Evolution Acoustics MMMicroOne

Please help me understand some terminology here. Spending the majority of my audio experience in the recording sciences and gaining more knowledge about sound from the world of high end audio; could someone please explain or define the term “ringing”?

My initial impression was that “ringing” is a generated from continuous frequency reflecting off a non or less absorptive or very hardened vibrating surface material and that the rate of recurrence associated with ringing would be located in the upper midrange or higher more irritating frequency range of human hearing affecting the quality of what most determine to be good sound. If ringing occurs in the lower range would we be tempted to call this “humming?” :)

I am always reading on forums where the equipment stands, shelving materials and their associated parts are usually associated with the term ringing so why doesn’t a smaller electronic component chassis made of thinner hardened chassis material and shaped like a hollow rectangular horn ‘ring like a bell’?

Prdprez: I can understand how you would determine short flaws in design and argue why speaker stands are not all that complicated and how one could easily predict outcomes in performance based on observations. As a physicist you are heavily involved with mathematical criterion; however you should also take consideration in the influence of materials science and engineering related to sound, equipment stands and musical presentation.

There are a few companies in high end audio heavily involved with their perspective research programs and vibration control methodologies that would be very eager to provide you very audible proof that the difference between good sound and “really good sound” can easily be attributed to the geometric designed equipment platform. Inventing one that really works well with all speaker enclosures may not be as easy as you currently perceive.

Our studio has spent much time in this arena. Granted, for years we thought equipment stands were mostly cosmetic pillars and furniture but the benefits discovered directly led to an increase in our business based on the end result and that is “really great sound quality”.

Taking a look at the EA-MMM1 build quality and responses to this thread unequivocally places them into a category of great value. Based on our experiences a more functional stand will provide a higher level of sound quality but would also add to the overall consumer price point and possibly the factory did not want to head in that direction with this initial roll out.

In our case the stands we chose cost more money than the loudspeakers and when we purchase more expensive monitors one very important characteristic remains a constant and that is the musical reference point in the studio remains coherent based on the stands performance.

In audio there is always room for greater understanding, discovery and improvement.

Disclaimer: My father works with a commercial company that employs various forms of vibration management so I am biased, have had greater access to knowledge from experience and have applied various techniques and multiple grounding principles in recording studio settings.

This discussion is starting to go a little circular.
So let me just correct a couple things from my perspective and then just leave it be. We don't need to end up arguing.

So, first, I never said that stands don't sound different. Of course they do. Otherwise I wouldn't be making the point that it's important for them to be 1) sturdy, 2) heavy (Ie. high mass), and 3) not contribute their own sound (Ie. ringing like a bell. Or a tuning fork, if you will)

The quote concerning "...stands are not one of them (stereo performance)." was grossly taken out of context. That statement applied to my assertion that there is not a lot of complicated things going on with a stand, from an engineering perspective. In other words, they are not remotely mysterious to a qualified engineer. There ARE many things in stereo performance that can seem a little inexplicable, such as why so many people find analog to sound better than digital. I do not find this to be the case with speaker stands. I simply assert that the right engineers already know everything they need to know in both mechanical engineering and materials science to make something that adequately lifts a speaker to the proper height and yet does not negatively impact on the overall performance.

This is my perspective and experience. If someone would like to contribute meaningful and concrete reasons as to what else could be contributing to the performance, as I've said already, I'm open to learning something new.

Prdprez, I knew you had minimal experimental knowledge of this topic. Try putting your floor standers on a set of stillpoints or sistrum stands and let us know what you HEAR. Physics is not simply theoretical in nature. There is the experimental arm as well....

Physics and Engineering is a useful platform to try and understand the various facets of this hobby, but there are enormous gaps in understanding in both fields. Case in point, engineers told us for a long time that wire did not matter. Lamp cord was equivalent to exotic wire. Now we know, based on actual measurements, that wire can effect timing errors (jitter). I have been told that mechanical grounding a crossover has effects on its actual performance. Since you have a physics background, is there an explanation for that? Any explanations for stabilization effecting electronic circuits? Surely its more witchcraft.....

Prdprez, I think you are right about the discussion getting circular and off the topic. I find that speaker stands sound quite different and that I like some. If you insist that they are done by "right" engineers and I think that our knowledge is insufficient to totally explain what we hear, I am will to just say yes, you are right and go on think I am right. I have manmade ebony stands (newspaper and plastic). They don't ring, are heavy, with StillPoints OEMs under the speakers, spikes under the stands, and sound great. I would love to hear the MMMicro one on them.

There are no bottoms to work with on the MM1 to try different stands.