active vibration management

i have to say

that my issues with this conversation is that people don't start from the stand point that they want to listen to music.
there is to much psuedo physics and theorys and not enough real life science.
cars cornering has very little to do with measuring 2 45 degree wobbly walls.
even more so people who have already decided that digital is better are not the people who should be discussing turntables.
for what itsworth i think nick will now be taking even more care about the items he has dismissed.
making something really heavy does not make it sound better.
there is more to it than that otherwise we could support everthing on the floor.
anything with mass can be excited by another mass and vice versa it is physics.
we affect the sun and the sun affects us.
it is quite easy to grasp.
now go back to my last post and try holding your turntable while it is playing and tell me why you think it sounds wrong and wowie !
do you all think that by increasing the mass of your speakers drive units you wil get a better sound.
i thought so !
who understands true physics on here.

 

Sorry but IMO it is not, there is an enormous difference between choosing a transducer with colouration to taste and choosing a support that allows the equipment to function as intended.

But I will sign off now. It is clear that you are a man who will defend his corner regardless of position until such time as an arguement errupts. I do not intend to get to that stage!

 

Not me

 

SM - this is not an argument it is a discussion and has so far been civil and I would hope to keep it that way. However I find it somewhat frustrating that you and AK are not giving me technical arguments in support of your position. This is why I keep fighting my corner as you have not really given me an opposing rationale other than saying you think active isolation is snake oil, even after I copied the thread. Dont be so quick to judge - if you can provide me with a compelling argument then I will take it on board. I will defend my position tenaciously but not dogmatically. Doesnt a cartridge allow the deck and arm to function as intended?

Daryl - I absolutely agree with your comments concerning mass. The active SEM isolation solution I was looking at previously didnt have a granite top for exactly those reasons, as both granite and marble ring like a bell in the most sensitive part of the audio spectrum at the dimensions likely to be used for a support. I come from a theoretical physics background for what its worth ;-). I spent quite a bit of time actually trawling the web for the physical properties of all these materials and eventually reached the same decision that you have.

 

I should think not.

 

Nick my argument is according to you, Mr brinkman sells a £10000 record player that only gives 50% of its performance if placed on a Normal Hifi rack, if you can't see the folly in this, then there is no hope for you. now had you said that you could eek a further snall percentage in performance with different isolation we wouldn't be having this converstaion, but you insist that the manufacturer makes it this way, if that is the case then, I'm sorry I agree with SM, the manufacturer is selling an unfinished compromised product.

So why do I need tehnical reasons to argue this?

It's either bunkum made up by you as you think you have the biggest and best toy (you don't by the way I reckon titians has more willy wavin rights), and folks have questioned it's performance, or the manufacturer is even more deluded than you.

Fwiw I know which one it's more likely to be

I'll leave you to your delusions, there is no hope for you

 

What analogue kid said.

No technical back-up required here really, it all seems like plain common sense to me.

Jon

 

Ak - its all about the final performance, if the brinkmann on the right rack beats a deck which isnt sensitive on any rack you choose then the BL is the deck for me. I dont care how I get to the end point all I care about is results. The TSS makes a big difference so I am speculating that an active isolation solution might make an even bigger one which is why I posted this thread. By your own admission you cant hear any difference between decks when they manifestly sound very different so I wonder what this opinion is adding to the discussion. Your point seems to be that Mr B should include the support in the price which isnt really relevent to sound quality or the topic of this thread concerning isolation. As you have never I assume tested a deck with a TSS or active isolation then your basis for saying it is snake oil doesnt seem to be based in experience. You also havent heard the BL I presume. Its just your conjecture and you have put forward no technical explanantion with which to support your view in the absence of experience. I am afraid you require either one or the other, so you dont "know" what the outcome will be. This is what seperates scientists from pub experts. Plenty of things run contrary to common sense - just look at general relativity and quantum theory.

Non-suspended and non-decoupled decks require external isolation - if you dont like it then its your choice not to buy one. It is not unfinished or compromised, it seeks to avoid the compromises of suspended decks which I have detailed both in this thread and the one referenced. I have provided a solid technical rationale for why this is the case that you havent really answer except bystating it is bunkum without any justification. Given that I posted the thread about using active isolation before anyone questioned the performance of the BL I can hardly be accused of defensive willy waving. I will be happy to listen to any technical arguments or experience you may have.

