Mapleshade boards under speakers

Emailists, I'm using the Nanomounts (just for the last 10 days) and trying to get a handle on their contribution to the sonics. I think it's positive, but pretty subtle. Note that the ones used to separate the top of the cart from the headshell area on your arm depend on both the cart and headshell underside being perfectly flat. I note in your pix that the cart extends pretty far forward from the end of the arm which would complicate the positioning of the Nanomounts there. Dave

Emailists,
As a user of Sistrum and maple platforms, I don't feel they use the same philosophy- maple has (as everything else) it's own resonance freguency, and instead os "draining" vibrations away from the supported component, they "accumulate" that energy, and then release it back ( approx. the same, as the speakers cabinets do, causing "smearing" of the sound).
Sistrum on the other hand do not store energy, because of the different properties of steel vs. wood, and do release the energy into the integrated metal cones.
Under the speakers, in particular, maple on brass cones absolutely "killed" the sound, robbed it of definition, energy and dynamics. Herbies products in the same application, were even worse.

Emailists, my experience with the 4" Mapleshade bases and brass footers
for the Gallo Ref 3 speakers was diametrically opposed to your view. Instead of
killing the sound, they opened it up and made it fuller and richer. and
substantially more dynamic. Compared to another (friend's) stock Ref 3 on a
direct side-by-side comparison, the speaker on the Mapleshade base was so
superior that we could hardly tell the stock one was playing. My friend ordered
the Mapleshade bases the next day. I see his comments are above. Dave

I have been using maple stands in various designs under amps, preamps, CD players, and speakers for a few years now. I have found I preffer maple to a few maunufactured brands including Sistrum.

I just finished building a copy of Mapleshades 4" maple stands for my Gallo ref 3.1 speakers. I did not buy the expensive brass footers, I instead tapped the holes I drilled for the feet to accept the feet that came with the speakers. They thread directly into the maple, no inserts. I also routed in a space to accept the grill which has to sit 1/2" lower than the surface of the stand in order to line up the screw holes in the back of the speakers. They sound better without the grills in place but I have a batch of grandchildren (all toddlers) and so I need to be able to have the grills in place some times. I don't think Mapleshade offers this option, but they should. It only took an hour to make a template for the router.

I set the speakers back up and listened this afternoon. I am very happy with the sound. Much larger and more open detailed soundstage. Imaging and bass have tightened up. A definite improvement across the board. I heard nothing that I felt was a detriment to the sound in my brief listening session.

Something probably could be gained from the addition of the brass footers, More mass and much better coupling to the floor, plus the brass factor certainly is something to consider, but the cost of the footers alone from Mapleshade is $788.00. I have $80.00 and a few hours of time in mine.

Mapleshade (style) stands under speakers, at least Gallo 3.1 speakers are a definite improvement.

I don't think you can automatically make universal claims for each product, good or bad. I think it to be very system dependent. The maple boards didn't work well with a friend's system, in mine they're superb. The Sistrum may have the same effect. Do they offer a return policy?