How an audio rack can enhance your amp/pre




Just thought I would share my recent experience with upgrading my sound star technologies rack to the new rhythm rack.

Every now and then, I have a visiting audiophile who really appreciates my system…and traditionally asks – “wow, what makes it sound so good?” My typical answer is it all makes a difference, even down the equipment rack, which can and certainly should be considered a component…but in many cases is overlooked…

Star Sound introduction

About 10 years ago, I was introduced to Star Sound Technologies Sistrum platforms and Audio Points. Audiopoints has always been known for its manufacture of well-designed and beautifully manufactured brass cones used under equipment and as an integral part of an audio stand. This ultimately led to the design of stands designed to transfer vibrations out of components and down to ground. What I didn’t know at the time was how good the Sistrum platforms ‘sounded’. So, I bit the bullet and tried several Sistrum Platforms - what intrigued me about the stands was the design of the Sistrum Platform which allowed a pre-determined pattern of energy, known as Coulomb Friction to develop and dissipate via a high-speed calculated conductive pathway to earth's ground. Which made sense…how do you deal with airborne energy dissipation? I know you could put cones to reduce vibrations from the ‘ground up’ so to speak, but how could you eliminate airborne vibration? We’ve all held our hand on our equipment when music is playing only to feel the equipment vibrate, so how do you deal with it? Draining it quickly to ground made sense, but at the end of the day, all I really wanted to know was…does it improve the sound?

To say I was shocked is an understatement - the Original Sistrum Platforms offered – smoother sound, better transients, dynamics and a lower noise floor. And, the cool part is that you could turn up the sound and the music would flow with greater ease…well worth the investment. Robert at Star Sound was extremely helpful in guiding me through which racks made the most sense for my system.

Rhythm Platforms

Which brings me to 2015…it had been a while since I last spoke with Robert curious as to what his engineering team was up to…which led me to check out the ‘new’ model of Sistrum Stands – the Sistrum Rhythm Platforms.

These new platforms / shelves were substantially heavier, with a nicer overall finish than the original stands, with more grooves allowing for substantially more options to place points in various places under your equipment to refine the sound even further. In addition, the shelves were engineered to deal with resonances in a more efficient manner…The brass cones at the bottom of the rack were substantially bigger in size - 3 inches and quite heavy. The brass cones under the equipment were attached with nicely crafted screws that could be hand tightened and no longer required a screw driver… a nice feature making it both easier to put together but also the amount of tightening could influence the sound. The brass and platform rods are modular, making it easier to put together and painted in a beautiful black finish – in combination with the brass I would say the improvement in the WAF factor is significant – the stands are really impressive to look at. As for structure, these things were a solid as could be – and heavy! Not going anywhere, even in an earthquake!

My system includes VAC equipment, preamp, amps, DAC and a transport. As well as power supplies. Most of which now rested on the new Rhythm Platform.

Listening Impressions:

My first impressions were clearly a lower noise floor with enhanced dynamics, while also being able to hear deeper into the soundstage, which now extended well outside of the speakers. Tempo was faster, due to better-defined, leading edges. The high end was ‘cleaner’, with more sheen and decay on symbols and hi hats. Brass had that right bite to it, without over doing it…Bass lines were tighter which led to better ‘rhythm’ … and best of all, I could crank up the volume and the dynamic range seemed to extend effortlessly, which was a nice surprise.

One thing I noticed, that was true of my initial experience with Sistrum Platforms, is that the newer Rhythm Platforms sounded progressively better after 3 days of ‘settling’ and reached full potential after about 1 week. So some form of break in is required.
Over the years, I’ve tried different racks and various cones under equipment, whether if be soft, hard, ceramic, rubber (or some variation of ‘absorbing material’ etc.) you name it. All of which ‘altered’ the sound, but nothing came close to the Sistrum Stands holistically; while the new Rhythm stands, just take it all to a higher level…
While I cannot expound eloquently on science of Coulomb’s Friction, I can tell you that whatever they are doing at Star Sound visa vie their racks, it works…and it’s not subtle. This is a very audible improvement in your listening experience. If you want your system to perform at its highest level, I would suggest that you maximize your investment in your equipment by letting it do what it does best and put it on a Sistrum rack that will allow it to perform at its best. And if you want the best, I would strongly recommend the Rhythm Platforms.
wisper
Dgarretson, I am in total agreement with what you say.

I just have to say that after trying to get four Audio Points in contact with the bottoms of my BMC Arcadia speaker and remembering that three points define a plane, I gave up on anything more than three.

How did you manage to get all six in contact? Four Ultra SSs or Fives, sound better than three, but one can raise or lower these individual units. Of course a screw other than a tight one is anathema for Star Sound.
The K-01X presents a perfectly flat bottom surface, and the machined tolerances of the SS APs and coupling disks are obviously very tight in order to allow six points of contact without shims.
In the 90’s when wood furniture stands and shelves transcended into equipment racks designed to control vibration, the audio world began to form methods of understanding how additional materials will alter performance in sound reproduction and have become the gospel for treating vibration in audio. These learning curves, most of which were adopted from other scientific and practiced applications of vibration control were largely borrowed from other industries.