:bakeoff:

 

I am not convinced of this.

All decks sound better when they arent put somewhere wobbly - whether they are suspended or non-suspended.

Its my opinion that neither I nor you could tell the difference between your deck when placed on something massively solid (like a fireplace-base or a solid rack on a concrete floor) and the isolation platform that you have in the same room.

I think IF you could hear a difference in my example (doubt it) then it would be described as extremely marginal.

If you have a wobbly floor then I can understand going to greater length.

Putting the turntable on something sensible is a good idea IMO, and I understand why you'd want to get the most from a very expensive deck.

 

Nick read that again, particularly the last bit, you are making a fool of yourself man, but it's amusing for the lurkers, so keep it up

 

Absolutely, I am sure a suspended deck would benefit from active isolation as well. But they would work pretty well on any rigid structure also. So the performance increase is likely to be marginal. Not so with non-suspended / non-decoupled decks.

I can demonstrate the effect in my system by letting out the air. It isnt subtle especially at high volume. As a number of people are lining up for a listen I wil get one of them to check it out and report back as a second opinion.

AK - in your opinion. I dont see you offering a better rationale or experience, or indeed any form of technical contribution. What you have presented is a "hunch". If the route I take contravenes mainstream wisdom then so be it.

 

Nick what technical reasons do you want me to give, YOU SAY the £10000 deck you have only performs at 50% of it's capacity unless on a particular kind of support, if this is true then the deck is flawed, I understand (like Borttleneck0 that supports can and do make a difference to TT sound, but it is marginal, certainly nothing like 50%, you however only seemed to suggest these figures and special isolation when others who have compared your uber deck reckoned they preffered something else, you then asked did they have it on isolation.

FWIW where are the technical points in your argument, other than Mr Brinkman and you allegedly say so, show me the measurements, and how you quantify the figures you spout.

I don't need to hear the decks in question to know you are talking nonsense, life experience tells me, you have very funny ears my friend, and veryu funny Ideas, now I'm not the biggest fan of the LP12, but every one I have heard has bettered any Rega P3 I have heard, yet you also argue against that, jeez man take a lon hard look at your self, you are looking sillier by the post, and thats not a "hunch" it's an honest observation.

 

50% was for figurative illustration - I later replaced that with something a bit more meaningful having realised that it was a problematic statement.

No I dont argue that the p3 is better than the lp12 that was rudy. The lp12 is in fact better than a p3.

I want technical reasons for why my technical argument is incorrect. The very fact that I posted this thread shows that I am not producing the isolation argument as a response to criticism.

I am afraid you do need experiment or theory to know I am wrong. Whats silly is saying I am wrong without either. It seems your life experience (and science experience) isnt what it is cracked up to be.

 

so you are retracting your earlier nonsense of 50% improvement, why because it has been challenged as deluded nonsense, with no scientific measuremenrts to back it up?

I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm saying if you belive all this then your bonkers, no wonder HIFI manufacturers and dealers get waway with perpetuating this nonsense, while there are still deluded folk like yourself eager to puff up their egos with absolute codswolop, and then attemp ridicule at those that question your bold statements

Have you read the "emperors new clothes"

I will leave you to your deluded world Nick, there is no hope for you, a fool and his money are soon parted, and you have all this uber setup in a flat, and not a particularly big one, talk about guilding the lilly.

See ya, if nothing you are amusing

 

No that is incorrect. I replaced my wishy washy 50% statament with something a bit more concrete many pages back in the thread. Let me restate: With isolation the BL is the best deck I have heard. Without isolation it sounds about as good as an OL resolution - which I think offers "50%" of the performance in my subjective opinion. I have seen isolation graphs for the tss and also active isolation v normal supports so it is not unsubstantiated. I thought it was you that was ridiculing me and name calling not the other way around ;-).

I think a lounge that is 4.5m by 7.5m is pretty large by UK standards. Not that it has anything to do with this thread.

You have expressed an opinion but you havent backed it up with subjective experience or any technical reason, so its just diverting the thread. When you do so I will be happy to respond.

