Improve Your Loudspeakers Sound with this Tweak?

[highfigh]

This makes sense. Super heavy speakers would raise the resonant frequency. But they would have to be extremely heavy to make much difference being placed at the edges of the room where the floor would likely be more damped vs the center of the room where there’s less support from the bottom plate, and walls below.
I still believe the deflection, reflection, and diffusion would mask anything transferred through the speaker/stand into the floor.

The weight of heavy speakers effectively shortens the span so, yes, it raises the resonant frequency.

The joists deflect as much as needed, to their collective limit. As they do this, it becomes more difficult to increase the deflection until it reaches the point of failure- this also depends on how the floor is framed- some use common dimensional lumber, others use I-joists or engineered lumber and the last two are definitely more stiff than dimensional. Also, dimensional joists need bridging, to prevent misalignment as the wood's moisture content changes because the variations in grain structure allow them to twist and bend laterally.

The acoustical effects on the sound will outweigh the benefits of these isolators, IMO.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

The weight of heavy speakers effectively shortens the span so, yes, it raises the resonant frequency.

The joists deflect as much as needed, to their collective limit. As they do this, it becomes more difficult to increase the deflection until it reaches the point of failure- this also depends on how the floor is framed- some use common dimensional lumber, others use I-joists or engineered lumber and the last two are definitely more stiff than dimensional. Also, dimensional joists need bridging, to prevent misalignment as the wood's moisture content changes because the variations in grain structure allow them to twist and bend laterally.

The acoustical effects on the sound will outweigh the benefits of these isolators, IMO.

I think we agree!

 

[ryanosaur]

All told, my stance on this is that isolation is very situational-dependent.

a few thoughts.

the trampoline suspended floor would likely do the opposite. It would likely not send vibrations through the rest of the house as it is decoupled from it. In your example, the term trampoline might evoke what happens to the frame of a trampoline when a person jumps on it. But the mass of that frame is less than the mass of the moving object. In this case it’s massively in the other direction. So a trampoline is a decoupled by nature.

it would actually be the more rigid floor of low mass that is sending vibrations everywhere and shaking things. A typical timber floor would fit this. The more rigid it is made the worse it would be.

as for absorbing. There are two issues to deal with. If the mass and rigidity of the floor is so great that the difference between it and the speaker is huge, there will be an impedance difference at the interface. The vibrations won’t transfer into the floor then. They just bounce back. Now we are in the same boat as before. You can graduate the interface to reduce the probability that the vibration bounces back. The easier solution is to change the impedance mismatch. Such as with adding a suspended floor over the concrete.

in any case, I feel like I can make a case for any of these scenarios. Without really first understanding the more desirable state, I am not sure where to land. What if the energy in the cabinet is of no audible consequence, then this may be for nothing.

I use the analogy of a trampoline because of how a footfall on one part of the floor will send vibrations through the whole floor. Perhaps trampoline is a poor word choice I settled on because of the springiness, rather think of it as ripples on the surface of a pond, perhaps, or the way solid ground and even concrete can ripple in an earthquake.
Regardless, I grew up on suspended wood floors which did not behave as the flooring in our home now. This house is “special” with this “half-story” section is much springier than the other section. I have yet to explore the underverse (crawl space) of the house to see how our landlord actually built the flooring in terms of joist spacing, but my thought process based on a knowledge of basic architecture is that he chose a wider-than-standard joist spacing or a non-standard material for the floorboard.
Either way, my suspicion bore out in the months I had my Subwoofers operating without utilizing any isolation technique with them (the outriggers I was going to use with my Sub platforms were mis-shipped, then delayed).
My experience using the stock feet (two-part assembly terminated by rubber cones) on the carpeted floor was that I could feel and hear excess vibrations throughout the room.
Once I knew the right Outriggers were coming, I started playing with the Subs, some. First I laid down the concrete pads and put the sub with stock feet on top. The pad compressed the medium-pile carpet and vibrations could still easily be felt and heard. It was an improvement over just having the Sub on the floor.
I then tried the Soundpath Feet, first without, then with the concrete pad in place. Each was different still and each was better than the Subs’ stock feet in either situation.
The only aspect I can grok reasonably then about the difference in putting the concrete platform on the outriggers with spikes is that I dramatically changed the surface area in contact with the flooring, considering the Platform alone was compressing the carpet into a very minimal layer still capable of transferring some of the mechanical energy.

