Springs under turntable


I picked up a set of springs for $35 on Amazon. I intended to use them under a preamp but one thing led to another and I tried them under the turntable. Now, this is no mean feat. It’s a Garrard 401 in a 60pound 50mm slate plinth. The spring device is interesting. It’s sold under the Nobsound brand and is made up of two 45mm wide solid billets of aluminum endcaps with recesses to fit up to seven small springs. It’s very well made. You can add or remove springs depending on the weight distribution. I had to do this with a level and it only took a few minutes. They look good. I did not fit them for floor isolation as I have concrete. I played a few tracks before fitting, and played the same tracks after fitting. Improvement in bass definition, speed, air, inner detail, more space around instruments, nicer timbre and color. Pleasant surprise for little money.
noromance
Okay so the Nobsound springs came and first surprise they are very small and stiff. Tested the full 7 springs with a 10 lb weight and it hardly compressed it. Also the springs fit snug into holes in the top and bottom. They aren't long to begin with and the holes limit the lateral range of motion from the top and bottom coil. Combined with each individual spring being quite stiff and altogether there's hardly any freedom for lateral movement. Nor is there a lot of vertical movement. This explains why the turntable doesn't bounce, twist under torque, etc.

My table https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/8367 altogether with the Shelf is probably a good 50-60 lbs, close to what Nobsound claims is max load (70-80 lbs something like that). After a bit of testing I have removed 3 springs leaving only 4 per unit. The other 12 I will make into four more of 3 springs each to use under my phono stage. Because they do work quite well. Read on.

The Miller Carbon sits on a BDR Source Shelf, with BDR Cones and Round Things between the Shelf and the granite, which in turn sits on a sand bed cast into the top shelf of the solid concrete rack. When the springs go in they replace BDR Cones and Round Things. This is a big deal. The springs are not being compared to any old this or that. People can have their own opinions about BDR. Pretty much always anyone saying anything other than they're excellent you can be sure they never heard them. Would be nice if those eager to criticize my every post would take a moment to include with their response, "Of course he's right, I never heard them." Then go on with the unfounded accusations.

Where was I? Oh yeah. So the springs go in and right away wow this is pretty nice. Very nice.

Did I mention I never did the usual oh we must play this very carefully then play the exact same thing very carefully.... no not at all. Turned the system on, warmed it up, put the springs in, listened to them FIRST. Ha! Because we are millercarbon! (Having fun noromance, this isn't for you, its for them. They know who they are.)

Second track as usual the Koetsu limbers up and smooths out and its sounding really good. Al Stewart is singing and there's a totally seductive palpable feeling of presence that was crazy good before but now is even crazier gooder. Super smooth, yet even more detailed. Like it is hard even to describe as a sound. Its more a feeling than a sound.

Still, it sometimes seems as if there is not quite as much sparkle. Like the extension is there, but... Fortunately the springs are almost exactly the same height as one Round Thing and Cone and so swapping them out is surprisingly easy so out they come and back in goes the BDR. Sure enough, more extension, sharper transients and dynamics. But only on the top end. The midrange just isn't as rich and warm and palpably present any more. Its not even all that close. It reminds me of the difference between analog and good digital, or between tubes and a good solid state amp. Both are good imitations. They sound just fine, until compared side by side and then... sorry but you know what we call second? First place loser.

Nothing chez Miller stays stock for long and so long as they're out a little silicone grease lubes the coils where they sit in the cylinders, and a little fO.q tape goes on top of each set and then back in they go. Can't really say those little tweaks made any improvement but it sure didn't make them any worse, and I'm sure now, the springs are an improvement on BDR.  

I think because everything is sitting on granite which even damped by the sand bed still rings. You can hit it and it makes a very high frequency tink kind of sound. Dies off super fast but its there. Is it a coincidence that this high frequency ringing is close to the range where I was hearing a little less sparkle with the springs? I don't think so. I think the granite was ringing, at a high enough frequency the BDR wasn't damping enough, and so it was getting into and coloring the music. Also these same vibrations were smearing midrange detail. That's why the midrange is now so sexy engaging and real. I mean its not quite liquid lush but compared to most of what's out there it sure is.  

The springs aren't exactly what I would call warm. They strike me as very neutral. But people who actually like digital and solid state might not see things that way. BDR comes in 2 versions, MkIII are a touch warmer than MkIV. The difference is small but its there. The general rule is MkIII for SS, MkIV for tubes. My system being tube/analog is all MkIV. Point being there would probably be even less difference if they were being compared to MkIII.

Been a long time since I got the BDR, 1990's, so kinda forgot but that is probably north of $500 worth of seriously good vibration control bested (if narrowly) by $35 worth of springs.

Good work, noromance!
Congratulations millercarbon....

I own the same set of springs boxes, and the right compression of the springs is very important, i know you know it for sure... i say it for all those who wil buy them....

It takes me 4 trying listening to get it right...

I have around 70 pounds of concrete slabs on top of my speakers, then i think they are pretty optimally compressed with more than 80 pounds on the springs, and when it is right, no defects in the high extension and the bass of my 7 inches drivers is feeled in my chest, the mid frequencies are perfect ....For the turntable it is easy to take off the right amount of springs for the optimal compression...(for my speakers i like them damped ). A variation around 4 of 5 pounds in compressive force is easily audible without problem....

My "sandwichs" of quartz,granite sorbothane, bamboo and cork was great, but when you miss something, you are not always conscious of what you miss, and the sound was smeared not much but enough to create a too much compress mid frequencies and less of extension in the high frequencies and a smeared bass also... .... With the springs smearing of the sound decreased enormously and all is clear but with sweet and warm mid frequencies....

The sound of my Mission speakers is celestial now....They compete the Moabs and i pay them 50 bucks used.... :)

These springs are a bargain....
Most interesting thread, read it all and it stayed 99.9% civil. Excellent considering the subject matter.

So about 6 months ago I experimented with springs under my 401 which is similar to noromance at about 55lb total weight.

There may have been a little more air at the top but to my ears it lost mid and bass impact. Not huge but enough to be noticeable.
Now to be fair these were springs I had bought on eBay after spending a lot of time with a spring calculator trying to make sure I got the best set-up.
Quite possibly I missed the mark.
Those springs are now under a sub.
Just ordered 2 sets of the Nobsound sets off Amazon at $32.99 a set.
These I can tune so now have options.
Many thanks guys!
There may have been a little more air at the top but to my ears it lost mid and bass impact. Not huge but enough to be noticeable.
This is a sign the springs were probably under not enough compression...

It takes me 4 trying to adjust the springs box nobsound....
@mijostyn
"When correct implementation of zero stiffness on loudspeakers is administered, there is no question of the superiority of this engineering practice on the voicing of the loudspeaker." (rixthetrick)

rixthetrick, What is zero stiffness? That is a term I have never heard before. How is superior when it comes to "voicing" a loudspeaker.

My father would have asked me if I'd bothered to look it up, before he'd answer such a complex question.

Zero stiffness:
http://www2.eng.cam.ac.uk/~sdg/preprint/OnZeroStiffness.pdf

As others have already mentioned, the effects of correctly implementing vibration isolation, is audibly heard. Correctly done, it's immediately recognized. And I don't need to prove it, you can do it for yourself, for really cheap. However, you need to know something about what you're doing.

For example the springs in your car/truck/motorcycle are rated specifically for that device. It smooths out the ride, it doesn't completely make it linear. Zero Stiffness is an ideal.

If you have electrostatic speakers (with their own limitations) or dipole speakers (with their own limitations) this is not likely (I would guess) to have nearly as much impact as an enclosure that is ported or sealed.

In most cases, I believe it's not the inertia of the small moving mass of the cone and voice coil that creates the most stored energy in a loudspeaker cabinet. I believe it is the sudden high and low pressure created by the drivers moving air within the cabinet (even a ported cabinet should see this pressure difference) that will deform the walls of the cabinet. It's not just pushing or pulling against the walls, it's doing both at a frequency that excites the cabinet.

Lewm mentioned transmission line woofers, I can see your logic,  and it makes sense. Have you tried isolation anyway?