2. tech-talk
  3. 126422-446

Do equipment stands have an impact on electronics?

Mechanical grounding or isolation from vibration has been a hot topic as of late.  Many know from experience that footers, stands and other vibration technologies impact things that vibrate a lot like speakers, subs or even listening rooms (my recent experience with an "Energy room").  The question is does it have merit when it comes to electronics and if so why?  Are there plausible explanations for their effect on electronics or suggested measurement paradigms to document such an effect?
agear
maplegrovemusic's avatar
maplegrovemusic
1,113 posts
 
Sweet post mr winer !
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,198 posts
 
Well, if if you think we’re delusional then its up to you to prove it not us to prove to you we are not. Becasue frankly I don’t give a rat’s ass what you think there.

I’m just sharing my findings on sound that I have found useful that others might find useful or not. It’s not a life or death matter.

Whatever. It all depends really. Of course you just think you know all the answers and it’s cut and dry based on your limited test results.

The egos are big on this thread. You can bank on that one if nothing else.

Also I’ll use my time as I choose. Do not need your approval or guidance. 
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Ethan Winer wrote,
Okay, one more, I can’t resist:

"We had an interesting incident near Humboldt State University. A new cell tower went up and the local newspaper asked a number of people what they thought of it. Some said they noticed their cell phone reception was better. Some said they noticed the tower was affecting their health. Think about how much more pronounced these effects will be once the tower is actually operational. The ability of the human brain to convince itself of just about anything is not to be underestimated." --Brian Dunning

But no one is saying there can never be placebo effects or other types of psychological phenomena in audio or any other field. Your problem is that it’s a logical fallacy to argue that those psychological phenomena conveniently explain *everything* you happen to be skeptical about or whatever.



Post removed 
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 


ethan_winer
9 posts
12-14-2016 4:00pm
No, the burden of proof is on those making the claim. Logic 101 teaches that you can’t prove a negative.

That’s illogical, Captain. Actually, in the real world the opposite is true. In a court of law the defendant is not required to prove the plaintif’s case. It’s up to the plaintif, you know, the one bringing the charges, in this case the charge that the device in question is a hoax or fraud, who’s actually got to prove his case. So far all we’ve got from the isolation denyers is a lot of angst, drama and who shot John.



More to discover