As you said, it would require a level of study and measurement that I am not capable of performing. In my mind, isolating and measuring the actual mechanical energy of the Sub would be the first step, followed by wiring the floor and walls with accelerometers, or lasers...

Of course, then there is the syntax conversation of how a person can reasonably describe the effect of what is happening when a change in energy transference is observed. Frankly, I despise the "audiophile" lingo for this as I've hinted previously. The performance of the Speaker as an isolated object is one thing (e.g. anechoic FR, cabinet resonance, etc), whereas the more complex system of the Speaker-Room interaction is different.
(I've seen many references to how a designer, for example, will go to great lengths to take the room out of the equation when listening to a new speaker and voicing it. This furthers my understanding that the Speaker exists as its own entity separate from any room interaction prior to being placed in any room. Likewise, we continuously discuss the interaction of any Speaker in any room with no two situations being exactly the same and how to deal with the acoustic concerns that arise, recognizing how some speakers aren't really meant to be used in certain rooms such as a RTJ 'Mega Stack' or Perlisten Tower in my 11x15' room, or perhaps a BMR Monitor in a 20' x50' room. (And while the Speakers themselves will still perform, what would the resulting interactions in terms of efficacious enjoyment?)).

I am intrigued at the notion that somehow an Isolation Product would transfer mechanical energy back into the Speaker as a potentially detrimental effect on performance. Likewise, I had not previously heard that Isolation can negatively impact Low Frequencies.

Hopefully, we can see something cool in the measurements you suggested being able to take as in room before and after with the Software you mentioned. It would be interesting indeed to see if there is any measurable difference considering a direct in room blind test is pretty much unrealistic.

 

[dutchholic]

Not really what I asked. Why did you use all those products you described? Because you read on the internet it was a tweak worth buying into in general? You a fan of Norman Varney or something?

You've done proper blind comparison testing to show you can actually tell the difference?

Why I did use all those products? They came with the speakers so I evaluated the differences. Why would I not give it a try? Is that strange in your mind to do? The differences between using rubbers and spikes under my speakers were huge, I understand your question very well since there is many snake oil nonsense on the internet but you really don't need to do blind comparison for that. It's not a "speaker/power cable" kind of difference. I preferred rubbers, the sound was about the same as with the rubber anti-slip mat which was meant for dishwashers(I had that laying around so I thought why not try it).

I don't know who Norman Varney is to be honest.

I bought the isoacoustics because of amirm's comment on ASR (won't spell the name fully out here, but I think that you know who he is). I was wondering what he heared and what difference they made so I tested them on my own speakers and after that I never looked back, the difference is clearly there.

Your scepticism is exactly the reason that I hoped for a more scientific approach, isoacoustics have their own research/data but it would be good if a third party that has zero financial benefit/connection with isoacoustics would come up with proper research/measurements so that this kind of conversation could be based with facts instead of partly emotions from both sides(you don't believe that I hear the difference without me doing blind testing, and I believe that I hear the difference very clearly without the feeling that I need to verify this with a blind test).

Edit: "You a fan of Norman Varney or something?" I would like to know why you ask me such a question? It seem that you want/try to categorize me into some group of people that believe nonsense, why is that? Kind of sad, now that I think about it... you're a little man to insult me by asking such questions here. I just looked Norman Varney up. I don't agree with his way of thinking, I don't use vinyl and I (OF COURSE) don't "isolate" amplifiers/other equipment which is of course a ridiculous thing to do.

 

[lovinthehd]

@dutchholic not familiar with your views and you;re fairly new here so hard to know where your "claims" come from or how they're based in at least something objectively oriented. So you used spikes and rubber feet as if they're for the same purpose because why? Spikes are largely about preventing movement on carpeted surfaces, the rest of the spike stuff I find rather silly.

