Favourate tweeks of all time.

The main source of vibration in a CD player is the disc itself. It spins at a speed of between 500 (reading the start of the CD) and 200 (at the end) rpm. CDs are not perfectly balanced and so they will cause the player to vibrate. Putting the player on an anti-vibration mount decouples the player from the floor therefore on an anti-vibration mount the player (and its electronics) will move more than if it were for example, sat on the floor with a brick on it.

As regards vibrations through the floor, if your floor is concrete and you dont live next to the M25 then the vibrations that you get through the floor will be minimal. The main acoustic feedback (ie speaker back through to player) you will get will be air bourne rather than through the floor.

 

Hiya,

Loved reading this thread, somewhat baffled about the amount of bits and bobs DavidF has used for making the cdp sound better, but then again, I spent six months demoing 1m pairs of copper wire (almost pair a week) untill I came across one I loved the sound of...
Good things don't usually happen quickly/easily a DavidF !

Sorry, just to recap, the wood, steel, rubber & concrete is all to absorb or ground different frequencys of vibration from the cdp yes?

Cheers

I tried sorbothane(ixos) iso feet (1 set of 4), under my squeezebox and then under its linear power supply, but prefer the difference they make under the power amp. Technical reasons as to why, I've no clue but I'm still amazed at how they could make different changes to the sound under different 'non moving' components.... When I find some ball bearings I'll give the wood and ball feet a bash

Cool stuff

 

Intersting....

yet the theory of draing vibrations awy from a cdplayer is certainly not a new one.(reading the mana website)

Is it the cone /ball bearing design that you are questionng or the isolation platform? I am certainly questioning the iso design at the moment.....that may ceratinly benefit from a re-think.

(Perhpts the iso platform should be reduced to just the granite slab?)

The ball bearings are a good design from this pint of view as they have such a small point of contact?

 

Get the CD-lathe, it will make the CDs perfectly balanced...

 

The vast proportion of my Cds ARE now lathed

 

So, according to some, you dont need all that stuff under your gear...

 

I am interested to hear vroomfondles point of view on the subject.....

 

I did some tests in Portugal, my gear was in a Standesign rack with Soundcare superspikes (under the rack)...

The best sound was with Stillpoints under the player, Ceraballs coming close second, Soundcare superspikes (under the player) and other soft supports almost made no difference...

In Riga I use Schallwand wood blocks under the player, I am waiting for the Stillpoints to arrive from Portugal to compare...

 

thanks.......

Like these....?

http://www.tweekgeek.com/product.asp?pf_id=StlPnts

...another approach! . .

 

As I said few paras ago I was here till about 3.00 am this morning reading around this...(partly the result of working "nights"...it does funny things to your body clock).

At the risk of being paid a visit by people in white coats+a white van....thee is apparantly a bit of science behind the cone/ ball bearing concept; this is probably obvious stuff to many. I found some of this stuff quite ineteresting;-

1) The relationship between cone and ball is an important one (OMG this is bad )....such that the ball is able to move as freely as possible.

2) Yhe size of the ball has an influence; the artical I was reading suggests a max of 13mm. Larger than this will cmpromise top end responce. Conversely a small ball will give less bass.

3) The relationship between the cdp (or whatever) chasis and the cone is also important......it made that the point that direct metal to wood conaact is important for inherant vibration to be transmitted. Again, I guess this straight forward enough.......but....


Just now I got to work with small elecric grinder as my cones have been modded fairly extensively and were less than pretty, then put 13mm balls in to replace (I think) 19mm.

Suddenly Charlie Hadns percussion sounds very different.

More work here obviously! (despite the embarressmnt factor)






David

 

Yes...

 

I am merely pointing out mounting equipment upon systems like the one you have shown do not drain movement in the player. If you take your design to the extreme and build a stack of plinths 20 ft high then it would wobble alarmingly - obviously not removing vibration energy from the player.

 

Are you saying that cones+BBs don't (or won't) work....or the iso plinths (don't work)?

....why?

as I say is it the cone syou think are wrong or the plinths?

How would YOU do it?

 

It all comes down to what you are trying to do. My earlier question still stands - What interference do you think you are getting through the floor?

 

The honest answer is that I don't know...specifically.

As I understand it the floor is responsible for most of the vibrations suffered by audio equipment(as a general statement)....that and shall we say air bourne sound waves. Thats probably a poor way of putting it but I'm sure my meanng will be understood.

So the intention is to isolate the equipment from both.

At the bottom of the rack is a heavy iso plinth arranged with spikes going through to the (as you say) concrete floor, thus starting the isolation process.

The rack (received as part of a swap) was designed/built in order to reduce vibration/resonace to a minimum...again to resist unwanted effects of soundwaves.

You know about the ballbearings/cones etc.

This has been my rationale to this point; I would welcome any other input to put new light on the subject!?

 

spikes couple !

but I can definitely say that dave's experiments have produced better sound.. thats to say his quite modest system punches well above it weight....

 

Yes, to the extent that vibrations are transmitted from the kit above and are drained to eath, an infinate ground.....so the spikes couple the iso plith to the concrte floor, agreed.

AS I understand it though vibration from the floor can't get back up through the spikes??

Thats why i suggested that they were going an isolation job as well.

Can any one put me right here (Mark? Simon?) this is driving me bonkers.

cheers, Pete...

I'm hoping its changed quite a lot since you were last here, as well.

As I say, I'm far from convinced about the curent iso platforms under the cdp....I think I may have got lost there.

 

You must do whatever you find sounds better. But my opinion is that any improvement in sound quality is not due to vibrations coming from the ground. Generally if you have a concrete floor then it is not a source of vibration.

 

Perhaps you should try this

 

Whoever made that is my hero.