Skylan vs. Sound Anchor speaker stands? Comments?

Stanwal, the Skylan web page describes incorporating neoprene de-coupling pads. Are these located on the top of the top plate (thus between the bottom of the speaker and the top of the stand)?

Do you use them this way?

I wonder if these neoprene pads, and the SA's adjustable rubber feet can be removed?

I have purchased speakers that are intended to be placed on mass loaded stands, but the manufacturer recommends blue tacking the speakers to the stands for rigidity.

My Skylan have small pads that can be removed, the rubber feet are on screws and would be more problematic. I don't think that most of their stands use these. I did an extensive test on interfaces this last year and concluded that Blutak is my last choice. Others such as Martin Colloms disagree. To me it deadened the top end. I much preferred Star Sound Audio points [ for which I am a dealer] but now use cups and ball bearings with marble tiles on top. Gives best sound but not for users with small children or big pets. Blutak is certainly rigid, I have had to pry things off after using it. All this is almost certainly system and taste dependent, they aim at different effects. Blutak intends to make the speaker and stand one unit, Star Sound intends to drain vibration from the speaker to the ground through the stand and the roller ball system intends to isolate the speaker from the ground. All do what they were intended to do. I use some specialty products for mass loading , I have seen steel blasting shot recommended but haven't used it. I has trouble getting one of the skylan tight enough to hold cat litter and haven't tried the metal material I have in my other stands, I am using Target and Atacama right now as the skylan and SA don't fit the speakers I am currently using. I have Atabits in the Atacama and Star Sound Micro Bearings in the Target. both of which I am a dealer for. Both are good but not cheap which is why I suggested the blasting shot. I used the smallest Audio Points under the S 100s most of the time [ point down] but also placed them directly on the stands. These different configurations make a considerable difference but results will vary with room and system in my opinion.

Stanwal, what you describe regarding Blutak is what the manufacturer intends, i.e. rigid coupling.

I can't say what I would prefer, but I first have to go with what's suggested before I deviate.

I considered Sistrum speaker stands, but frankly, in my seismic prone location sharp brass points are not the best choice for keeping gear undamaged even in a small shaker.

Anyway...any further comments on the Skylan versus Sound Anchors are appreciated.

I've tried Skylan and several high quality metal stands just recently (not Sound Anchor) and it seems so far that the metal stands have a slightly more lively sound. The Skylan is filled with sand, which might be a factor. Reading various reports on audioasylum seem to confirm that metal is a bit livelier as a rule of thumb. That might be a big clue as to which one you want to start with.

Also I've noticed that I like the one stand I'm using that is basically a wide frame instead of having thick posts, the EPOS ST12. I've always felt that speakers like having space to breath around them - always felt that floorstanders need to be on spikes tall enough to give them some room between speaker and floor - so this is consistent with that observation I've had over time.

Art

I was under the impression that Skylan stands are metal, excepting the base and top platform. Is this not correct?

On the other hand, Sound Anchor stands are 100% metal, yes?

What would you think of a 3/4" birch plywood stands...basically a boxes divided into upper and lower chambers that would allow the upper chambers to be filled with compacted sand? The bottom would be open, with AudioPoints on the bottom corners. Consider the stand is only 9" tall.