I know there is much in audiophilia about this subject, and Norman Varney is a big pusher of isolation products, that's all, had no idea if you were just doing this for speakers or other gear particularly like Norman advocates. I don't have much respect for Norman, no. Your post sounds like most audiophile tweak type posts....trust me sort of thing, without any particular methodology to see if the steps you took to judge audibility were valid. I've used a variety of speakers and subs with various "feet" and find it trivial. Perhaps with certain flooring or feet in mind, maybe like Ryan has experienced (altho I've also had several wood floors without such experience).

Maybe you can convince me to try an Amazon trial "risk free", but I'm not quite there either, just don't see why I should bother at this point. I've not seen anything very substantial on this subject at all in terms of audibility. I've seen testing showing no particular influence from some isolation products of this nature, too which goes with my experiences.

 

[Pogre]

Why I did use all those products? They came with the speakers so I evaluated the differences. Why would I not give it a try? Is that strange in your mind to do? The differences between using rubbers and spikes under my speakers were huge, I understand your question very well since there is many snake oil nonsense on the internet but you really don't need to do blind comparison for that. It's not a "speaker/power cable" kind of difference. I preferred rubbers, the sound was about the same as with the rubber anti-slip mat which was meant for dishwashers(I had that laying around so I thought why not try it).

I don't know who Norman Varney is to be honest.

I bought the isoacoustics because of amirm's comment on ASR (won't spell the name fully out here, but I think that you know who he is). I was wondering what he heared and what difference they made so I tested them on my own speakers and after that I never looked back, the difference is clearly there.

Your scepticism is exactly the reason that I hoped for a more scientific approach, isoacoustics have their own research/data but it would be good if a third party that has zero financial benefit/connection with isoacoustics would come up with proper research/measurements so that this kind of conversation could be based with facts instead of partly emotions from both sides(you don't believe that I hear the difference without me doing blind testing, and I believe that I hear the difference very clearly without the feeling that I need to verify this with a blind test).

Edit: "You a fan of Norman Varney or something?" I would like to know why you ask me such a question? It seem that you want/try to categorize me into some group of people that believe nonsense, why is that? Kind of sad, now that I think about it... you're a little man to insult me by asking such questions here. I just looked Norman Varney up. I don't agree with his way of thinking, I don't use vinyl and I (OF COURSE) don't "isolate" amplifiers/other equipment which is of course a ridiculous thing to do.

So you haven't really tried many (see also- less expensive) aftermarket isolation products outside of whatever feet are provided by the manufacturer? Those don't come with nebulous claims of dramatic improvements, aren't necessarily isolators, nor do they cost $1000... that price alone is enough to taint someone's perceptions. And for the record spikes couple, they don't isolate.

Sighted testing is notoriously inaccurate. This is why double blind, controlled testing is used for determining differences with stuff like this. I've experienced placebo/expectation bias myself and know first hand not to trust sighted, uncontrolled testing. I wouldn't even trust my own first hand experience without some controls in place. Especially if I'm invested. It's unreliable, and when bias is removed, very often those differences melt away. In this case tho, it doesn't sound like you've compared apples to apples with other products made specifically for isolation anyway.

Maybe your situation is one such that an isolation product does offer some improvements. Maybe the Iso's are making a difference for you. I can believe that, but there are other solutions out there for a fraction of the cost that I'd argue would be just as effective. That's what puts the Iso's into the jewelry category for me. I mean... they even come in a fancy (expensive) velvet lined jewelry box made just to show off their polish and bling...

I just can't get past thinking that for the same price you can buy something much more substantial like a really nice subwoofer, a mic and DSP or some room treatments.

 

[3db]

Your scepticism is exactly the reason that I hoped for a more scientific approach, isoacoustics have their own research/data but it would be good if a third party that has zero financial benefit/connection with isoacoustics would come up with proper research/measurements so that this kind of conversation could be based with facts instead of partly emotions from both sides(you don't believe that I hear the difference without me doing blind testing, and I believe that I hear the difference very clearly without the feeling that I need to verify this with a blind test).

