Stillpoints - snake oil?


Anybody here using Stillpoints Ultras? My dealer thinks highly of them, but I am very suspicious.
128x128thyname
Do these high end audio makers recommend any of these $500 cords or $1000 isolation devices? Does say Esoteric say if you use a $ 500 AQ cord and Stillpoints our amps sound a hell of a lot better? We recommend you buy them. Maybe they do I have no idea. 
People can spend money on what they want. The OP said he or she was suspicous. I am simply saying if the companies who make these products don't think their products need more isolation to work as designed why would I think they do? 
I did a shoot-out of a number of different coupling and decoupling devices under the tube rectified power supply of my phono stage several years ago.  From cheap to expensive. Some I had on hand, some I bought.
Almost every one changed the sound to varying degrees. Whether that was beneficial or "better" depends on what you are trying to achieve. The Aurios (I forget which model, it was like an enclosed roller block) had the most profound effect, but caused a stridency to leading edges of notes that was intolerable. The Vibrapod puck plus cone was one of the better, cheap alternatives with little noticeable downside on my system. Some of the others included an old set of Goldmund cones, HRS pucks (plus plates), Herbie’s footers and the Stillpoints SS.
I am using the Stillpoints, which increased clarity without the negative (stridency) of the Aurios.
I do like the Stillpoints LP weight and use it in lieu of the factory screw down clamp on my Kuzma XL. It also made changes to the sound, but I concluded those were beneficial.
I think when you have a ’tweaked’ system and you are making further changes it is sometimes worthwhile to "un-do" or remove the tweaks to check what a "new" device is doing against a baseline~
It’s odd ever since the advent of the Vibraplane and Townshend’s and Bright Star’s air bladder iso stands more than 20 years ago the subject of vibration isolation should still be so misunderstood and somewhat shrouded in mystery. It’s not really rocket science. It’s very simple. The difficulty arises in the implementation. That’s the Art of isolation. That’s why results often vary. Not to mention the glut of iso devices now available. How can anyone compare them all?

 If the vibration isolation method is mass-on-spring AND the instructions for setting up the platform are followed how can you lose? To be as completely effective as possible, isolation should occur in all six count em directions and should start as low in frequency as possible. Everything else is some kind of compromise. Rome was not built in a day.
Post removed