Component Isolation

Its been a fruitful month, Ive had several breakthroughs that really took my system to another level, and all 3 of them I wouldnt have thought would do much.



The latest thing I tried are some decent Isoacoustics Footers underneath my speaker stands. Im using a pair of 3 way bookshelves that weigh about 28lbs on top of stands that weigh around 35 lbs. I already had the stands on spikes so I just replaced them with the Gaia 3 pucks. To be honest I noticed a small difference but it wasnt anything to write home about. Slightly better bass resolution from less floor excitement.



But I was reading about component isolation and one person was saying that the best results come from using isolators, a platform and then another set of isolators directly touching the component. The important thing is that the mass of the platform is greater than the component and so theres a grounding effect where the component vibrations are 'pulled' into the platform and away from the mass. I had another set of pucks lying around so I tried putting another set on top of my speaker platforms and I was shocked how much better everything sounded. Imaging and soundstaging improved dramatically.

Putting my hand on the speaker I feel much less vibration while its playing. The most surprising thing was the improvements in the midrange. I was expecting bass but 300-800hz I could hear the biggest improvement.



Doing sweeps my speakers show much less bass below 100hz and yet it sounds like theres more. So Im now a big believer.



Im thinking about trying to build a platform for my DAC and AMP to see if that makes a difference and I was hoping someone here could give me pointers on how to calculate the best platform mass. I heard it needs to be more but does it matter how much more? Also Ive heard using 3 points of contact on the component is better than 4.
 
Hey nice to see your phase!


Yeah isolation definitely makes a difference on speakers, juries still oout for me on components. But as in the post above the real difference was noticed after the second layer of isolation with the mass in between. Most platforms Ive seen sold for this purpose dont have nearly the mass I think might be required, I suppose shipping would be the main concern.


something like this (d):
wNEMamgeaXeKQAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==
 

Attachments

  • a.png
    a.png
    197.1 KB · Views: 152
That's a cool image, it explains the ideas very nicely. I may have to do some experiments myself. I agree, high mass is important and that suggests it should be 'manufactured at home' since it avoids paying for high shipping costs for something that should be trivial to DIY.

How about concrete pavers from the local Home Depot store, wrapped in something nice ?

How the heck would you isolate a very heavy speaker ?
Let's say that spikes into a floating wood floor were not acceptable - but you have a very heavy speaker. Is a sufficiently heavy speaker (150lbs or more) self-isolating?
 
Last edited:
Paving stones...my thoughts exactly! I really dont have enough knowledge of physics to answer your question about whether a 150lb speaker would be self isolating, but I dont think so. Ground borne vibrations happen from earthquakes inside the earth constantly and can move mountains...so I dont think our speakers have a chance of being completely stable.



I used to think that such minute effects would make zero difference, until I started using the Gaia's underneath my Kef's and I saw the difference they make.



When you consider a tweeter for example might move only 0.5 microns at 5khz you can see how even tiny perturbations could affect the soundfield. That got me really interested in whats possible, if for nothing else than scientific curiosity.



AND...what affect does vibration have on components? My next experiment will be using bearings in cups, similar to the rediculously overpriced 'rollerblocks' that cost $500 a set. I ordered 10 G10 quality bearings of ebay for $5 plus shipping...I have an (possibly) interesting idea for a cup that I'll share with you all after I try it out.
 
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
^ good idea about balls and cups. For a better use use isostatic arangement ( triangle, the most stable) and take a look at earthquake protection devices for inspiration. And use two cups by ball or you may run into trouble...

But they will only be effective on z and x axis ( and twisted vectors in those axis) you'll need another way to deal with vertical axis ( y). Sorbothane can be good. Sub inflated kid's bike tyre inner tube can work great and at very low freq ( 1hz and below)but you'll need to check them often as they empty themself under those conditions. If you have children or pets forget the idea...

Yes vibration may have an effect on components. By how much is the real question ( if you use tubes there is no question about microphony, smd may not be as sensible but it could be).
This have to be tested.
 
Last edited:
When you consider a tweeter for example might move only 0.5 microns at 5khz you can see how even tiny perturbations could affect the soundfield. That got me really interested in whats possible, if for nothing else than scientific curiosity.

Actually, this makes sense since a vibrating tweeter, means that the magnet is moving wrt the listener and this can create Doppler effects. (simply having multiple frequencies playing through a cone doesn't create Doppler effects because it requires relative motion between the magnet and listener)


My next experiment will be using bearings in cups, similar to the rediculously overpriced 'rollerblocks'

I'm not familiar with overpriced rollerblocks, do you have an image of what you are proposing ?

you'll need another way to deal with vertical axis ( y). Sorbothane can be good. Sub inflated kid's bike tyre inner tube can work great and at very low freq ( 1hz and below)but you'll need to check them often as they empty themself under those conditions. .