 

Erm...excuse me so how is this a technical argument?

Seems to me like you're reverting to an old habit of suggesting somthing and then trying to get others to provide all the technical proof to contradict it

Jon

 

No that is not the technical argument - that is a restatement of my subjective experience comment in response to ak. The technical argument is elsewhere in this thread and also in the thread I referenced. I have provided my own technical argument and have asked others to do the same - not unreasonable I feel. There was no old habit. That was one thread on another forum where I didnt keep an article about vfm. Lets not drag that up again.

Penance has offered to provide some additional technical info on SEM isolation during the week so we can all look forward to that I hope. I beleive WM will have some tech info on the TSS if I am not mistaken.

 

The problem here is that when an opinion is backed up by subjective experience (my friend's findings re SME vs BB and my findings re the S7 vs vpi HRX and SME) you claim that the Brinkmann was not optimised and if it had been it would have been preferred. This is little more than wishful supposition.

Have you ever considered whether the SME 30/2 was optimised when you auditioned it? Where was that btw?

Your technical arguement may well stand up in theory. But only in THEORY. When respected audiophiles claim that the Brinkmann is totally outclassed by the SME30/2, the subjective listening results do not support your claims.

 

One of the best sounds I've every heard was an SME30 into a Manley steelhead<>Custom valve pre and 360 spectral mono's and BH II's (nothing to do with me )
Superb everywhere, a truley musical experiance
That was my Vinyl reference, until I heard a Teac P01/D01 forget Vinyl, just listen to one. Quite amazing.
I still rate the WTR for total musicallity,however the SME30 is most formidable. Wm

 

SM - SOME respected audiophiles (by which I assume you mean your friend and I am only aware of one other who made such a claim and that too was second hand) believe the SME outclasses the brinkmann. Many others beleive it does not, as evidenced by the number of sme 20 and 30 owners traded in for brinkmann. And none the other way round that I am aware of. I suggest you contact Les to verify that for yourself - or even better go and take a listen and make up your own mind. Many others have also pointed out the sme decks do not play rock as well as classical something that is borne out by my experience. In addition it was not your opinion and not your subjective experience, it was someone elses. You werent there so you dont really know - no matter how much you trust your friend it is still hearsay. I have direct experience of both products and to me the BL totally outclasses the SME. No matter how much you trust your friend my opinion is every bit as valid as his. Two people can listen to the same hifi kit even if it is properly set up and reach entirely different conclusions. Doubtless you will have something to say on that topic but your opinion is somewhat biased as he is your friend. I am sure the sme is a great product and that many people will prefer it to the BL, however for my tastes on my music collection the BL was a far better all rounder and the difference on rock was of a very large magnitude. I raised the issue of the isolation of the BL as it was moot to the thread topic and because I had previously heard of a US dealer who was not demming the BL on air suspended supports. Consequently it was reasonable for me to ask and it is something worth bearing in mind - hifi is full of little wrinkles like this. If this issue was addressed (and I dont know enough about arcici to say whether it was) and your friend still preferred the sme then fine, he made the right choice for him. But casting aspersions on the transparency of my system for the purpose of undermining my opinion is equally wishful thinking, and in the absence of any evidence whatsoever or any argument why that might be the case. I beleive the sme and arm come fitted from sme so the only setup issue could be the cartridge - which is usually very obvious during the dem. If you have a particular issue to suggest that might account for the observed performance of the sme then go right ahead. The cartridge was a lyra helikon, which I have heard on a number of decks.

Anyway this part of discussion has no real relevance to the thread and isnt really going anywhere it being of the form x versus y so I suggest you PM me privately if you wish to continue this discussion as it is effectively a two way conversation anyway and I cant beleive anyone else is remotely interested in reading it. I am not even sure I am .

The technical argument concerns the use of air suspension for non-suspended decks and is perfectly valid - it is also borne out by experience. Neither you nor you friend have compared the effect of swapping the support type for the BL and I have yet to see any techncial argument that might be acceptable in the abscence of experience.

I also look forward to hearing the WTR as well as the Steelhead. I didnt go crazy over the spectral amps however. I preferred the plinius in comparison.