Amp stands- Do they work?


I recently purchased a Pass Aleph 3 and loved it so much that I "had to buy" a pair of the Aleph 2 monoblocks. I have been A/B-ing them at my home for the last 3 weeks for most of my free time. The 2s have a lot more presence, but lack the for lack of better words "musical reality" the 3 has. Forgive me for the term, but if you've heard the 3, then you probably understand. Anyway, I have asked most of the guys at Pass Labs and they essentially tell me I am hearing things- that the 2s "have all the sonic characteristics of the 3, just more of it" I have eliminated all other variables except that the 3 is on the bottom of my rack (Salamander Archetype), and the 2's are on the carpet in front of my system. I am interested in anyone's input as to the impact a reasonable stand might have on the sonics of my amps. I currently am acting on this hypothesis and have put the 3 on the floor next to the 2's. If it is of any help the components are in order- my source is a Muse Model 5 transport, Illuminati D-60 digital, EAD 7000 MkIII D/A, Kimber KCAG, Muse Model 3 preamp, WBT 5151 -great cable!!!!!, Pass Amps, Nordost Red Dawn speaker cable, B&W 804s. Counterpoint PAC-5 conditioner, API Power Wedge 4A conditioner. Marigo RMX ref power cables. Amps are using stock power cables- Nelson Pass's recommendation. Thanks for listening and I look forward to any input.
tsquared
Thanks so much Garfish. I have been a little ungracious in my replies to Nanderson, and hereby apologise (again). But years of hearing from the measurement clones trotting out the same or similar stuff has led to me getting worked up about this topic. I do not expect them to accept my opinions about how something sounds, but when someone asks for opinions on such a thing (as occurred here), you get these flat earthers insisting your opinion is deluded and demanding proof. It might even be tolerable if it wasn't so repetitive. Even if our opinions are deluded, at least there is some variety to them.
Redkiwi, I agree with your thoughts concerning the importance of speakers versus amps. And with Garfish's comments about the psychology of hearing. Although I have strong feelings about my personal choice in a speaker, your statement about the effect of a non musical amp are absolutely true in my experience. All of the variables in a complex system have to be addressed, and impossible to assess in a momentary blind comparison. In addition, Nanderson appears to have motives totally unrelated to enjoying music. Several of his postings contain comments that sound like the views of an investment broker. Perhaps with a eye toward the spending on music and equipment, when those dollars could be directed toward goals of financial freedom he speaks of. Would there be a commission involved?
Thanks Albert Porter. There are some questions I have been meaning to ask you (and anyone else, of course), since we seem to have some things in common. I note that you have clearly spent a good deal of time and money on the issue of vibration control. Although I have spent a lot of time on this too, I feel I am at best only half-way there to understanding how to use this variable wisely. Any insights would be very much appreciated. The other question I had concerns your thoughts on an appropriate strategy for putting a total system together. I raise this with you because of my whole-hearted agreement with your comment that all of the variables in a complex system have to be addressed. For example it is probably obvious to all that one should spend more on your amp than your amp stand. But it is equally wrong in my mind to state that you should never spend money on an amp stand because that money will always have been better spent on the amp. In building my most recent system, it was only when I had dealt with everything from the power lead into the house, through each and every cable, each and every component, and each and every support or isolation device, and each and every room treatment issue, that I really felt I had eliminated all significant unmusical artefacts. It sounds to me like you have come to the same conclusions. But what this means is that the number of variables we are dealing with is very long indeed, and our opinions on individual components will be clouded by the deficiencies of our existing system. Therefore it would seem that some simplifying rules would be of considerable benefit if we are to get good results. In another post I had a wee spat on this point. I was advocating attempting to select each component with neutrality in mind rather than using components to balance colourations in other components. This is because the apparent lack of neutrality of a component is not always due to it acting like a pure filter. For example, a CD player may smear some high frequencies and therefore sound peaky in the highs, despite appearing to be ruler-flat when measured. Balancing this with a warm and soft preamp is trying to turn two wrongs make a right. I have heard some advocate getting good quality components and then use cables (as filters) to get a neutral balance. Personally I see this as being similar to the "soggy preamp with etched CD player" idea. When playing with isolation I at first thought that this was a better place to do the final voicing of the system. But I found that warming things up with different isolation devices tended to destroy pace and rhythm, and that sharpening things up with different isolation devices tended to do so by smearing higher frequencies. I am very interested in any insights on the appropriate strategy for compiling a total system, given the very large number of variables at play.
