuance under my CDP, but am finding nirvana elusive. Whereas top end distortions seem mitigated, and PRAT is superb, I'm still bothered by leanness, especially noticeable on massed strings. I notice that when I pay attention I can successfully dismiss it, but find that it calls attention to itself more obviously when my sensoria are multiplexed (such as when reading). I originally attributed this stingy stringiness (say five times fast!) to the software, but then was disappointed by massed strings on Ref Rec's Respighi (Bravura) disc. Maybe I still need to chase a warmer IC for my CDP (still Red Dawn)?.........Ken mentioned a 2-3 day break-in requirement; sometimes I just want to go shake the damned thing into final-fractal-residual-resolution, and hope it fattens up a bit! So interesting that other instruments are timbrally more honest than before, however.
I'll try to get back to critical listening. Bought a few other recent Ref Recs: whereas the dynamics and horn choirs on the Copeland/Oue are stupendous, again the massed strings are pretty searing...anybody else notice this? Bonsoir.
Note that Neuance is REALLY light. Mark: I'm using a smaller
Mark IV mounted on 3 spikes tightly screwed through my shelf (per Ken's instructions). I tried cones under the CDP, but couldn't really hear an apparent difference compared to the Rotel's stock HARD feet. Interesting that I STRONGLY prefer
old Rotel 855 and Neuance to Bel Canto and DVD, eh?
.......PS Anyone got a favorite Mahler 8? I'm actually a bit disappointed in the remastered 24/96 Solti on Decca. If that's the best they can do I can't imagine how bad the original was! I hear there's a Chailly/Concertgebouw debuting in March that's impressive...oops!--sorry to fall off-thread.