Vibrations control

Hi all,

I’m wondering if someone knows something about this subject or has made some testing with wood blocks (or spikes) under a Bartók or a Rossini Player. Or is there a theory about this ? With all the gears I’ve owned, it has always bought an improvement to put the chassis on Cardas Myrtle Blocks. Now, I know that the control of vibrations has been carefully studied and addressed during the conception of these high-end gears — dCS is dCS, isn’t it? —, but it doesn’t mean that there’s nothing more to be gained. So, a more precise question would be: where is the best position for wood blocks (my preference over spikes, so far) ? One under each foot ? The body resting on three blocks ? Two in front, one in the back ? Or the opposite ?

Thank you for your ideas and/or experiences.

There is no fixed answer to this . You have to think of the support system as a whole. Not only may the position of the block under the base of the dCS component alter the resulting sound but this may also vary in accordance with their position in relation to the equipment shelf and the resonance pattern produced there. This , in turn, may also change in accordance with the type of supporting frame ( which is, no doubt, coupled to your floor which will also bring its own qualities to the outcome !).

Various members here have tried all sorts of footers under Bartoks. Rossinis and Vivaldis. You can look through the archives to find their postings but I don’t think that there is any real consistency with the results to the extent as to make a universal recommendation.

So you can only try various positions or even various types of support ( bear in mind that some are couplers and some decouplers) until you feel best pleased.

Place them under the transformers.

I agree with @PAR, own experimentation is needed. To give examples - with my Ansuz feet, four pieces under each device were too much and constricted the music, three worked. Two in the back and one in front were better than two in front and one in the back. I guess due to the extra resonance source - cables. Now with the Ansuz Titanium rack I removed the Ansuz feet under each individual device entirely. Just the rack with the devices directly on the wood shelves was better.

Interesting, this implies there are “good vibrations”

I’m out of my depth when it comes to the details of mechanical grounding. Experience tells me there is a ‘too much’ with most tuning.

Earlier this year I spoke for an hour with the head of a US company that makes isolation control products. For pretty technical reasons, he uses mechanical grounding rather than materials such as elastomer or wood. Basically his goal was to get the component to sound as true as possible to how the designer wanted it to sound, and not add any coloration. I asked if people every returned his products because they didn’t like the sound. He said one customer returned a product because it gave the component too much bass. Another customer returned the exact same product because it made the component have too little bass.

If you really want vibration control the engineering has to be pretty heroic compared to the little devices like footers sold to the audiophile world.

Here are two brands that do what they say on the tin:

Andre , perhaps it was to one of those who you were speaking to?

1 Like

The company I mentioned makes products a bit more simple than that. These products are another level for sure. I remember when audiophiles started using the Vibraplane (isolation intended for electron microscopes and other scientific equipment) under turntables.

In regard to vibration control and turntables at least one of the new Mark Döhmann 'tables has the Minus K technoolgy already built in - a bit OT for this forum but there you go:


Exactly what vibrations are causing problems?

Anyway, not these ones :grinning:

1 Like