Redkiwi, I cannot really add to your comments, because you have stated it perfectly already. I can only relate my experience from my side. I have developed a knack of hearing a component, and then mentally being able to place it into a category of sound, and then when I hear a problem in a system, I attack the problem with a solution that I know will help. I realize this is not a very clear answer, but I originally got into the HI Fi business in 1966, when I was a kid. I have never lost interest since that day, and along with 13 years in retail high end sales, I served as a factory technical rep. for a time after that. All the experiences over the years has taught me that your hearing is much more important than any specification. I know you mentioned that fact in your posting, so I guess basically I am agreeing with you again. I know that every single piece of equipment has a sonic signature, so the trick is to isolate what that signature is, so that the next time you see or hear that piece, you know what it is doing. I am part of a group of about a dozen people, often when we test, we hear the same Hi Fi item in several places. Owing to the differences in the rooms and equipment at the other peoples homes, we all get a "snapshot" of the results in each situation. I know it's not very scientific, but I swear, I can almost tell what a system is going to sound like in advance, by looking at the room and the individual pieces. In the end, the only way to find out for sure what will work is by doing what is already posted. Spend long term listening to the music, enjoy it, try to understand what is irritating and what is good about each item in the system. And as far as isolation, it cannot "cure" a bad product, it can only improve upon it. As you say, a great amp stand can be a big asset if everything else is "ready" for that level of change. On the other hand, there are systems and rooms, where literally improving the isolation of the amp could actually result in worse sound. This happens when you uncover a flaw that was hiding a worse problem upstream, and then the amp stand gets the blame for the problem (Kind of like kicking the tires on a car because the engine won't run, when the problem is no fuel). Add to this problem, the room literally dictates what isolation pieces work. I have a pier and beam foundation with a VERY heavy granite floor. It is live, dense, and has a specific ring to it. Not a ring that is audible, but a ring that shows if the equipment is allowed to react with it. So, depending on the room, the isolation should?/could? be anything we have posted earlier on this site, from butcher block Maple shelves, to Sound Anchor stands to air platforms. Unfortunately, they all sound different, and some of these solve problems in one area, only to add a different anomaly in a different area. So, even with all the experience I have with equipment, my experience with rooms is much less. I have been in my home a long time, so I have a limited experience with isolation control in other situations, except for the friends homes I already mentioned. The other issue is understanding what is important to the listener. Often, what is annoying to you or I, may be the best sound someone else has ever heard. On that subject you can guess and fill in blanks forever and never know what or why we all hear differently, or perhaps it is only choices, because they prefer a different paths to their own ultimate sound. I can and will attempt to describe why I like certain products (there are actually quite a lot) that are all good. I have simply chosen the ones that suit me in particular and then I have "honed" them into position with tube choices, isolation and extremely tight electrical work on the listening room. Not to get off on that whole thing, but just a hint of what I mean, I have a dedicated transformer on the pole outside, I run 220 3 phase (commercial power in residential neighborhood) and have a 750 Amp drop, using triple double zero copper. Then I have 14 dedicated runs to the equipment with star grounding, and the (small amount) of digital is on one side of the power grid and the analog is on the other. All of this matters, how much depends on where the system is in its evolution.
Thanks Albertporter. I don't have any immediate response, and will read your post over a couple of times before responding. There is nothing I disagree with, much to agree with, but also some to explore further I think.