Turntable and Rack vibration control


Hi,
I moved from a Nouvelle Platine Verdier to a Loricraft Garrard 301. The big change with this move was that the Verdier comes with a terrific implementation of pneumatic suspension feet which kept the TT almost floating and hence great isolation from vibration. The result was always a noise/grain free playback and super clean backgrounds. With the Garrard, the plinth is typical custom made stacked birch ply with standard steel cones as footers. When placed directly on the rack the background is noisy, the images muddle up and overall music is not well sorted.

I do not expect the Garrard to be as quiet as the Verdier but I know it should not be this noisy either. In fact the Verdier also sounded noisy when I placed it directly on cones bypassing the pneumatic suspension feet. 

I use a Hutter Racktime rack which is not like an overbuilt audiophile rack. It is more like an open frame rack with lightweight supports. It is a bit like a Rega TT, not very damped or controlled. The rack has pointy steel feet which rests on brass spike plates (mine is an wooden floor). I guess this implementation is not sophisticated enough to keep away vibrations and let the TT play quietly. 

I am looking at two levels of solutions:
1. Replace the existing steel feet and brass plate with a quality vibration control footer below the rack
2. Replace the stock steel cone below the TT plinth with a better footer/platform.

I have tried Sorbothane, Squash balls kind of tweaks, while they reduce noise they slow down the music too.
I have also tried Stillpoints and Finite Elemente footers under the rack. They make the sound thin and metallic IMO. Platforms like Minus-K are too expensive so I have not considered them yet.

I am looking suggestions here, probably footers and vibration control devices that are more musically oriented yet well engineered like Shun Mook, Harmonix, SSC or something like an HRS platform ?
pani
I bit the bullet and ordered a Symposium Ultra platform for my TNT. Also ordered some springs to place under the Big Rock sand box that the Ultra will be placed on. 

Will report back.

Dave


I get it that throwing mass into a plinth or stand is one way to hifi Nirvana for some. That said, I am convinced that mass alone ain't the answer, neither damping. Of course the balance is important.
In pursuance of this are people designing plinths targeting the resonant frequency generated by the motors in question? 300hz for ac motors; 50hz for DD etc?
Surely targeting of the resonant frequency in the stand/plinth to match the primary source of vibration will allow the channeling away of the said energy, or am I being stupid - is it gonna be just a case of excacerbating the problem?
You’re close, very close. You actually want to target the resonant frequencies of the platter, tonearm and cartridge, which are designed to exhibit resonant frequencies well below the lowest frequency of speakers, around 10 Hz to 15 Hz. So all you have to do is reduce or eliminate any vibration in the range 10 to 15 Hz. Vibration isolation would be a good place to start. 

You will need to isolate the motor from plinth whether attached or not, or preferably reduce motor vibration until it is virtually non existent 

Bruce
Completely agree with that, Bruce. Do you feel that using a 300 rpm vs 600 rpm motor and/or an independent flywheel between motor and platter are effective as methods to reduce unwanted motor vibrations from reaching the stylus?

How about thread drive vs rubber belts? My experience is that replacing rubber belts with a single thread is a big improvement, so I am surprised/confused by the recent trend toward two or three rubber belts between motor and platter from one TT manufacturer's tweakers...

Dave