• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Anti-vibration obsession - why amps?

tshoejohn said:
Check this out from wikipedia, microphonics in tube and solid state components:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microphonics

If someone already posted this then nevermind:D
Click to expand...

That is excellent, short, simple, and to the point. From what I read it is a problem the sound playing and true what most said it seems from the study it will affect tube gear more so than SS but it does affect both none the less. Very interesting read. More reason why I'm so happy with my new stuff which gets rid of this problem. Thanks for the great info.
 
also more reason why I wish I had heard my Mcintosh MC2301's on these racks since I now know it affects tubes more so according to that study, again, great stuff.
 
Also this study states that music playing is a problem for components not only from a vibration stand point. Vibration tweaks only prevent the vibration from going up so the problem with these tweaks still remains what is coming in to the component from the top not from the feet or contact with what ever they sit on. Those vibrations are just as much the problem IMO...
 
Last edited:
similost said:
Personally, I believe too many people think they have ears three times as sensitive as they actually are, and also don't have any honestly important things to worry about..
Click to expand...

Interesting on the topic of our ears. Some companies are finding out our ears are better than they thought and tell us more than we know about audio.
the Esoteric engineers didnt think they needed to clock the P3-D3 combo to more than 8 parts per billion error so thats the onboard crystal clock that they installed - maybe even my X-01. After they released it they started playing with the Rubidium crystal and found they could construct a more accurate clock with .05 parts per billion error. To their suprise us humans can easily hear the difference - thus they released the G-0S. They are correct - its another amazing step up. !!
This was quite a suprise that our ears have this degree of accuracy - even the beginning of CD's where they clocked the standard at 44.1 kz = they assumed that since we can only hear to 20k the clock speed doubled that and that any errors should be well beyond our range ____ WRONG, as SACD's are easily better and now the originals at 4X CD resoution are even better.
Who knows where it will end.
Great book for understanding alot of pieces of the audio pie is "Complete Guide to High End Audio" by Robert Harley.(probably at Amazon)
He's the main reviewer at Stereophile and is an extremely knowledgable dude. His reviews are always excellent and you can rely on his judgements. The chapters on "digital" sources are very helpful on understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the digital medium and explain alot of what our ears have already told us just by listening.
 
What do you consider more accurate? Less jitter, frequency stability or phase noise? Screw rubidium why didn't they use cesium, after all its what the standard time is based on. Could it just not be a marketing ploy, they have to do something to come up with a new product.

Can you hear past 20k? If you can you are part of a very small few. And even if you could nothing should come from a properly designed cd player above 20k due to a low pass filter to take care of digital aliases. The reason for 44.1K was chosen was because of digital theory and the natural hearing limit of around 20k max. This maximum was found due to the size of the cochlea inside of the ear. Im not sure what errors your speaking of above 20k, this is confusing me a bit.

SACDs sound better because of the higher bit rate information package that is used to transfer data.

I guess my analogy of how a MOSFET fell in deaf ears in beerdrafts rack thread but until somebody can give some kind of logical explanation of how vibrations change the movement of electrons through a semiconductor I am going to stick with the fact that vibrations do not effect solid state electronics.
 
tshoejohn said:
Check this out from wikipedia, microphonics in tube and solid state components:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microphonics

If someone already posted this then nevermind:D
Click to expand...

Read the article posted here. I read that it can get into solid state caps and something else and wind up being amplified in the signal path. I don't understand it but that is what I read here I thought. To not believe something like this is just cheating your system from being able to perform at its highest level, just my opinion, since I've now got to experience it first hand what vibrations and noise does and what the sound is like when its not a problem. I've been guilty of wondering what to do to get the last 5% out of my audio system, now with my recent addition to take care of this problem being discussed, I know there was A LOT MORE THAN 5% left to achieve in my personal audio system and I achieved it now.
 
crackerkorean said:
What do you consider more accurate? Less jitter, frequency stability or phase noise? Screw rubidium why didn't they use cesium, after all its what the standard time is based on. Could it just not be a marketing ploy, they have to do something to come up with a new product.

Can you hear past 20k? If you can you are part of a very small few. And even if you could nothing should come from a properly designed cd player above 20k due to a low pass filter to take care of digital aliases. The reason for 44.1K was chosen was because of digital theory and the natural hearing limit of around 20k max. This maximum was found due to the size of the cochlea inside of the ear. Im not sure what errors your speaking of above 20k, this is confusing me a bit.

SACDs sound better because of the higher bit rate information package that is used to transfer data.

