If any, I'd put the spikes according to your left drawing, as the drivers usually are bolted to the front baffle, thus locating the center of gravity next to the front.
Best regards!
Best regards!
Perhaps you should enclose your speakers in pyramids?
Joking about expensive gimmicks aside, I'd like to comment more positively on speakers. I used to put heavy cinderblocks on my subs to help anchor them. Not able to do measurements at the time but maybe somebody could now.
Probably good idea to rigidify but you'd need three sharp spikes sticking into your floor and a cinderblock to do much good, as previous posters said. Any speaker power that ends up shaking the box has to be in weird ways and therefore has to be all distortion.
Not likely that 4 spikes would be co-planar or that a flat box would be either. So good to use some kind of firm but rubberiferous gasket sheeting to accommodate irregularities in seating the speaker on the floor.... assuming that's the right height.
What does make a lot of difference is moving speakers around - even just a foot - because that can cause big changes in performance. But you can't do that kind of improvement without REW to measure incremental changes.
B.
Joking about expensive gimmicks aside, I'd like to comment more positively on speakers. I used to put heavy cinderblocks on my subs to help anchor them. Not able to do measurements at the time but maybe somebody could now.
Probably good idea to rigidify but you'd need three sharp spikes sticking into your floor and a cinderblock to do much good, as previous posters said. Any speaker power that ends up shaking the box has to be in weird ways and therefore has to be all distortion.
Not likely that 4 spikes would be co-planar or that a flat box would be either. So good to use some kind of firm but rubberiferous gasket sheeting to accommodate irregularities in seating the speaker on the floor.... assuming that's the right height.
What does make a lot of difference is moving speakers around - even just a foot - because that can cause big changes in performance. But you can't do that kind of improvement without REW to measure incremental changes.
B.
Last edited:
+2 to Pallas and bifor , and as I think Ben is saying, securely anchoring / "coupling" with spikes through carpet into either wooden or concrete sub-floor or directly to the floor itself is not as easy as you might like hope.
It's been my experience that mass loading the bottom of the enclosure with either sand / birdshot pellets, or quartz slab glued with silicone, and more importantly finding the right location will yield more benefits than spikes. And yes, it's way too easy to damage very expensive carpet or wooden flooring with spikes.
But, if you really want to try them, I'd go with #1
It's been my experience that mass loading the bottom of the enclosure with either sand / birdshot pellets, or quartz slab glued with silicone, and more importantly finding the right location will yield more benefits than spikes. And yes, it's way too easy to damage very expensive carpet or wooden flooring with spikes.
But, if you really want to try them, I'd go with #1
Rivers of words but no answer to my question about the three schemas shown in the figure.
probably you don't know the exact answer, thanks anyway
probably you don't know the exact answer, thanks anyway
nr1 with soundcare superspikes
Most stable, most weight is on the frontpanel with the drivers.
But with soundcare superspikes you can install four of them because they're easily adjusted by hand.
Most stable, most weight is on the frontpanel with the drivers.
But with soundcare superspikes you can install four of them because they're easily adjusted by hand.
Having to ask help for such a Very simple question .. speaks volumes in itself. Being snarky.. only adds to the initial impression 😉
thank you
why the solution 3 is not recommended ?
about my point of view it break vibrations and resonances in three different points.
i'm wrong ?
Triangle found that getting as much load as possible under the baffle was the deciding factor for $2. If you want more stability, stretching out the rear width with outriggers would be helpful.
Arrangement #3 i just find strange. #1 is the one that, with little thot, makes the most sense.
dave
Arrangement #3 i just find strange. #1 is the one that, with little thot, makes the most sense.
dave
I think Bare and Scott rolled a Yahtzee here - both Kay and Danny gave a pretty logical reason in their replies
Not aware of Triangle's research - any URL for that, Dave? Note that the separate stands they market have 4 adjustable spikes on the metal base plates
http://www.triangle-fr.com/en/pieds
Not aware of Triangle's research - any URL for that, Dave? Note that the separate stands they market have 4 adjustable spikes on the metal base plates
http://www.triangle-fr.com/en/pieds
Not without a lot of search, it came out of a magazine article on visiting the Triangle factory… and if you think back, i got you to rotate the metal bases you made for the Elipses from #1 to #2 so the idea has crossed by you 🙂
dave
Yet if the baffle were on the left, then the most logical.
Go ahead and use the spikes if you desire diypass. It may look nicer and they may not degrade the sound enough for you to notice. Just make sure it's on a carpeted surface.
Yes, that certainly suited the aesthetics of the wide curved baffle, and as you alluded earlier the base plates were actually extended to form a wide triangular footprint
Hard to discern in the photos, but the two part "spikes" from Parts Express have a removable threaded tip, which allows use of Feltac self adhesive felt glides.
Attachments
Last edited:
No, it's the worst if the centre of gravity is where everyone is assuming it to be, unless, of course, you have it somewhere other than towards the front in the middle
- Status
- Not open for further replies.