That's the problem with this article published by Audioholics. The graphs were relatively meaningless, cluttered, and meant to confuse. The fact that the implied statement of amplifiers acting as microphones and generating noise sounds makes the article reek of snake oil. I know one doesn't need blind listening tests to eliminate rattles being generated by objects hanging on walls etc but it is actually, a leap of faith that say it will improve the sound of the loudspeaker itself. That's were blind listening tests need to be employed to either confirm or reject such a claim.

 

[Hetfield]

I will say this and I am always on the lookout for snake oil but I do believe in the isolation pads for speakers. I do not believe in spending thousands on them and you be honest Auralex is too expensive. You can get basically the same quality for much less. I just them on my surrounds, and center channel. I used to use them when I had bookshelf speaker mains. I just put 2 under my center channel and I think it makes a significant difference but that's just based on my ears, not science or measurements.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

 

[highfigh]

This house is “special” with this “half-story” section is much springier than the other section. I have yet to explore the underverse (crawl space) of the house to see how our landlord actually built the flooring in terms of joist spacing, but my thought process based on a knowledge of basic architecture is that he chose a wider-than-standard joist spacing or a non-standard material for the floorboard.

The other possibility if the landlord built the floor outside of standard methods is: he may have used inferior lumber or they're not correct WRT the span. The old rule of thumb for 2x joists was 1" of height for every inch of length, up to the limit for deflection, which was 1/4", IIRC.

It's also possible that if the crawl space is damp, the lumber may be rotted.

 

[Pogre]

I will say this and I am always on the lookout for snake oil but I do believe in the isolation pads for speakers. I do not believe in spending thousands on them and you be honest Auralex is too expensive. You can get basically the same quality for much less. I just them on my surrounds, and center channel. I used to use them when I had bookshelf speaker mains. I just put 2 under my center channel and I think it makes a significant difference but that's just based on my ears, not science or measurements.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

I have some pads under my center channel too, but it's more for raising it up 2" so the tweet is level with my towers. I can't say that I really noticed any difference, but I never did any real comparisons. There could be some minor improvements in my case, but it's not obvious or dramatic.

I think a solution like this is going to be room dependent and results might vary from noticeably improved to not at all, depending on the situation, and can be done for well under a thousand bucks.

 

[ryanosaur]

There’s an aspect about how powerful the drivers are and at what frequency that is important to consider in terms of some of this.
I don’t even think these new Toy Subs that KEF and SVS have on the market need more than just some good rubber feet: they don’t have the combination of output and extension to shake the foundation very much. Neither do most Speakers, even larger towers.
Frankly, with the exception of true full rangers and strong Subs, I have a hard time believing any isolation is needed unless there is a specific problem one can identify related to the Speaker and for which positioning cannot alleviate.

Much like friend @Pogre , I have some inexpensive Monitor Pads under my Center and Surrounds. These are more about protecting the finish of the Speaker (first) and adding height and/or tilt as needed (second). I am not concerned so much with my surrounds causing ringing in my stands (2-of-3 posts are filled with sand, but this is done for weight as I do not believe my surrounds have the power to transfer enough energy to make the tubes ring, and I think that there would be a problem with the third hollow post ringing still… which it doesn’t). My main equipment stand Is a metro shelf which I do have a little concern about, but since I have the monitor pad to protect the speaker, I am also covered in terms of that shelf picking up unwanted vibrations (and the cheap foam pad is enough for that if, in fact, there are any vibrations to worry about).

 

[3db]

I have felt stick on pads on the bottom of the rubber feet of my three PSB Subsonic 6 subs so I can slide them around easily on the hardwood floor in order to pass the vaccum cleaner at their locations. Does that count?

 

[TheoN]

The goal of my article was to raise this question from the 2nd paragraph in the review:

The difference that speaker positioning, room treatments, multi-sub configurations, and room equalization can make are audible, measurable, and among your biggest “bang for the buck.” Because the interaction of our speakers and our rooms are so much a part of the equation, I’ve often wondered if we should add vibration control and isolation to the optimization list.

Any journey—any inquiry—starts somewhere with questions and observations. My personal experience with the IsoAcoustics GAIA isolators paired with different speakers and placed on different flooring substrates taught me that indeed this is an area that we as audio enthusiasts need to explore more.

The ultimate question is: Do isolation products "work"?

