This Sistrum stuff works
As far as "cones" go, different shapes, materials and the placement of the cone under both the equipment being supported and the point that it makes contact on the shelf will all effect things. Try reading the article below. It is not an "end all" in regards to coupling / isolation by any means, but it is very interesting none the less. Sean > Stereophile article "Bad Vibes" by Shannon Dickson |
Not to detract from the information included in this thread or the experiences of others, i found the information and design process of the racks at Grand Prix Audio to be a steeped in actual "technology" and "science" rather than the gimmickry and marketing that most other "audiophile approved" products resort to. This is not to say that i believe or agree with all that they have to say, but that i found it be a very good read as to how / why they developed the product that they did. Try reading through their website and see what YOU think as an individual. If it makes sense, so be it. If it doesn't, read it again : ) Sean > |
Brulee: I am sorry if my post came across the wrong way. I was not trying to belittle the comments / experience that anyone has had with Sistrum products and stated such in the first sentence of my second post in this thread. What i was trying to say was that i thought that the approach being taken by Grand Prix has a lot of merit in my eyes. They are actually taking measurements, performing tests, i.e. trying to understand why / how things work and why we hear what we hear. I do not believe that we have the knowledge to fully understand all of the things going on in any given device ( be it a rack, electronics, etc... ), but i do think that the more that we know, the better off we are. Like any other "science", data can be interpreted / misinterpreted. It is from trying / studying / making mistakes and applying ALL of that info that progress is made. I also stated that i did not agree with everything that Grand Prix had to say. They too have their fair share of marketing and hype taking place. However, they have seasoned such marketing with at least a hint of real "technology". That is why i said what i did about "audiophile approved products". Many are strictly based on nothing less than snake oil. Personally, i would not use the shelves that Grand Prix provides with them, so we are probably in agreement at least on that subject. As far as commenting without having experience, i have done that many times. This is a discussion forum and one need not have hands on experience to process logical thoughts about a subject and / or ask questions. Unfortunately, i think that a lot of things get lost in the translation due to lack of voice inflection, body language, etc... I try to be careful in how i word things, but misinterpretation is inevitable in some circumstances. That is why i have always encouraged those that don't understand something to ask / post questions. As far as relying on those with personal experience using a product, this also has pitfalls. One does not know their past points of reference, their level of experience with other comparable products, how far they went in trying to optimize the performance of said unit, how long they actually used the unit,etc... For that matter, one can have have a unit for a month and only put a few few hours on it. How usefull / accurate do you think those comments would be ? It takes both a skilled and knowledgable audiophile / writer to convey all of that information in an easy to follow manner. If you doubt this, take a look at Audio Review and read some of the reviews of any given product. Everyone has opinions and even those owning / using the same identical product can have VERY different points of view / experiences. To take this one step further, if we resorted to people contributing information strictly based on products that they only have first hand experience with, there would be VERY little posted on these forums. Especially if one wants to narrow things down to using Brand X with Brand Y type scenarios. As such, i will continue to post in the manner that i have and i hope that others will share their points of view, even if we differ on perspective. That goes for you too. After all, i would want to know the highs and lows of any given product / plan of attack PRIOR to forking out the money or making the effort to try it. Contrasting points of view with some type of background as to why / how we have those opinions can only help those inquiring about such subjects. Since i'm hoping that we are all adults capable of individual thought processes, being able to read various points of view and draw our own conclusions is part of life. Audio is no different as far as i can tell. As such, i try to pass on usefull info that i've found and / or experienced. Along with this, i include personal observations based on my own individual thought process. Whether or not one finds the links that i provide, my comments based on personal experience or simple thoughts thrown out to ponder useful, entertaining, repulsive, etc... is up to them. As such, caveat emptor ( let the buyer beware ). If you don't like what i'm selling ( or saying ), don't buy it. Twl: I hope that you understood where i was coming from and did not take my comments as a personal attack. Your thoughts / comments on this product are quite interesting and i'm glad that you shared them. Personally, i find many of the comments / ideas found on the Star Points / Sistrum website to be similar in concept to that of Michael Green. Judith: Thanks for understanding where i'm coming from, or at least trying to : ) As far as your comments regarding side by side comparisons go, i agree that they can be of limited use as neither item is fully optimized under most circumstances. This is not to say that the experience isn't usefull, but that the information garnered from such testing needs to be fully absorbed and digested in the proper manner. Sean > |