Perhaps this inner-tube idea could work for my 150lbs speakers ?
 
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
I'm not familiar with overpriced rollerblocks, do you have an image of what you are proposing ?

Single Pendulum | Earthquake Protection Systems | United States

Imagine the lower part (cup) duplicated for upper part too and the use of a non truncated sphere. Position the system at angles of a triangle (with the 'cups' fixed to a plate to keep their relative position the same if movement happen).

With the correct curve for the cups you can have very low oscilation frequency ( sub 1hz). At this frequency of oscillation there is a high Q so the system can oscillate for a lonnnnnggg time, but once you go up in freq you are effectively decoupled ( transmission is null). Think about the graphical representation of a low pass filter with high Q ( resonance on a synthesizer filter for example).

The material used needs to be ( very) hard and the ball to be the most spherical possible.

Perhaps this inner-tube idea could work for my 150lbs speakers ?

Theorically there is no reason it can't work: the inner tube is just an approximation of the air suspension systems used in industry (eg: to decouple lab responsible of quality control from vibration generated by gear used in factory). The interest of air suspension is that very low oscillation freq are possible ( here again sub hz is possible).

The real issue is to have the inner tubes inflated to same value for a stereo pair. And inner tubes deflates themself with time...

I've used it for mic stands and it works. Others have used it for loudspeakers: Barry Diament use this ( with the earthquake device) under his Magnepan loudspeakers.

Vibration control for better performance
 
Last edited:
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
I agree this part is difficult for me too.

But the guy is really a reference in mastering field and his work is recognized worldwide ( take a look at his credits, that talk by itself... and his approach is unconventional: no compressors or limiters used! This is a radical approach to mastering in this days, as well as his recording using only a Jecklin couple).

Of course it isn't an excuse to such claims but who knows... maybe he is one of a kind which is 'hyper sensitive'? I don't know.

Anyway he doesn't try to sell something to you so i give him the benefit of doubt on this. Or maybe i'm too naive? :D

Anyway, if you are into component isolation then try what he advice, you don't have to spend a lot of money for a test and ime it is worth the effort just for the sake of curiosity.

I was sceptical at first but heard the 'seismic device' in action under loudspeakers and differents components ( AD, DA, some studio tools,...) and was surprised by outcome.

Under loudspeakers the effects wasn't subtile. We were a crew of trained listeners ( audio engineers) and some disliked the effect ( it 'clean' the low end) but we all agreed there was something at play and not placebo. Under hardware it was less obvious on some units more on others.

The inner tube i used for drum rec to decouple the overhead couple and here again the effect wasn't subtile to me. I've not tried both system together but i plan to do so one day or another.
 
Report:


So I picked up some second hand bearing isolators and they came in the mail today. Got 2 sets of 3. Theyre basically just a top and bottom disc with a dimple
in the middle in which sits a 3/8" metal bearing. So I stuck one under my dac and one under my tube amp. Did they make a difference? Yep.


I'll do my best to describe the undescribable:


I have some amateur studio experience and alot of listening experience so I think I can pick up on some of the more subtle qualities. I would say that a slight bit of haze has been removed, presumably a tiny bit of high frequency distortion from vibration. While it is subtle it is noticeable.



I think that this is all cumulative. Doing the dac, amp, speakers, power supply etc all contribute. These incredibly delicate cues from high frequencies give the sound a more stable presentation that allows your brain to better create a soundstage image. So ultimately Im a believer in vibration isolation now.



NOW...I still think that this is a tweak you should do for cheap. I think that the asking price of alot of these units are rediculous and Im thinking of ways to create bearing cups for next to no money. You can get the very high quality bearings off of amazon for $5. Im going to experiment with G5 ceramic bearings as well. Im not sure that smoothness will actually create more performance however..



The idea of smoother and smoother bearings is that they reduce friction on the cups and thereby raise the frequency of isolation. However past 10khz this isnt as audible. Also Im not sure the bearings work in all dimensions so Im thinking about using them in conjunction with a spring platform to get up and down isolation as well. But if you havent tried bearings, give it a shot YMMV
 
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Your observations are more than less inline with my own.

Have you tried under your loudspeakers? This was the most obvious place to me and others too.

I agree about cumulative effect, but like Bigun, i'm still doubtful about power strips, i'm not for components but it is variable some will gain others not.

