SUMMER |
2004 |
 |
|
|
Feature Article
A
Brief Survey of Isolation Devices
This
is an abridged version of the full article, which covers nine
pages, and is too lengthy for reprint in a single issue of the
Newsletter. The complete report, which contains photos and
details on each of the devices mentioned, is available on our
Website
here.
It’s
unquestioned that vibration and resonance alter the sound of
our playback systems. How to deal with the problem though, is
a topic of unusual complexity. A myriad of variables combine
and interact to make the equation particularly convoluted.
Influences include: source of vibration (structure-borne or
air-borne), equipment support (nature of rack or stand),
sensitivity of the components to the vibrations present and
the ability of the listener to perceive the effects of these
variables. Add to that, the most important (and subjective)
issue of personal preference, and we have an equation with no
universal solution.
With such disparity among systems, environments and
listening preferences, how can a comprehensive, tell-all
review be written? It
can’t. That’s why this treatise is labeled a survey, rather
than a review. The information offered here is but a general
overview and should be considered a starting point, rather
than an endpoint, in your search for isolation products.
Most of you have experimented with isolation; be it
cones, spikes, bearings, isolation platforms and bases or one
of the many viscoelastic feet. Whichever you choose, they all
change the sound. Which one is best, depends on the variables
we’ve discussed previously, as well as (and certainly the most
important constituent) our own personal preferences. An
example: device “A” offers a slightly warmer flavor while
device “B” results in a faster or brighter sound. Which is
right will depend on your inclination and how your system is
tuned. Now, I’m not saying that all isolation devices affect
tonality, but the same analogy would apply to other
characteristics of the devices employed (detail, leading
edge transients, ambience retrieval, etc.).
System variables not withstanding, I’ve found that most all
isolation products have a general thumbprint, a basic character
perceptible
in nearly all systems. Fine points will vary, of course, but
I’ve had enough experience with the offerings (both in my
systems and feedback from countless clients) to feel
reasonably comfortable generalizing.
Lastly, I’m neither disputing nor endorsing the concepts or
theories behind any of the products. I have no training as a
mechanical engineer or physicist; I’m simply a careful
listener. I do know there are as many questions as answers in
this arena, with each manufacturer asserting the validity of
their particular designs. So, like with any other product in
audio, let your ears be the judge. I’ll offer another caveat.
While I have evaluated all the products listed here, I cannot
say that I am
familiar
with every offering in every line. Further, there may have
been changes or additions since my last experience. Again, use
this not as an absolute reference, but as an overview to
familiarize yourself with available offerings. Consult a
knowledgeable dealer for specific recommendations that suit
your system and preferences.
Data is provided in tabular form for easy cross
referencing. To keep the survey brief, I’ll offer a basic
thumbnail sketch of each product (though I could write pages
on each, describing intricacies I’ve experienced, most of that
knowledge is specific to my system and may not manifest itself
in yours). Next, I’ll grade each product on several scales.
I’m trying to stay very objective with these, using mainly
feedback that I’ve received from the field.
In
the performance field note than some products are tagged with
a plus or minus symbol. The “+” indicates a product works well
in most systems, “-“ means the item is system dependant,
either because of strongly variable performance or mechanical
considerations (e.g. too tall to fit in most racks).
Products have been divided into five categories, describing
their approach: Viscoelastic (soft resilient feet),
Rigid (usually cones of various materials), Roller Ball
(devices utilizing ball bearings in some way) technology and
Bases (platforms of any sort) and Other (either
using multiple technologies or not fitting into any category
listed above). Products are assessed using a scale of 1 – 10.
All
items are listed in alphabetically, and not in order
preference
|
Product |
Class |
Material |
Price |
Value |
Performance |
|
Aurios Isotones |
Roller Ball |
Stainless |
$189/3 |
7 |
8 |
|
“
Pro |
Roller Ball |
Stainless |
$599/3 |
4 |
8 |
|
Black Diamond Racing Cones |
Rigid |
Carbon Fiber |
$60/3 |
7 |
6- |
|
Bright Star Big Rock |
Base/Other |
Various |
$299 |
5 |
5- |
|
“
Gemini |
Base/Other |
Various |
$325 |
5 |
6- |
|
“
Air Mass |
Base/Other |
Various |
$399 |
5 |
6- |
|
“
Iso Node |
Viscoelastic |
Elastomer |
$12.50/4 |
7 |
4- |
|
Clear Audio Magix |
Other |
Various |
$200ea |
2 |
8- |
|
Daruma IIIi |
Roller Ball |
Aluminum |
$99/3 |
7 |
5 |
|
FIM Platform |
Base/Other |
Various |
$299 |
7 |
8+ |
|
“
Iso Bearings |
Roller Ball |
Various |
$99/3 |
9 |
7 |
|
DH Cones – Large |
Rigid |
Ceramic |
$50/3 |
8 |
7+ |
|
“ Jumbo |
Rigid |
Ceramic |
$70/3 |
8 |
7+ |
|
“
Super |
Rigid |
Ceramic |
$100/3 |
8 |
7+ |
|
Hyperion Magnetic Floater |
Other |
Various |
$60/3 |
Not yet rated |
Not yet rated |
|
Marigo Small Cones |
Rigid |
Composite |
$95 |
7 |
7+ |
|
“
Signature Cones/Base |
Rigid |
Composite |
$239 |
4 |
3- |
|
Polycrystal – Standard |
Rigid |
Composite |
$65/3 |
9 |
7+ |
|
“
Reference |
Rigid |
Composite |
$150/3 |
7 |
6 |
|
S.A.P. Relaxa Base |
Other |
Various |
$795 |
2 |
6 |
|
Silent Running Tremorless |
Base |
Various |
$299 |
7 |
8+ |
|
Stillpoints |
Other |
Various |
$299 |
5 |
7 |
|
Symposium Rollerblocks |
Roller Ball |
Stainless |
$350 |
5 |
6 |
|
Van Slyke Engineering |
Other |
Various |
|
2 |
4- |
|
Vibrapods |
Viscoelastic |
Elastomer |
$7ea |
7 |
2- |
|
“
Isocones? |
Other |
Various |
|
7 |
4- |
Click
here to read the article in its entirety
Next 1
2 3 4
5
|