How an audio rack can enhance your amp/pre




Just thought I would share my recent experience with upgrading my sound star technologies rack to the new rhythm rack.

Every now and then, I have a visiting audiophile who really appreciates my system…and traditionally asks – “wow, what makes it sound so good?” My typical answer is it all makes a difference, even down the equipment rack, which can and certainly should be considered a component…but in many cases is overlooked…

Star Sound introduction

About 10 years ago, I was introduced to Star Sound Technologies Sistrum platforms and Audio Points. Audiopoints has always been known for its manufacture of well-designed and beautifully manufactured brass cones used under equipment and as an integral part of an audio stand. This ultimately led to the design of stands designed to transfer vibrations out of components and down to ground. What I didn’t know at the time was how good the Sistrum platforms ‘sounded’. So, I bit the bullet and tried several Sistrum Platforms - what intrigued me about the stands was the design of the Sistrum Platform which allowed a pre-determined pattern of energy, known as Coulomb Friction to develop and dissipate via a high-speed calculated conductive pathway to earth's ground. Which made sense…how do you deal with airborne energy dissipation? I know you could put cones to reduce vibrations from the ‘ground up’ so to speak, but how could you eliminate airborne vibration? We’ve all held our hand on our equipment when music is playing only to feel the equipment vibrate, so how do you deal with it? Draining it quickly to ground made sense, but at the end of the day, all I really wanted to know was…does it improve the sound?

To say I was shocked is an understatement - the Original Sistrum Platforms offered – smoother sound, better transients, dynamics and a lower noise floor. And, the cool part is that you could turn up the sound and the music would flow with greater ease…well worth the investment. Robert at Star Sound was extremely helpful in guiding me through which racks made the most sense for my system.

Rhythm Platforms

Which brings me to 2015…it had been a while since I last spoke with Robert curious as to what his engineering team was up to…which led me to check out the ‘new’ model of Sistrum Stands – the Sistrum Rhythm Platforms.

These new platforms / shelves were substantially heavier, with a nicer overall finish than the original stands, with more grooves allowing for substantially more options to place points in various places under your equipment to refine the sound even further. In addition, the shelves were engineered to deal with resonances in a more efficient manner…The brass cones at the bottom of the rack were substantially bigger in size - 3 inches and quite heavy. The brass cones under the equipment were attached with nicely crafted screws that could be hand tightened and no longer required a screw driver… a nice feature making it both easier to put together but also the amount of tightening could influence the sound. The brass and platform rods are modular, making it easier to put together and painted in a beautiful black finish – in combination with the brass I would say the improvement in the WAF factor is significant – the stands are really impressive to look at. As for structure, these things were a solid as could be – and heavy! Not going anywhere, even in an earthquake!

My system includes VAC equipment, preamp, amps, DAC and a transport. As well as power supplies. Most of which now rested on the new Rhythm Platform.

Listening Impressions:

My first impressions were clearly a lower noise floor with enhanced dynamics, while also being able to hear deeper into the soundstage, which now extended well outside of the speakers. Tempo was faster, due to better-defined, leading edges. The high end was ‘cleaner’, with more sheen and decay on symbols and hi hats. Brass had that right bite to it, without over doing it…Bass lines were tighter which led to better ‘rhythm’ … and best of all, I could crank up the volume and the dynamic range seemed to extend effortlessly, which was a nice surprise.

One thing I noticed, that was true of my initial experience with Sistrum Platforms, is that the newer Rhythm Platforms sounded progressively better after 3 days of ‘settling’ and reached full potential after about 1 week. So some form of break in is required.
Over the years, I’ve tried different racks and various cones under equipment, whether if be soft, hard, ceramic, rubber (or some variation of ‘absorbing material’ etc.) you name it. All of which ‘altered’ the sound, but nothing came close to the Sistrum Stands holistically; while the new Rhythm stands, just take it all to a higher level…
While I cannot expound eloquently on science of Coulomb’s Friction, I can tell you that whatever they are doing at Star Sound visa vie their racks, it works…and it’s not subtle. This is a very audible improvement in your listening experience. If you want your system to perform at its highest level, I would suggest that you maximize your investment in your equipment by letting it do what it does best and put it on a Sistrum rack that will allow it to perform at its best. And if you want the best, I would strongly recommend the Rhythm Platforms.
wisper
07-23-15: Atmasphere
however we do Not agree with your comment “proven effective for the past 6 decades”. If you are implying ‘sixty years’ of vibration management in audio;

To the best of our knowledge:

Audio Points was the second ever conical shaped product in the audio marketplace and began selling in 1988. Tip Toes was the first and began selling in late 1987. In the mid 1990’s audio racking was still largely referred to as furniture. We can trace the first absorption stands using sand, lead and rubber based systems from companies such as Zoethecus and Bright Star along with the first mechanical grounding racks from RoomTune and Sound Anchors to the early 90’s. The Sistrum Platforms™ release was in 2000 and was the first audio racking system marketed bearing the name recognition as a “platform”.

You might want to take a look at my prior posts. As I mentioned in them, my Scully LP mastering lathe employs a heavy steel table which has adjustable points built into its feet. It was made in the late 1940s. Upon the table is a special vibration-damping platform, on which the lathe itself resides. The lathe has three feet, all quite pointed and adjustable which engage cups built into the platform.

So this use of points precedes the Mod Squad by about 3 decades and change.

It is incorrect to say you can't get rid of vibration. A proper vibration damping system translates vibration into heat. I use Ultra Resolution Technologies platforms which were developed by Warren Gehl (currently at ARC; he also designed a very effective platter pad for damping resonance in LPs; although very effective neither product is still in production) and they have proven quite effective. Platforms are also used beneath powerful microscopes for the same purpose and are shown to be quite effective- so much so that some audiophiles have used the same platforms in their home systems.