If they do, to what extent? Or, are they actually destructive to a speaker's performance? Do some flooring substrate materials benefit more? (What I perceived and hypothesized is that the substrate material-speaker interaction plays a clear role in the "performance" of the IsoAcoustics product). If yes, what are those substrate materials? What are some use cases where isolation products may make sense? Are there a set of objective standards and measurements that can be developed to then measure and compare them?

This is all part of the discussion I wanted to start. I hope that discussion will lead to further exploration with broader measurements, standards, and conclusions. And to someone's question, yes, you have PSB, Dynaudio, and others who are offering IsoAcoustics isolators as part of their speakers.

I also hope this process re-emphasizes that speakers and the rooms they are placed in are part of a larger system. Therefore when we talk about any speaker in a room, we need to remind ourselves continually that the speaker-room interaction is an organism.

I can think of no better place than Audioholics for questions and discussions like this to take place with tough questions and rigorous debate. That's the gem of @gene 's vision and what contributors like @Matthew J Poes have brought to the site.

As to the point of price— just look at the con in the review . Yes, they are expensive. Yet put it into perspective. The GAIA III for speakers up to 70lbs is roughly $240. That's not a big hit. That's more in line where most enthusiasts would have their speakers.

Speakers in the 100+lb to 200+lb range don't cost $500. Those speakers are going to cost thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars. That enthusiast will pay more in sales tax than the $800 or $1,000 cost for a set of IsoAcoustics isolators! The IsoAcoustics GAIA and TITAN are beautifully built and of course someone would want something that is aesthetically designed and built well to pair with a $15,000, $25,000, or $70,000+ speaker. There's nothing wrong with accessorizing your gear with beautifully designed audio jewelry.

Finally, I had very specific goals in mind for the IsoAcoustics product for my setup. I found the GAIA to be a great solution for me in my setups—especially for heavy speakers on hardwood floors with no marring, scratching, or residue.

I'll leave you with this. Many years ago at our previous home, the tonearm of my turntable would physically skip if someone would walk in a certain area of the hardwood floor. I purchased some Sorbothane isolators along with some Vibrapod isolation feet. Not only did the combination of the two isolation products stop the tonearm skipping, someone could now jump in that area of the floor and the tonearm wouldn't miss a beat. The Sorbothane left residue markings on my cabinet and the top cracked. EDIT: Here's the link to the Sorbothane feet I had used: https://www.crutchfield.com/S-tiD3NRvHfwb/p_703SQFEET/AudioQuest-SorboGel-Q-Feet.html

Believe what you want about isolation products. Isolation products do nothing? My experience tells me otherwise. I think there's something there. I'm looking forward to what I feel is the much needed and necessary research into this area—to prove or disprove. And it will be great to say it all started on Audioholics first.

 

[Pogre]

As to the point of price— just look at the con in the review .

This is a fair point, you do address some of the points I've raised in this thread in your "Cons".

Cons

• Expensive
• How much difference you’ll notice seems to depend on your flooring substrate
• Need to confirm you have the correct thread size for your speaker prior to ordering

4 out of 5 stars for value tho?

 

[Matthew J Poes]

I’ve been discussing this with Todd Welti. I think the fact that he didn’t dismiss it right off the bat is telling. So I again would encourage people to take an inquisitive perspective rather than a totally dismissive one.

I think some rigorous testing of this could be interesting. I still worry that these tests may not be valid or may net differences that we can’t quantify as better. A common issue we all face is that we tend to perceive different as better. It might just be different. Or worse.

Todd seemed to like the direction I was going with regard to the impedance mismatch. He was most interested in the impact of energy retained or drained from the enclosure. The tactile piece could be something too.

Something to keep in mind. These are designed to be decouplers. To reduce vibration transfer. I’ve already discussed the issue with that. If that is good or not is debatable. Spikes are couplers, they actually increase the transfer of vibration energy to the floor. Not decrease it. It actually increases the likelihood of an energy transfer by focusing the energy into a small point.

mass loading an enclosure would be an example of a different yet approach. The energy will not transfer or be dissipated all that well in a mass loaded enclosure. Instead the energy will have so much more mass to move that the inertia needed would be beyond the amount of energy in the system. It won’t move. So that energy doesn’t transfer. It probably does dissipate to a point. But most of it stays in the driver itself. Mass loading does help keep high powered speakers from dancing. The ultimate expression of an impedance mismatch.