I guess my analogy of how a MOSFET fell in deaf ears in beerdrafts rack thread but until somebody can give some kind of logical explanation of how vibrations change the movement of electrons through a semiconductor I am going to stick with the fact that vibrations do not effect solid state electronics.
Click to expand...

Ok, important to note that the previous post is info I got from a audio buddy who is a professional musician and not my own words. This is his response to your response. Crackerkorean, as I've discussed previously you are less than 2 hours from my home in driving. You are welcome to come down and we will perform A/B testing. I just have to be careful not to damage my racks since they did cost $$$$$. I think when you hear my system you won't need a comparison. I'm sure you've got a great system and have heard many a great systems as I have. Anyway here is my buddies comments on yours.

theres always somebody who says we cant hear this or that.
im sure some people are not aware (or able) to hear subtle sonics. alot of people think cables dont make a difference - they are obviously wrong as they all sound quite different. It more illustrates that they simply cant hear it. I have an engineer friend who says that cables are all the same and I may as well use lampcord !! He has been here as i swapped cables and still cannot hear completely obvious differences !!
even though we can technically hear beyond 20k (i have trouble over 15k) we may still be able to perceive "space" transmitted by high freq. sonics. we certainly can on low (below 20hz).
there may be an even more accurate clock (cesium) but this guy obviously cant hear the improvements that the G-OS added with its rubidium clock. Its definitely NOT a market ploy but a fabulous (although somewhat subtle) improvement. In his case its NOT worth it just because he cant hear it..........
If you read Harleys book he covers alot of this theory and helps to make it more understandable.
 
Like I said I would love to come and listen to your system but to listen, unless your willing to take your gear off that rack and put it on something else and subject it to sweeps and measurements move it back and go through the whole process again.

See thats just it, unless your cd players are not being filtered at all you do not have any really high frequency content. So you will not have any output anyway, sorry no space to perceive if its not there.

And like I asked earlier what part of the clock was the actual improvement? The frequency stability, phase noise or jitter, something else that I dont know about? Or is it just because its rubidium and not quartz.

Really doesn't matter, this is not what this post is about and nobody can produce anything even close to factual to backup claims being posted.
 
Come on, bring some racks to place gear on, measure. We will need three people each time we move equipment. Me, you, and someone else local in audio. The measurements will be taken on the racks now as you hear them when you arrive, then let stay on new racks for 48 hours prior to next measurements, then if back to cms racks, 48 hours and remeasure. I don't know what measuring will tell us that our ears won't but lets do it. Just have to be careful. I'm ready when you and any other audio guy is ready to come bye on multiple days. I will suffer the music I will be subjected to during the process. This thread is about vibrations and how it changes the music so I think it perfect. You bring the test equipment because I don't have any...
 
I, of course, would be happy just to sit down and have a listen to it. Don't run measurements on my own gear when I decide to buy something, so I don't see why I would want to do that with someone elses.
Thats just me tho...
 
Bigerik said:
I, of course, would be happy just to sit down and have a listen to it. Don't run measurements on my own gear when I decide to buy something, so I don't see why I would want to do that with someone elses.
Thats just me tho...
Click to expand...

Im right there with you, one of my posts in TOL here says it. I haven't measured mine but might out of sheer curiosity when I do have the tools to do so.

My issue with most of this stuff is if there is a change or not, dont care about how it sounds since thats more about personal taste.

Ok im done with this.
 
Mr. Lin said:
I can just picture a bunch of vintage tube gear stuffed inside a tank, as if it wouldn't be hot enough in there! :D

My grandfather, a WWII Navy veteran, once told me that our military still uses tubes in fighter/bomber planes because of what you mentioned about their immunity to electromagnetic impulses (from nuclear weapons). I don't know whether that's actually still true. I know we have a few ex-military here, maybe they could shed some light on it - Avionic?

As for the rest of what Gary described, the same experiment could be done by placing things on top of components. You don't necessarily have to spend a lot of money to achieve adequate vibration control IMO, though some of the things I've bought that are specifically for audio work quite well. With amps, speakers, source components - I like to have something underneath, and some sort of weight on top as well.
Click to expand...

Only electronic tubes in a F-15 besides a couple small CRT's. Are traveling wave tubes,TWT's in the ECM threat radar jamming amplifiers.All the rest is solidstate.Critical components are EMP shielded.
:smoke: ( EMP) electro-magnetic pulse, (ECM) electronic counter measures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWT#Traveling-wave_tube_amplifier
 
Last edited:
I'm not as technically proficient as many on this forum, and my experience tends to be mostly with instrument amplification not 2 channel audio, so bear that in mind if you read this rest of this post.

