Sistrum or Neuance or...?


I'm considering some isolation for my transport and DAC. Which of the Sistrum or Neuance do you recommend? Or what else? I'm certainly open to suggestions. Thanks.
budrew
Sean, I am a social scientist and agree with you in principle. If we had the possibility of operationalizing "sounding better" and the proper tools to do so, we could proceed as you want. But we cannot operationalize the concept and lack the measurements. We have to be unscientific about this, especially as I know what I like.
Newbee if you are truly interested I do not mind sharing my experiences..and my thoughts as to what is happening when using Sistrum..Many disagree and many agree..Sistrum acts as a conduit for resonate energy to drain thru..These drain fields help set up patterns for energy to exit by.This energy is self generated by the device and thru external influences.{sound pressure]..If these influences are left untapped[aka dampening] then they will influence again and again and again the amplifying circuitry that we all feel to be the best..well.. you have never heard your expensive gear work at its highest effiencey until you drain away this muddy crap....If your equipment has to amplify grunge along with signal then its lost efficiency.. If the grunge has a path to vacate thru and not to travel within the music it will SOUND BETTER..Tom
Ohlala what I saw on the RTA was more energy and yet a smoother in room response from about 200hz on up to about 3k..There was about a 1.5db gain in spl..using pink noise. Smoother means less rises and valleys, the read out on the screen of the rta was more linear in nature. The led's of the read out varied less up and down, they seemed to react in a slower and more contrite pace. There was more energy in the room yet the pressure was more uniform in structure.Tom
Newbee: You can attribute variables in sonics due to a rack change in multiple manners. The most logical to me would be altering resonances in the room itself, especially over a narrow bandwidth. Some racks are going to contribute high frequency emphasis / ringing due to the excitation of metal. Some are going to contribute increased reflections / diffraction due to an increase in large, flat surface areas. Some are going to increase apparent low frequency content due to added mass / altered density in the room. Any of these given effects may become highly pronounced depending on if the room is phenomenally live, heavily damped, moved into different physical / acoustic locations from the last sample, placed upon a resonant, multi-node suspended floor, etc...

Everything in a room becomes part of the tuning of a system and what we hear, so taking all things into account, i don't doubt what Tom said or experienced. I just don't know if what he measured / heard is attributable to exactly what he thinks it is. Could be several factors coming into play. Sometimes what we think is obvious is actually a compendium of multiplying factors.

It is for that reason that critical analysis becomes necessary. That is, if you want to make headway in a consistent manner and apply what you've learned to various systems in different acoustic environments*. In that respect, that's why i disagree with Tbg. We do have the tools to take the proper measurements. Only problem is, you can take all the measurements that you want and go nowhere if you don't know how to interpret the recorded data or think that those specific results won't affect other aspects of operation. One link definitely affects the other links involved. Until all the links are of equal strength, your system is only as good as that weak link(s). Sean
>

* The research that Ken at Neuance performed when designing his shelves is quite amusing, technically interesting and "real world". Most of his tests were conducted under very diverse conditions and installations. It was through the compilation of data and observations from varied scenarios that he arrived at the "near universal" design results that currently make up the Neuance line of products. As far as i know, Ken is still refining these designs based on further testing and feedback from end users. Like all things though, Neuance shelves have their design limitations and supporting great amounts of mass in a small area is one of them. Other than that, if you follow Ken's directions for proper use, you'll probably get the results that he speaks of on his website. Whether or not you like those results is obviously a matter of personal preference and how well the rest of the system and listening environment has been optimized.