Brulee: While Judith is a big girl and can answer for herself, i'll only add that i was adding a comment to this thread. I did not state that one product was superior to another or that one should buy one over the other. I did say that i found the info presented on the Grand Prix website to be interesting and that i thought it was worth reading. As far as your "taste testing" question goes, one can form opinions / ideas about a product without ever really "tasting" it. How something looks, is presented, is reported on, etc... can all help to form an opinion of the product. That does not mean that such ideas are accurate or will be applicable to everyone's individual tastes or experiences. However, without those initial thoughts about various products, we would show no interest in anything. Something has to "catch our eye" or "turn our stomach" before wanting to check it out or avoid it. As such, we ALL form "opinions" or have "preconcieved notions" about products prior to experiencing them. Personally, i don't think it is wrong to discuss those "preconcieved ideas" or why / how one formed the opinions that they do about a product. Twl: I have used Michael Green products in the past. At one point in time, i had his most expensive rack and invested in several different devices that he offered. I spent a lot of time on the phone with his "assistants" and a couple of hours talking to Michael personally. To be 100% honest, i could not get rid of that stuff fast enough. I also have to say that the person who purchased the rack from me was VERY happy with it. They post here on these forums and i respect their opinions. We simply had different opinions / experiences with the same identical product. This is not to say that i find the Sistrum products directly comparable to what i had from MGD. They are built very differently and i'm sure that they perform very differently. I was commenting that i think that the two companies share common philosophies even though some of their products are very different. Warren: There are several women that post / read these forums. Speaking of that, i wonder if anyone has heard from Angela after her relocation ? Sean > |
I was not so much talking about the racks themselves, but the idealogies. Michael Green believes in "live" or "resonant" rather than "dead" or "damped". Your last response to me basically focuses on many of the same attributes that he seeks to achieve, but using different methods. He even allows one to "tune" his speakers so that the effect of box resonance can be added or reduced as one sees fit. As far as that goes, are you trying to tune equipment and racks to become actual "musical instruments" and / or actual contributors to what we hear ? My thoughts were that the gear should be as neutral of a messenger as possible and neither add nor subtract energy from the recording being reproduced. As far as i know, i thought that Steve McCormack was the "inventor" of component footers aka cones known as "Tiptoe's" and dampers known as "Soft Shoes". Are we talking about the same thing here ??? Sean > |
Twl: Sorry for sidetracking your thread. This was not my intention. I only intended to introduce another product of similar pedigree into the conversation. Some of my "generic" comments were misinterpreted as being specific and for that i apologize. Brulee: I understand exactly what you are saying. In effect, you believe that only sonics matter, the ear is the final judge and personal hands-on evaluation "rules". I think that this is "partially" wrong and here's why: It's kind of like buying a highly recommended car that only goes 70 MPH. You initially don't know about the limited speed and even if you did, you might not see this as a problem because that is as fast or faster as you normally drive. Other end users that recommended the product may not have ever pushed the envelope to find out exactly what the product was capable of. As far as they are concerned, it always worked fine for them so they are happy and recommend the product. One would only recognize this as a flaw once they tried to exceed the level of performance that they now can't achieve. If they would have read the specs and done the math, they would have known about the limitations involved in such a design. Even if one can't do the math, there are those that can and could have helped prior to finding out the hard way. Audiotweak: I did not use the MGD rack as a clamp-rack although i could have. It was the same basic rack ( Deluxe Adjustarack ) but not set up to clamp. It still suffered from the darkness and compressed dynamics that you mention. I attribute this to the massive amount of weight / energy storage of each individual shelf. General public: As to the Grand Prix rack, my thoughts are that the company actually took time to measure, look at the results and refine a product using comparative evaluations performed in a scientific manner. I was not aware that such a product even existed until it was pointed out to me and I wanted to share this information and product just as someone else had shared it with me. Although all of the design / research test curves might not be posted, some of the figures that were derived during testing were posted. They obviously have the means to do such testing and understand the results given their background. The rack is more "involved" than any other design i've seen, although i will agree, simpler IS sometimes better. Their design deals with resonance transfer, damping, absorption, etc... As far as i can tell, it does this all at the same time and seeks to do so with great efficiency. As i mentioned to Ken Lyon though, i think that the shelves are the weak point of the design and probably need to be changed for best results. Other than that, buy and use what you want. I've never suggested anything less than that in any of my posts. I say this even though i may have negative personal opinions about a product and shared them. We all have different tastes, goals and ways of thinking about things. One has to do what they think best fills their needs. That is what i did and why i don't have a rack that is a commercially available product. I can't say that it is better than everything ( or anything ) else out there, but i can say that it suits my personal needs better than anything else that i've tried. I think that is what Twl was trying to say and i'm glad that he ( and obviously, more than a few others ) are happy with their purchases and took the time to share their results and findings. I'll shut up now and hope you can understand where i'm coming from. Sean > |