That said i disagree on certain points you made:
there is gain to have the most perfect spheres in the hardest material you can find. This is true for the cups too.

First because materials have different spec relative to load they are able to withstand. Of course for something in the 5 to 10kg range it would not matter a lot but for heavy loudspeakers it is a concern.

Second because the more spherical and hard the ball is, the less friction it have. In the same spirit the cups should be as hard and smooth as possible for the same reason.

This doesn't rise the freq of oscillation, this parameter is defined by the curve the cup have, but it lessen the damping friction apply.

It can seems anecdotical but it is not as it gives more decoupling ( in my analogy to a low pass filter with high Q it rise the Q parameter and the higher it is the more decoupling you'll have).

The freq of oscillation is defined as a simple pendulum as can be seen there:

Oscillation of a Simple Pendulum

I have some documents about all this, i'll dig in my archive.

That said i agree there is no need to spend a lot to try it, but if you are convinced by the effect it may be interesting to optimise this and sadly it'll cost money fast ( ceramic balls with fine tolerances are pricey, if you want the freq of isolation to be low ( around 1hz or below) you'll need to make them using a lathe but able to work with hard material ( mechanical bronze) which cost too and then polish them...

Yes you may need another way to tame in the y (vertical) axis. Springs can work but they are not easily found with resonance in the freq of interest for us ime.

I repeat what i already said: sorbothane is easier to implement and effective in approximately the same freq range as springs.
 
Krivium,


Thanks I enjoy your insights. Ok I'll just spill my crazy idea...


I was thinking of super smooth cups to use for bearings and an image popped
into my mind...well not an image exactly, but the lens that creates it!


What do you think of using concave 50mm lenses? They are made to extreme
tight tolerances because light has to pass through them undistorted. And they're super smooth. Of course the strength isnt as much as tungsten, but you can buy them premade.
 

Attachments

  • 444.png
    444.png
    493.9 KB · Views: 90
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
I've found a graph explaining the effect of damping on decoupling:

Vibration isolation - Wikipedia

As can be seen there is a peak at res freq ( the system will oscilate for long time) but once you past above the transmission decrease fast and steep. This is what you are looking for.

About lens: yes it could work but you may run into trouble about load. That said if you can have them for cheap why not try?

The issue is you won't have control on the freq of oscillation.
Don't you have some friends which are metal workers and have access to a lathe?
 
Last edited:
Yup ordered some lenses already at $17 a piece. Not entirely cheap still $102 plus the bearings for a set but still much cheaper than the high performance alternatives. Of course I dont know if they work yet!


Im not too worried about load for say, a 40lb components. The lenses I ordered are 18mm thick so each should be able to support 15lbs I would think. But maybe they'll crack with vibration I dont know yet.
 
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
I don't know if there is an optimum size.

I think there must be an optimal relationship between diameter and the cup profile but i may be wrong... but here are my thoughts about a practical implementation: the smaller the diameter the less contact with the cup it should be so these should reduce damping and focus pressure point ( makes the connection to ground 'better', the same effect that spike coud have, increase coupling to ground).

If you can have the cups custom build to spec it could help to secure the system: with a 'step' ( of height a little bigger than ball's diameter) on the edge of the cup, with a max displacement you can avoid the ball to slip off the cups.

With loudspeakers it should be mandatory imho.

I don't know if you see what i mean?

Edit: check the first link in this, study the blue parts in the schem to explain the principle, the step is implemented as they don't want the building to fall off!
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/room-acoustics-and-mods/378433-component-isolation.html#post6828948
 
Last edited:
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Yes it is science. I'm all for it too. :yes:

The thing is often there is a mix up in peoples mind about decoupling and damping.
Those are different phenomena but both works for different purposes... earthquake and Tokyo's skyscrappers is a real life example the science behind it ( decoupling) is ok. :D
 
Last edited:
Update,



Curiosity got the better of me and I decided to try the bearings underneath my bookshelf speakers instead of the Iso pucks. They made an even bigger difference than underneath the dac and tube amp. I think I prefer the bearings to the isopucks. I still have them on the gaia's underneath the stands but on top of the stand I put the bearings. Of course you have to be careful that a child or pet doesnt knock them over. Very risky ! :D


Marked improvement in transients and a feeling of 'thereness' or 'solidity' in the sound. I too loath these awfully subjective terms but not sure how else to put it.



Im ashamed to say I didnt make these but the guy who i bought them off of had a friend make these with a lathe. I think they're just aluminum
 

Attachments

  • 111.jpg
    111.jpg
    545 KB · Views: 120
  • 2222.jpg
    2222.jpg
    451.9 KB · Views: 117
Last edited: