Confusion on speaker stands versus floor standing

[rothwellaudio]

That's interesting about studio use. What I've been told over the years in this hobby is that you want the cabinet as rigidly fixed in place as you can get it. This is because the only thing that makes sound in your room is the relative motion of the driver to the board, and cabinet, it's mounted to. If the cabinet is able to move with the motion of the speaker driver, such as when it's sitting on soft rubber feet or carpeted floor, then you're losing sonic information that should have been going to your ears. Good, spiked stands can give a noticeable increase in resolution and dynamics. Some dealers liked using Blu Tack instead of spikes between the speaker cabinet and the top plate of the stands; they said it worked well and meant they could sell their floor sample speakers without a bunch of little holes on the bottoms of them.

Yes, that's pretty much the received wisdom in the hi-fi world. The idea is that if the loudspeaker cone moves forwards the cabinet must move backwards due to conservation of momentum. Momentum equals mass times velocity, so if we consider the masses involved we can get a better idea of what's going on. Here's an 8" driver picked at random from Parts Express.

FaitalPRO 8FE300 8" Professional Midbass 8 Ohm

FaitalPRO 8FE300 8" Professional Midbass 8 Ohm FaitalPRO’s FE300 series has been designed and built as a direct response to the overwhelming demand for an evolved and more powerful series of products which would enhance the universally successful FE200 series. Building on this original idea...

www.parts-express.com

The mass of the cone (including airload?) is 22.9 grams. What's the mass of a loudspeaker cabinet? That could be anywhere within a wide range, but lets pick another speaker at random just to get a ballpark figure. Parts Express sell one pair of speakers with an 8" woofer, the Yamaha NS-6490.

CLEARANCE Yamaha NS-6490 8" 3-Way Acoustic Suspension Bookshelf Speaker Pair

Yamaha NS-6490 8" 3-Way Acoustic Suspension Bookshelf Speaker PairThe Yamaha NS-6490 bookshelf speakers are workhorses, handling up to 140 watts, they will take whatever you throw at them. These speakers work well in a stereo configuration or in your home theater system as left and right...

www.parts-express.com

The weight is given as 28.95, but no units are given. (???) Yamaha's website says the speakers weigh 13.2 lbs, which is 5987 grams. That's probably for a pair of speakers and PE's figure is in kilograms for a single speaker. Assuming the cone is around 22.9 grams (same as the other 8" driver), the ratio of cone mass to cabinet mass is 1:261. So, could cone motion cause a significant movement of the cabinet with the cabinet being 261 times as heavy? I suppose that would depend on what's considered significant and the point is debatable. The idea of rigid coupling of speaker cabinets to the structure of the room is to add the mass of the structure to the mass of the cabinet so that the ratio of cone mass to "the other mass" is further increased.

In the studio world a different approach is taken and speakers are often isolated from the room structure by compliant mounting. Their theory gives two benefits.
Firstly the speed of sound in solids is generally faster than the speed of sound in air.
The speed of sound in air is 343m/s. The speed of sound in wood and concrete is approximately ten times that, so if a loudspeaker is rigidly coupled to the room structure it can travel through the structure to the listener faster than it can travel through the air to the listener, and that is what causes the smearing effect. Therefore compliant mounting reduces smearing.
The second benefit of compliant mounting (ie decoupling) is that it prevents the loudspeaker cabinets from causing the room structure to vibrate and therefore prevents the room from becoming an uncontrolled resonator and secondary source of sound.

To be honest, the studio theory sounds more convincing to me and there does seem to be an increasing number of loudspeaker isolation products available in the hi-fi market too, so maybe the studio approach is starting to win the argument.

Anyway, the point I was trying to make to the OP is post #3 is that loudspeaker stands don't necessarily prevent the speaker from being rigidly coupled to the floor in the same way as spikes under floorstanders rigidly couple those speakers. However, the benefits of rigid coupling are debatable anyway.

 

[rothwellaudio]

Truly, one thing I don't usually understand, are people who get small speakers on stands- then add subwoofers.

I don't get it either. The space under stand-mounted speakers could be used to create a bigger cabinet without taking up any more floor space.
On the other hand, I suppose subwoofers can be placed where they're unobtrusive (maybe).

 

[rothwellaudio]

My guess is it was a typo and they meant to say "improve" something, not "prove" something.

No, it wasn't a typo, but maybe "prove" wasn't the best choice of words. I was wondering what the example in post #4 was meant to be for, or what it was meant to illustrate. What point was it trying to make? Was it meant as an argument for decoupling speakers from the floor? If so, thousands of pictures of speakers on spikes would surely be a counter-argument. Hence I asked for clarification, only to get a petulant outburst of abuse in return.
Btw, I'm not sure how "did I quote you?" is relevant. Are we only allowed to respond to posts that quote us directly?

 

[jrtrent]

To be honest, the studio theory sounds more convincing to me and there does seem to be an increasing number of loudspeaker isolation products available in the hi-fi market too, so maybe the studio approach is starting to win the argument.

Thanks for your detailed response. Back in the day (for me, that's about 45 years ago), there were also decoupling products, such as spring steel type stands designed to flex with the cone's movement. My ears, through both in store and in home demonstration, preferred the high rigidity approach.

Anyway, the point I was trying to make to the OP is post #3 is that loudspeaker stands don't necessarily prevent the speaker from being rigidly coupled to the floor in the same way as spikes under floorstanders rigidly couple those speakers. However, the benefits of rigid coupling are debatable anyway.

Good points, and part of the fun is that everything in audio is debatable!

 

[WillVT]

No, it wasn't a typo, but maybe "prove" wasn't the best choice of words. I was wondering what the example in post #4 was meant to be for, or what it was meant to illustrate. What point was it trying to make? Was it meant as an argument for decoupling speakers from the floor? If so, thousands of pictures of speakers on spikes would surely be a counter-argument. Hence I asked for clarification, only to get a petulant outburst of abuse in return.
Btw, I'm not sure how "did I quote you?" is relevant. Are we only allowed to respond to posts that quote us directly?

Thanks for clarifying. Some folks, and I don't mean you, just seem to enjoy inflammatory arguments.

 

[Sgt Shultz]

My guess is it was a typo and they meant to say "improve" something, not "prove" something.

Let's go with that, his subsequent response showed otherwise.

When in actuality I posted the Infinity stands in response and support of his comment about studios using the opposite approach.

You see his response could have been positive acknowledging the Modulus as a good example of decoupling the speaker from the stand but instead his post was aggressive, that's the reason he's been put on ignore.

 

[Mart Mccall]

I think there's too many variables to be able to state any one method is the best:

1) The design of the speaker
2) The floor construction
3) Personal taste in presentation.

Only one rule I would say is hard and fast and that is it is best to raise the cabinet so it's base is not touching the floor in other words don't just plonk 'em down.

I have concrete floor, with underlay and carpet on top. I don't use spikes although that is an option, the speakers just sit on their hard rubberised feet which have the option to screw the spikes into.

Each cab weighs 84lbs aka 38 kilos, there is no way they are moving even a tiny fraction with the action of the drive units. I'm not sure how high the ration of driver power to cabinet weight would need to be to get any movement at all, I think you would need a very lightweight cab with huge drivers. I don't know who is making that. One of the Chinese speaker companies may offer something like it

Would also point out adding spikes will raise the speaker up an inch or so, and the drivers relative to the listener, this change alone may make a difference to the sound with some speaker designs and have no connection to coupling. decoupling etc.

For speakers sat on cabinets or bookshelves I use the hard rubberised feet intended for washing machines. Cost about fiver a pack. I never sit them direct on the shelf or cabinet.

 

[Sgt Shultz]

I think there's too many variables to be able to state any one method is the best:

1) The design of the speaker
2) The floor construction
3) Personal taste in presentation.

Only one rule I would say is hard and fast and that is it is best to raise the cabinet so it's base is not touching the floor in other words don't just plonk 'em down.

I have concrete floor, with underlay and carpet on top. I don't use spikes although that is an option, the speakers just sit on their hard rubberised feet which have the option to screw the spikes into.

Each cab weighs 84lbs aka 38 kilos, there is no way they are moving even a tiny fraction with the action of the drive units. I'm not sure how high the ration of driver power to cabinet weight would need to be to get any movement at all, I think you would need a very lightweight cab with huge drivers. I don't know who is making that. One of the Chinese speaker companies may offer something like it

Would also point out adding spikes will raise the speaker up an inch or so, and the drivers relative to the listener, this change alone may make a difference to the sound with some speaker designs and have no connection to coupling. decoupling etc.

For speakers sat on cabinets or bookshelves I use the hard rubberised feet intended for washing machines. Cost about fiver a pack. I never sit them direct on the shelf or cabinet.

The AR58s were inching backwards sitting on tile floors, good old American made furniture grade cabinets at 52lbs. Spiking cured the problem, tightened up the bass and improved imaging. It also allowed leveling and if dealing with tile floors this is a huge benefit.

 

[spark1]

Let's go with that, his subsequent response showed otherwise.

When in actuality I posted the Infinity stands in response and support of his comment about studios using the opposite approach.

His post was aggressive, there was no need for that and he's been put on ignore.

Well, at least you got to show more pictures of your gear.

 

[DesertRatt]

Therefore compliant mounting reduces smearing.

Good write up! I wonder though if simple speaker cabinet resonances aren't greater than the effects of coupling?

 

[rothwellaudio]

Good write up! I wonder though if simple speaker cabinet resonances aren't greater than the effects of coupling?

Quite possibly. As others have commented in this thread...

...part of the fun is that everything in audio is debatable!

I think there's too many variables to be able to state any one method is the best

Worrying about coupling or decoupling is pointless if the sides of the speaker cabinets are vibrating like crazy.
And is the floor solid concrete or suspended wood?
Lots of variables.

 

[jrtrent]

Worrying about coupling or decoupling is pointless if the sides of the speaker cabinets are vibrating like crazy.
And is the floor solid concrete or suspended wood?
Lots of variables.

I was fortunate in my shopping experience to have local dealers who took both approaches, and allowed borrowing floor samples to try at home to see which I preferred. I know that not everyone has a similar opportunity, but with good dealers, "worrying" is simply not part of the process, just the fun of trying things for yourself before making a purchasing decision.

 

[Mister Pig]

Truly, one thing I don't usually understand, are people who get small speakers on stands- then add subwoofers.

Usually, that winds up occupying even more floor space, than a good set of full-bandwidth floor-standing speakers. And sometimes, more total cost too. And they don't always integrate as well as a full-bandwidth single speaker system...

As mentioned above- the benefits of good speaker stands- isolation and/or direct coupling, leveling, aiming and such- can also be done with floor standing speakers. Spikes, isolating platforms, and such, are just as compatible with floor-standers as stand-mount speakers.

Regards,
Gordon.

Actually there is good reasoning for it. It's much easier to build a small inert cabinet that will not resonate than it is to build a large one. You can achieve improved focus and definition, and the bass driver is decoupled from the upper registers of sound. Yes, it takes up more room, but the result can be superior if executed properly.

 

[Natasha Bell]

Ok so, I haven't exactly been able to find a straight answer about this, but why would you want to have a smaller speaker on stands to improve the sound (keeping it from hitting the ground in front of the speaker I'm sure) but with bigger speakers (like Polk SDAs) you actually want to spike them to connect them *better* to the ground?

Surely small speakers lose any of that ground connection being on a stand. Is it a trade off? As in, it's better to get the smaller speaker off the ground for sound dispersion, versus leaving it connected to the ground for -I assume- bass response?

Just a little confused on the different methodology I see/read about.

Thanks for everyone's input in advance!

It is all about placement of the tweeters. Bass is omnidirectional. Mid-range, is not very picky, but needs to face you. Tweeters have to be at ear-level for best results.

 

[hnash53]

An alternative to stands one can use as I have pictured here. You'll need a solid mounting such as a wall stud or wood post or the framing around a window.
Something like these:

Amazon.com

 

[rothwellaudio]

What happened to the OP's interest in this topic?

 

[JoeESP9]

There have been spikes under my speakers since the middle 1980's. I even have spikes under most of my gear. As for the gear spikes doing anything other than looking "bitchin", I'm not bothered by that at all.

 

[eiraved]

What happened to the OP's interest in this topic?

He's busy on another thread.

Polk Audio SDA SRS 2.3, 2b, and SRS 2

All I know is the RDO-194 works great in place of the SL-2000 in my Monitor 10's. It made a very noticable difference for the better. It doesn't sound off at all. I have put random tweeters in beat up speakers I used in may garage before with blown tweeters and they didn't sound right. ooh I...

audiokarma.org

 

[GordonW]

Show me floor standers that reach to 18hz -3db that take up less space or even similar space to this?
View attachment 2976374

And don't completely dominate the room due to their physical size.

These:

15" x 16" footprint. Dual 10" woofers, triple 10" passive radiators (on the rear) run by an on-board 500 watt amp. That would be less floor space, than two of those subwoofers and two stand-mounted cabinets, combined (if it's not stereo bass, it need not apply, IMHO). Unless you built some custom stands to go on top of the subs- which would unfortunately defeat the isolation in the factory stands...

But, all in a COMMON cabinet- radiating from the same space. Not separate cabinets.

Flat to 16Hz, usable output to 12Hz.

The VSA VR55 and Ultra 55 would also apply.

The Tannoy Saturn S10 would come very close too. The specs say 28Hz, but I measured an f3 of 22Hz in room on a pair of those (with one bass port in each speaker blocked by the factory plug, and the other port open), in a friend's house. Sold for $2K back in the late 90s.

Regards,
Gordon.

 

[GordonW]

Actually there is good reasoning for it. It's much easier to build a small inert cabinet that will not resonate than it is to build a large one. You can achieve improved focus and definition, and the bass driver is decoupled from the upper registers of sound. Yes, it takes up more room, but the result can be superior if executed properly.

Easier, but not that much easier. Been there, built that.

It's hard to beat the focus, of drivers all operating on and launching sound from the same baffle.

Regards,
Gordon.