Audiotweak: I guess if you are a person that believes that science can explain everything and man knows all that there is to know, life becomes a lot simpler. You don't have to worry about any new discoveries or scientific breakthroughs ever popping up. As such, the Earth is flat. On top of that, the Earth is the center of the universe. As we all know, these statements were all taught as "fact" at some point in time. I'm sure that "scientists" back then used the same logic when making such statements i.e. "we've known this to be true for hundreds of years".... Thank God for those that take the time to experiment, march to the beat of a different drummer and have ideas that fly in the face of convention. Life would be pretty boring living in caves and grunting to communicate. Personally, i think that man knows just enough to be dangerous, both to himself and the planet. Only time will tell if i'm wrong or right. Sean > |
I posted quite a bit about energy transfer and cone points over in AA about two years ago. Jonathan Scull compiled some of these posts and assembled parts of them into what became the majority of his February 2001 "Fine Tunes" column. Bare in mind that much of what i wrote was based on "logic" and "common sense" / "hands on experience" as i am not a physicist. So as not to confuse anyone out there, i don't play a physicist on tv either : ) Having said that, those that do understand physics have informed me that mechanical energy that can be passed from one device in one direction can in turn be fed back in the reverse direction. While i do not doubt this as the two points are obviously in contact with each other, i have to question if the level of energy transfer occurs at the same rate in both directions ? My thoughts are that a cone does act as somewhat of a "mechanical diode" ( a "diode" is an electronic version of a "one way valve" ) and the effectiveness of the "diode action" will depend on the shape, materials used and the mass of the devices. That is why there are SO many variations on cone shape, size, material, etc... and why some seem to work better than others in specific situations. I've never seen any studies on this subject but would love to. If anyone knows of any, please turn us onto them. I am also of the belief that one can't "survive" or "fine tune" an audio system optimally by using one specific method ( isolation, coupling, mass loading, absorption, etc...) by itself. In my experience, some components respond to a combination of the above, whereas others might work best using only one method. Obviously, this will vary with the specific type of support structure / rack / shelf being used. What i found to work best with one type of rack failed miserably with another type of rack. One would only know this though if they had actually tried several different racks and tried various tweaks on each of those racks. I did this very thing and could not believe some of the differences that i heard in the process. Personally, if i could, i would build an open structured rack(s) out of wood using as little metal as possible in the actual construction of the rack. I think that this type of rack sounds best. Obviously, one could play around with various types of wood used, how the shelves were suspended or anchored, etc... Personally, i do NOT like having the shelves anchored and / or part of the support structure of the rack. What someone else prefers from a structural vantage point or sonic preference might be very different though. Having said that, i don't have all wooden racks as i could not achieve the versatility that i was looking for in such a design. As such, i had to deal with the fact that what i wanted would compromise the sonics to some degree. Such is life. With that in mind, I took an existing design ( Premier ) and manipulated it to fit my needs / desires as best possible. I did this because i could not find any commercial design that met all of the criteria that i set forth when shopping for racks. With the help of a few knowledgeable folks, i arrived at something that is both versatile enough to keep me happy AND is suitable to my sonic preferences. I am still experimenting and learning, but that is the great part about "tweaking" i.e. you can do as much or as little as you desire or can afford. With that in mind, i hope that i have not discouraged anyone from buying / trying ANY product that interests them. Obviously, this includes the Sistrum's or other similar products. Learning via first hand experience is a great thing and taking the desire away from someone to do so is disgraceful. As such, i apologize and would like to encourage all of you to experiment with as many variables as you can within your system(s)and come to your own conclusions about what works best. If you end up thinking i'm a quack regarding some of my suggestions / comments, so be it. You'll never know what you like best until you try things out for yourself though. Once again, i do apologize to those that i've offended / stepped on their toes in this thread. Sean > |
