Vibration Question

@pindac Now don't go giving me ideas!

@dogberry Put the stylus down on a stationary record and turn up the volume. Take a teaspoon and tap the oak around the turntable. You should not hear anything. 

Done. The pods holding the Grado are silent, as are those holding the Soundsmith. However, if I tap very hard (like percussing a chest, which I suppose I am, in a way) with two fingers I can hear something with the volume turned up to Quad-destruction levels in the case of the Soundsmith only. Maybe that is why the Soundsmith has discovered it has bass? Anyway, it is good enough for me.

I hear nothing at all with the cartridges mounted on the factory and custom mounts, even when I do the hard tap with two straight fingers.

The idea of checking for Kinetic Energies Influence is one I am familiar with through my own long term interest in using structural materials configured in varying assemblies and adding new permutations to the Structure, through new material type. Albeit, a new thickness of a liked material, a added layer of a liked material or a whole new material. Separator types used between tiers and Source are another area that has been given equally long term consideration and trials of options chosen.

This has evolved to the place where the considerations are to be seen being utilised under the Racking, on the Racking Shelving, and upon the top tiers of the racking.

I feel very confident the methodology used for Audio Equipment support has evolved to the place where little more benefits are to be discovered, especially now Phenolic Resin Impregnated Densified Wood is the latest material being introduced to take over the role of certain materials.

For many many years, I have tried to trip the support system up, through applying Kinetic Energy into the Vibration Sensitive components belonging to the system, i.e a Cartridge and a Valve.

Attempts to create a concerning sound from a Speaker through investigating the effects of natural ambient Kinetic Energy or a Artificial Applied Kinetic Energy has been for a long time, a condition that is present or able to be made present, that has not caused any concerns in relation to how it impacts on the system.

Across all forums the exact same topic can be seen discussed on occasion.

Not all contributors are making it known if audible concerns are present, but most contributors are keen to share methods adopted that are considered a improved methodology to support.

In this thread Two Individuals have made it Known they are not able to create an audible sound as a result of artificially creating Kinetic Energy to be transferred to the most sensitive receptors of such energy.

In my case as one individual reporting on artificially creating Kinetic Energy not being a concern and having spent many many hours learning about controls to contain the effects of Kinetic Energy presence. It seems quite strange that another who has seemingly adopted much lesser methods, has been able to report almost identical non concern.

In no way is this questioning the report of the outcome of investigating the TT with a Bipod TA support structure. I totally accept the findings being reported back to the individual who encouraged the investigation. 

The inquisitive side of myself asks. When having first discovered audible sound was not present when resulting from artificially applied Kinetic Energy, this area of Isolation Control was no longer a concern, this type of produced energy is semingly one that most can produce that is near equivalent.

Natural Present Kinetic Energy is not typical, it will vary Geographically and as a result of the local environments activity.   

How much of a influence has been the constant naturally present Kinetic Energy. Has the progressive and different methodologies selected to support audio equipment, over time proven to have been influential in bettering the end sound produced, through betterment to the Isolation method.

I am now and as have been on many occasions left to ponder, what has evolved,  to create the impression. Not much more benefits are to discovered, if the investigations and trials are continued, for discovering methodologies for equipment/component Isolation.

Which other influences from natural present Kinetic Energy on the end sound has been tidied up, as a result of the Support Structures I have been working with for a long period of their evolvement.

Which are the constant frequencies born from naturally present Kinetic Energy  that are through their transferral to the Styli / Valves, a detriment to the end sound, as a result of the impact being applied prior to the end sounds production.

Which frequencies (all that are present or a proportion ? ) through creating a purpose produced support structure, are the frequencies that have been tidied up in relation to their influence being evaluated on the audio systems end sound.   

Then there is the question I have made on occasions and not received an answer that satisfies. Is a dedicated Platform such as a MinusK capable of being the correct method to Isolate all unwanted frequencies in all environments. I ask this as I have worked in Laboratories at the time of their construction, and have seen the pre screed works carried out as a means to be a measure to improve Vibration control.  This seems excessive measures when the critical instrument already has its own Independent Vibration Control Plinth on the bench.        

The chest is old and crudely made, with a very thick top, and seasoned since sometime in the 1600s. But undoubtedly, you are right, @pindac, there must be effects of percussing a drum-like surface like the top of it. Given that the top of the chest must vibrate somewhat on being struck, how can there be little or no sound revealed by the cartridge? I assume the fact the pods are sitting on spikes is helping decouple them from the surface - a mechanical isolator rather than one resulting from material science.

But I suppose the practical question is whether my ear can hear the resulting vibrations as transmitted to the cartridge, and I’ll be the first to admit my hearing is compromised, having one ear with about 50% sensitivity in it, and the other totally dead. So if I can hear nothing through the cartridges mounted on the built-in mounts on the percussion test, and nothing through the Grado on the pods, I can say that it works as well as I need it to do. The Soundsmith though does give a faint noise in the speakers, presumably because its cantilever and iron is lighter than that of the Grado (I’m making that assumption because it is a low-output MI, and the Grado is not. Probably most of the reduction in output comes from fewer turns in the fixed coils, but that alone offers no advantage over a high output MI: Peter Ledermann must be using lighter iron on the cantilever as well to make his "MIMC" cartridges because that is what makes them sound different). But this is with the pre-amp turned all the way up, and I would typically play an LP with the volume set to 15-20% of maximum. At that level I can strike the chest and hear nothing. Even so, I think you are right, and not just on theoretical grounds, because the Soundsmith sounds different to the way it sounded on the built-in mount. The Soundsmith initially was a disappointment to me when I bought it as a candidate to replace the Decca. It was so neutral and uncoloured (qualities that actually make it a very good cartridge) it did not get my feet tapping. I found I could improve my response to it with various resistive loadings—lots available on the NuVista Vinyl—and then discovered it sounded equally pleasing via the SUT. But it is a different beast on the bipod; there is more bass and this must be related to the new mount, and that must imply some vibration feeding back into the cartridge. Anathema to some, but I like it! If I am 'making a virtue of necessity' as the old phrase had it, so be it.

Thank you for your detailed response, as always.