Fixing that above problem does actually require a very compliant decoupler. Rubber feet are not nearly compliant enough. Sadly only SVS and Isoacoustics makes decouplers with the right compliance to fix this. There is nothing fancy about this. It could be made cheaply. It just isn’t common.

For those interested I am happy to share cheap decouplers that would have the right compliance for this. None look good.

 

[highfigh]

The goal of my article was to raise this question from the 2nd paragraph in the review:


Any journey—any inquiry—starts somewhere with questions and observations. My personal experience with the IsoAcoustics GAIA isolators paired with different speakers and placed on different flooring substrates taught me that indeed this is an area that we as audio enthusiasts need to explore more.

The ultimate question is: Do isolation products "work"?

If they do, to what extent? Or, are they actually destructive to a speaker's performance? Do some flooring substrate materials benefit more? (What I perceived and hypothesized is that the substrate material-speaker interaction plays a clear role in the "performance" of the IsoAcoustics product). If yes, what are those substrate materials? What are some use cases where isolation products may make sense? Are there a set of objective standards and measurements that can be developed to then measure and compare them?

Believe what you want about isolation products. Isolation products do nothing? My experience tells me otherwise. I think there's something there. I'm looking forward to what I feel is the much needed and necessary research into this area—to prove or disprove. And it will be great to say it all started on Audioholics first.

I would like to know if room response analysis might show something and it would be interesting to place sensors on various surfaces and items, to see what they pick up from physical contact and/or modulation by the sound, with and without the isolators and with music and test tones since EVERYTHING resonates. I think it should, to some degree- I have done test tone sweeps that showed the problem frequencies when solving buzzes & rattles in rooms and it was easy to hear when the problem was solved. If these can help with that kind of problem, it would be a big help, although the price is probably out of reach for most people. If nothing else, it could be another tool in the box of tricks for people to improve the sound of their systems.

 

[TheoN]

This is a fair point, you do address some of the points I've raised in this thread in your "Cons".

Cons

• Expensive
• How much difference you’ll notice seems to depend on your flooring substrate
• Need to confirm you have the correct thread size for your speaker prior to ordering

4 out of 5 stars for value tho?

Appreciate that.

To the point of value, that's totally subjective.

I debated between a 3 to 4 and eventually decided on 4 when I looked across the product line for a larger perspective

The entry level GAIA isolators are cheaper and one could say more comparable to some of the "competition" in that space. Given their superb build quality and design, the fact they don't mar the floor, and that they keep the speaker firmly in place with a cool suction feature, that's what tipped the scales to me for a 4 vs. a 3. I feel that based on the goals I stated in the review, they were closer to a 4 than a 3 for value. If someone feels these offer less in their particular view or setup, I can't object to that.

 

[highfigh]

I’ve been discussing this with Todd Welti. I think the fact that he didn’t dismiss it right off the bat is telling. So I again would encourage people to take an inquisitive perspective rather than a totally dismissive one.

I think some rigorous testing of this could be interesting. I still worry that these tests may not be valid or may net differences that we can’t quantify as better. A common issue we all face is that we tend to perceive different as better. It might just be different. Or worse.

Todd seemed to like the direction I was going with regard to the impedance mismatch. He was most interested in the impact of energy retained or drained from the enclosure. The tactile piece could be something too.

Something to keep in mind. These are designed to be decouplers. To reduce vibration transfer. I’ve already discussed the issue with that. If that is good or not is debatable. Spikes are couplers, they actually increase the transfer of vibration energy to the floor. Not decrease it. It actually increases the likelihood of an energy transfer by focusing the energy into a small point.

mass loading an enclosure would be an example of a different yet approach. The energy will not transfer or be dissipated all that well in a mass loaded enclosure. Instead the energy will have so much more mass to move that the inertia needed would be beyond the amount of energy in the system. It won’t move. So that energy doesn’t transfer. It probably does dissipate to a point. But most of it stays in the driver itself. Mass loading does help keep high powered speakers from dancing. The ultimate expression of an impedance mismatch.