In instrument amplification, the amplifier tends to either be in close proximity to, or mounted in the same enclosure as the speakers it is amplifying. I can tell you from hard won experience that in some amps the vibration of the driver can cause the amplifier to do some strange stuff. I've heard amps (both tubed and SS) produce all manner of squeals, shudders, and once what would have passed for a Huey helicopter taking off, simply from the vibrations of the drivers. That's one of the reasons that amps are often decoupled from their speaker enclosures.

How does this apply to home audio? I don't know that it does, but I would think that certain levels of volume/vibration could effect a home audio amplifier in a similar if far less dramatic fashion. The long and short of it is, that the only way to know for sure that this sort of thing can or can't improve the audio reproduction of a given system in a given room, is to try it and see.
 
I agree that musical instrument "combo" amps can have problems with vibrations and microphonics. That said, for every one amp that has a problem there are 500 of the same design that do not. Most guitar amps just aren't built all that well. They're built to a price point and built "good enough." They are no where near as well built as is high-end audio gear. There are tens of thousands of vintage tube amps in daily use with ancient capacitors and carbon composition resistors all of which will make noise if you tap them while the amp is on. These amps are sitting there six inches away from a driver pumping out 110 dB SPL after being bounced around in the trunk of the car on the way to the gig. Would they sound different if the electronics had exotic vibration isolation features? Maybe. But the point is that the vibration isolation stuff being talked about for well-made, modern, solid-state gear in a home audio environment is likely to have a pretty small impact when the normal vibration environment without isolation is pretty benign to begin with.
 
Bigerik said:
I, of course, would be happy just to sit down and have a listen to it. Don't run measurements on my own gear when I decide to buy something, so I don't see why I would want to do that with someone elses.
Thats just me tho...
Click to expand...

That's just me as well...

fotno said:
I'm not as technically proficient as many on this forum, and my experience tends to be mostly with instrument amplification not 2 channel audio, so bear that in mind if you read this rest of this post.

In instrument amplification, the amplifier tends to either be in close proximity to, or mounted in the same enclosure as the speakers it is amplifying. I can tell you from hard won experience that in some amps the vibration of the driver can cause the amplifier to do some strange stuff. I've heard amps (both tubed and SS) produce all manner of squeals, shudders, and once what would have passed for a Huey helicopter taking off, simply from the vibrations of the drivers. That's one of the reasons that amps are often decoupled from their speaker enclosures.

How does this apply to home audio? I don't know that it does, but I would think that certain levels of volume/vibration could effect a home audio amplifier in a similar if far less dramatic fashion. The long and short of it is, that the only way to know for sure that this sort of thing can or can't improve the audio reproduction of a given system in a given room, is to try it and see.
Click to expand...

Try it and see, words of wisdom my friend.
 
Solid-state components such as capacitors and oscillators (used in digital clocking) can be microphonic. For example, some capacitors will produce electrical noise when vibrated. In the engineering literature, you can find references to techniques for reducing microphonics in such components. Such things certainly matter for some non-audio high-precision digital applications (e.g., those with very high clock rates). Are these effects in modern circuits at a level that is perceptible in audio applications? I don't know, but it does seem to me that I've heard benefits from simple rubber-cork sandwich isolators under SS gear. These things cost about $2 apiece if you buy them from industrial rather than audio sources, and they work as well as or better than any of the pricier isolation products I've tried. Anyway, there are certainly not-mysterious mechanisms by which vibration can affect the performance of SS circuits.
 
Now we are getting what I call great info. Thanks richpa and fotno. By the way the cheap vibration things I tried in my MC2301's that I had posted and it worked very nice for them are the cork sandwiched with hard rubber of some kind you are referring to. They were bought at an audio store but they were not made for audio. I think I paid $5 each for them. I listened to several disc last night and I don't think I've ever been able to say that my speakers are truly not there. Sure I've had certain cuts make my speakers disappear but there always seems to be a song that has a sound that jumps up and reveals the speaker at one point or another. My stage spans now easily to 20 feet wide on big music and my speakers are only like 9' apart. I can close my eyes and never pick up where the speakers are and I know where they are. The depth is alway back and never up at the speaker and depending on the instrument and the band the depth will vary. I never had it this good before getting rid of my vibrations.
 
Ayup, double blind...how to separate the wheat from the chaff. Good advice from fotno and RichPA too. Given my exposure to the scientific research world for some things, industrial (low cost) isolators, I can attest do indeed make a difference, especially with sources sensitive to vibration and feedback.

Also (of special note), some of the beauty of those venerable guitar amps (and their coupled designs), is the sound, interference and aura of their output...very alluring in some cases :naughty:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom