Redwiki - About racks, shelves...


Reading your Neuance thread peaked my interst with racks, shelves and footers and if you don't mind I would like your opinion on my setup. RACK> Lovan (lead-filled) triangle rack
with custom 1/2" glass shelves supported on hard rubber footers on rack. TOP SHELF> 3cm polished granite rests o (3) aluminum TipToes with rubber (on flat bottom) between cones & granite. Cone points sit into dimples of each rack post. Another 3cm granite shelf - with (5) Vibrapods between - sits on top of the first granite shelf. VAC TRIODE AMP> Rests on top of top shelf. Stock footers have been replaced with Vibrapods screwed into the amp, Vibrapods sit on B.D.R. "ThoseThings" bases (only). DDS.PRO TRANSPORT> Bright Star Audio Big Rock platform sits on glass shelf, another 1/2" glass base rest on the Big Rock with Vibrapods between. Transport rests on glass base w/stock footers. M.P.S. (power supply) / DAC> M.P.S. rests on 1/2" glass shelf with Vibrapod footers. Dac sits on M.P.S. with down-pointed B.D.R. cones between. 10 lb. lead bar rest on dac. PASSIVE LINE ATTENUATOR> Sits atop 150 lb. concrete Inoic column. Vibrapods between column & Bubinga 2" (hardwood) base. Down-pointed B.D.R. cones between wood & passive. VPI brick sits on top. SILVERLINE SONATINA SPEAKERS> Rests on 24x12x4"
polished granite platforms. Stock footers replaced by up-pointed Poly Crystal cones which sit on 3x3x1/2" Ebony. SHUNYATA HYDRA PLC> Rests on 15x13x6" polished granite with down-pointed B.D.R. cones. R. Crump suggested i dump the "kitty box" and replce w/Maple platform. The Neuance bases look intersting an alternative. While still evaluating the Hydra's contribution (burn-in process) - I'm looking for a more open, neutral sound with less additive devices to color the presentation., thus considering re-evaluating my set-up.
Whats ya think? Thanks in advance. Reference system: http://
cgi.AudioAsylum.com/systems/436.html.

mwalsdor
wow, my stuff is sitting on a kitchen table. Maybe it's time to do something about that... My upgrade heirarchy went chronologically like this over the past year:
speakers, amp, CDP,power cords, interconnects, speaker cables (that's where I am now), soon to be room treatment, then rack, feet etc... So do the feet/rack issues really affect the sound? (This area of tweaking is all new to me).
Jay
I don't want the mantle of expertise on this issue. I just want to report excellent results with the light and rigid approach, when using Neuance shelving.

Mwalsdor, your rack arrangement goes in the opposite direction, plumping for mass in most cases. I am sure that there are lots of ways to skin the cat, but my experiments with the mass approach were not successful for me. The sound was often lovely, but the music failed to grab me. This is an odd thing. We can make our systems cause saxophones to sound beautiful, a voice to sound resplendent, a drum to be crashingly impactful and strings to soar. But this is not the same approach as seeking to remove all time smearing and go the PRAT route.

There are some that insist that their massy structures achieve PRAT. I am sceptical, I can't help myself. It defies my understanding of the issues, and does not gel with my experience. But I admit that does not mean I am certain that they are wrong.

The PRAT approach can result, in lesser systems, in a fast, infectious, but colored and fatiguing sound. The mass approach can result, in lesser systems, in a sluggish system where the instruments don't seem to be quite playing together, but often with good neutrality and powerful bass. At the pinnacle of each approach it may be that the sound quality converges to the same point.

But for me, I have found some form of previously unobtained musical bliss from the light/rigid/damped method. It is easy to implement, gets you great PRAT and is very neutral.

Get a welded steel rack that is spiked to the floor and supports its shelves on spikes. Get Neuance shelves. Possibly, use E-A-R feet between shelf and component. Simple and works great - you just have to wait a week while the sound stabilises - something to do with how the Neuance settles under the weight being applied to it. No need for cones, Vibrapods etc.

Almost everything in your shelf strategy Mwalsdor follows the opposing path with mass, and then has cones as a light/rigid interface to dissipate energy. It may sound great, and I have no reason to doubt that. But I reckon you would be surprised if you heard my system on my rack and would expect it to have a fresh vibrancy and speed that would make it very different from yours. What you may also notice is that your system had more bass weight and more solidity. I don't know which you would prefer, but I urge you to give the light/rigid/damped method a try. But throwing a Neuance shelf into your current rack is not the same thing.

I have to admit I am struggling because I don't really know what your rack sounds like or what you will like. All I can say is I am delighted with my rack, and it works best if I just keep it simple, no lead or sand filling, no concrete or granite blocks, no cones....
Redkiwi, this is an excellent post in response to a lot of variables with which you are not intimately familiar. I would like to follow-up with a question about the type/brands of welded steel racks you think would meet your criteria for your light/rigid/damped method. For example, would the "Reference Rack" sold by Atlantis meet this criteria:
http://www.audioplusservices.com/audiopl/at-rrk.htm
Do you have some alternatives to suggest?
Rushton...that's my rack! I can vouch for it's effectiveness, but, some tweaking still helps. I use a Cambridge Audio Isomagic Isolation Platform under the turntable, and EAR Feet on the rest of the gear. Solid rack, looks good too. Jeff