Fixing that above problem does actually require a very compliant decoupler. Rubber feet are not nearly compliant enough. Sadly only SVS and Isoacoustics makes decouplers with the right compliance to fix this. There is nothing fancy about this. It could be made cheaply. It just isn’t common.

For those interested I am happy to share cheap decouplers that would have the right compliance for this. None look good.

Making a variable coupler shouldn't be too difficult- use a material that naturally works at an extremely low frequency with a threaded stud in the center and use a padded disc that can be rotated +/- from some nominal starting position that has been found to work as a nominal 'zero point'. Tightening the disc would add pressure to/lower the compliance of the absorbing material, which would also raise the resonant frequency.

 

[TheoN]

I would like to know if room response analysis might show something and it would be interesting to place sensors on various surfaces and items, to see what they pick up from physical contact and/or modulation by the sound, with and without the isolators and with music and test tones since EVERYTHING resonates. I think it should, to some degree- I have done test tone sweeps that showed the problem frequencies when solving buzzes & rattles in rooms and it was easy to hear when the problem was solved. If these can help with that kind of problem, it would be a big help, although the price is probably out of reach for most people. If nothing else, it could be another tool in the box of tricks for people to improve the sound of their systems.

Perhaps I didn't highlight enough the fact that I physically felt reduced energy transference with the Salon2 placed on the hardwood floor. The way I would describe it is that in my room I felt as though the IsoAcoustics isolators reduced destructive physical vibrations transferring into the room. Put another way, the sofa didn't vibrate as much . I felt as though it yielded a cleaner presentation and the perception of tighter bass.

Conversely, a bassaholic may not like that aspect and say, "Hey these things are reducing the tactile sensation of my system." I do not like those ButtKicker tactile gimmicks with chairs for example.

And that opens up so many more questions than the typing medium is good for such as "how much does physical sensation of bass play into our perception of bass quantity/quality"—this one space being studied in headphones for example and if elevated bass in the curve is something we prefer psychoacoustically in the absence of physical bass sensation.

 

[highfigh]

Perhaps I didn't highlight enough the fact that I physically felt reduced energy transference with the Salon2 placed on the hardwood floor. The way I would describe it is that in my room I felt as though the IsoAcoustics isolators reduced destructive physical vibrations transferring into the room. Put another way, the sofa didn't vibrate as much . I felt as though it yielded a cleaner presentation and the perception of tighter bass.

Conversely, a bassaholic may not like that aspect and say, "Hey these things are reducing the tactile sensation of my system." I do not like those ButtKicker tactile gimmicks with chairs for example.

And that opens up so many more questions than the typing medium is good for such as "how much does physical sensation of bass play into our perception of bass quantity/quality"—this one space being studied in headphones for example and if elevated bass in the curve is something we prefer psychoacoustically in the absence of physical bass sensation.

I read your comments, but objective measurement would make dialing in the required degree and range of damping effect would make a 'one size fits all' device unnecessary since the weight of speakers varies so much.

Never been a fan of buttkickers. Tactile sensation varies, according to the person. I had a Mazda RX-7 with a subwoofer behind one of the front seats and when I was driving with another person in the car, he asked if I could turn the bass down because he was becoming nauseated. I didn't feel it in the same way because I'm a lot bigger than he was.

So far, I haven't heard a system in a residence that 'felt' the same as a live show. I have heard loud, strong bass, good presence and airy sound, but it never sounds the same and a large part of the reason is obviously the power of the systems/speaker size, etc but the number of variables is large. I can't begin to estimate the number of times I heard people say "I want it to sound exactly the same as it did in the studio when this was recorded" but that really shows the lack of understanding about how music sound in studios and how it's recorded. I think we search for sound that we inherently like, but the hardest part of finding it in how we aren't able to put our description into words. Most equipment choices are compromises to some degree because we may not be able to afford what we REALLY want or maybe, we just haven't heard what stroked our hair the way we like, if you know what I mean.

By any chance, have you heard the large Steinway-Lyngdorf system?