Robert's statement was correct IMO. The products that translate vibration into heat are not perfect. Their are active products as you mentioned that are analogs of what is used in the world of SEM (http://cgim.audiogon.com/i/vs/i/f/1371914466.jpg) and may have some merit, but I know people who have used them and converted to Sistrum. Furthermore, you cannot easily translate that technology for products that really vibrate like speakers, subs, and walls. ):

Do you amps run cooler on those stands? Why did they go out of production?

Hello Atmasphere,

Sorry for missing your previous thread information on the cutting lathe and hopefully we stand corrected.

Are you sure the cones were not used as a truer means of leveling and stability requirements or were actually designed for vibration management purposes? It is long recognized that cones positioned into a cup provides a more efficient means for restricting slippage and movement.

We would really appreciate it if you could refer us to any information where Scully quantifies this system was designed as a method of vibration management. This would be the first documentation we have ever come across pre 60’s related to our studies.

Our answer to your previous writing with regards to vibration was ‘specific’ in that you cannot “eliminate” vibration. However your new statement is correct with regards to “getting rid of vibration” by converting the vibration into heat. Conversion through multilayered damping is a well applied methodology but we find those techniques to be a much slower process in comparison to our approach.

Star Sound’s adaptation is to transfer resonance at high-speed via conductive pathways away from the source of vibration keeping everything related to and the signal in constant motion. The earliest research we found on Resonance Energy Transfer was published in the IBM Journal dated 1968 titled - The Resonistor - A Frequency Selective Device Utilizing the Mechanical Resonance of a Silicon Substrate by R. J. Wilfinger, P. H. Bardell and D. S. Chhabra.

Regards to the microscope isolation tables, Bell Engineers improved the techniques of stabilizing electron microscopes during the development of the world’s first transistor production line implemented by Western Electric, Allentown PA in 1951.I know this statement to be accurate as it was a principal project my father participated in. We understand and definitely relate to why isolation tables were developed but have issues with their applications in audio reproduction where sub-harmonic frequencies and chassis micro motion play an extremely small role related to musical instruments and the audible range of human hearing.

The only comparisons in performance we have obtained related to these devices used in audio was provided by Norm Luttbeg who recently published a review on the Rhythm Platform for StereoTimes Magazine and Ddraudt a well experienced audiophile here on AudioGon. I am sure you can contact both of them for their opinions.

We have discovered situations where a science and product developed for minimizing vibration dedicated to other purposes such as microscopes, heavy machinery, underwater or flight research or building foundations related to earthquakes generally does not provide sonic results that one might imagine when applied in conjunction with audio equipment and listening environments.

It has become obvious to us that there is a great deal of information and technology yet to be discovered and understood linking the various sciences of vibration control to a common single understanding especially when it boils down to personal opinions on likes and dislikes when listening to or making music.

Robert Maicks
Star Sound Technologies, LLC
"Star Sound’s adaptation is to transfer resonance at high-speed via conductive pathways away from the source of vibration keeping everything related to and the signal in constant motion." Hmmm…a line certainly worthy of any Faith Based Audio mythology discussion as it makes exactly ZERO sense…what also mystifies me is that there is any connection between claims of lowering the temperature of amps and providing profound tempo improvement using pointy things stuck to racks (!), and damping unwanted vibration in lathes and microscopes (necessary), except as it applies to the History of Damping. I do think the cello spike could make a great barbecue skewer though…and has the added benefit of making burnt food sound better. Underwater Earthquake Flight Research notwithstanding, I anxiously await the results of "further research" into the science of how vibration control (read my paper, "Microscopes and Subwoofers, a Paradox in Waiting"…Merkel Press $2.95) yields a "common single understanding" boiling down to "personal opinions on likes and dislikes when listening to or making music." Seriously, statements like can provide me with what surfing genius George Greenough described as "the innermost limits of pure fun."
07-24-15: Wolf_garcia
"Star Sound’s adaptation is to transfer resonance at high-speed via conductive pathways away from the source of vibration keeping everything related to and the signal in constant motion." Hmmm…a line certainly worthy of any Faith Based Audio mythology discussion as it makes exactly ZERO sense…what also mystifies me is that there is any connection between claims of lowering the temperature of amps and providing profound tempo improvement using pointy things stuck to racks (!), and damping unwanted vibration in lathes and microscopes (necessary), except as it applies to the History of Damping. I do think the cello spike could make a great barbecue skewer though…and has the added benefit of making burnt food sound better. Underwater Earthquake Flight Research notwithstanding, I anxiously await the results of "further research" into the science of how vibration control (read my paper, "Microscopes and Subwoofers, a Paradox in Waiting"…Merkel Press $2.95) yields a "common single understanding" boiling down to "personal opinions on likes and dislikes when listening to or making music." Seriously, statements like can provide me with what surfing genius George Greenough described as "the innermost limits of pure fun."

Wofly, there are several engineers who are part of the SS conglomerate (http://www.audiopoints.com/aboutUs.php), so maybe we can get one of them to chime in for a more exhaustive discussion? They typically don't waste time with these forums, but it might be worthwhile since this subject is treated with such scorn by many without backgrounds in mechanical engineering.

Robert told me that back in the 60s and 70s, one of the primary prerequisites to getting a sound "engineering" gig was long hair. Was that part of your pedigree? :)

As for the temperature thing, I have made personal observations to that extent. Maybe its a matter of simple ventilation, etc. Who knows. I know Robert did measurements.
Appreciate the info and review of these racks. Vibration control is an important part of getting the most out of your system.

Thanks