Every equipment racking company in audio has theories as to how their products perform. Not one of them including Star Sound has produced any type of third party testing. There is no standard methodology recognized for testing products for comparisons sake.

Every equipment rack at one point or another does some of the same things attempting to manage vibration. Some employ absorbents such as sand, lead, Sorbothane® or types of rubber and foams used as damping materials where some use various stones, acrylics, others use carbon polymers and woods that have various effects on performance but the vast majority of racking has ‘one’ material in common with each other and that is metals.

Star Sound products and designs employ metals only. A Sistrum single shelf is a speaker, amplifier, component platform. The rest of the industry uses multiple combinations of various other materials to achieve their product and performance but are left with a technical approach that cannot service all equipment profiles.

What some readers may be missing is steel and brass also damp energy as each metal and alloy has specific damping factors based on their chemical makeup (damping charts are easy to research). Steel and brass also provide diffusion and phase cancellation where energy is converted into heat so we are not much different than other product in the marketplace other than we employ a mechanical grounding device designed to vibrate in a sonic environment.

We are not focused on where vibration comes from or how much vibration is created or what types of vibration disrupt product operational efficiency that negatively affects components, speakers or listening environments sonic. Star Sound products become infused as part of the overall vibration formula – joined at the hip.

In answer to the questions listed below: Star Sound comments posted here are with regards to Live Vibe Technology™ is assumed that our technology is in place inside the equipment, below the equipment, adapted to musical instruments and/or building structural frameworks.

It is also assumed that all applications and statements are determined in a musical reproduction environment. Earthquakes, locomotives, 4 Hz frequencies, earth’s crust rotations, etc related to other sciences are beyond our studies and research criterion. Star Sound limits in house testing to audio/video equipment and the sound room relative to human hearing capability.

Question: “Hey, what happened to the vibration coming up from the floor? That's a much bigger problem than anything the component can dish out. And that what the rigid rack amplifies. Hel-looo!”

Answer: With our technology implied, energy formed from vibration coming from the air, flooring, walls, and ceilings, mechanical, electromechanical or acoustic means is not an issue. We approach managing vibration as a single concept versus categorically analyzing it coming from one location or one form or one direction at a time.

We experimented with springs many years ago and determined a soft float design establishes greater amplitudes of lateral motion causing changes in speed and decay. When applied in combination with steel shelving, additional materials were required to maximize the effort as the direct instrument chassis contact area was too linear. The formula became extremely complex and the sonic results varied due to various types of equipment’s chassis mass. Rather than build products specific to weight restraints or choosing various springs for each type of component, this highly functional concept was placed aside.

The Sistrum rod assemblies and Audio Points provided a much higher speed of energy flow with no weight restrictions.

Our reply to the latter portion of this question is how can one provide proof that a Sistrum Platform ‘amplifies’ vibration from the flooring or any other source for that matter? We understand where ‘rack chatter’ originates when using wood blocks and shelving as vibrating wood produces an audible range of frequencies hence the comparisons in the sound between MDF, maple and other exotics are discussed often on this forum but having a bit of trouble in hearing noise amplified by heavy dense steel.

Question: “The stand does have it's own resonant frequency, as absolutely everything does, so it's very likely, that it transfers that own residual (it cannot dissipate a 100% of it) resonant frequency back into the component, therefore adding that resonant frequency to the sound made by the component itself.”

Answer: Yes, every form of racking design no matter what materials and processes are employed will do this. In our opinion - based on physics, laws of motion, and gravity in combination with the phenomena known as Coulomb friction the geometry of the Sistrum design maintains the majority of resonance flow towards ground. Please review previous information with analogy on our response here, dated 7-18-15 (water flow and fire hydrant).

It is also the opinion of the company that the minute amount of energy ‘feeding back into the equipment’ will not affect the sonic merit of the equipment nor infuse a hardness in sonic or ‘metallic sound’ when placed atop a Platform. The resonant frequency of the Sistrum Platforms is well above and below human hearing while functioning in a listening environment. Naturally if you hold up a metal shelf and whack it with a hammer there is quite an audible frequency ring and that will vary depending on the material used to make up the hammerhead but that situation and self generated frequency does not relate to a listening room.

We would never argue that you did not experience total satisfaction from the Sistrum performance. I began my career with this company discussing systems with hundreds of listeners and audiophiles having attained tremendous amounts of knowledge over the years. I also learned through this experience there were other variables related to system synergy such as audio components, cables mix, power and distribution, mirrors, picture frames, bookcases, lamps, rugs, curtains, windows, speaker placements, rooms, etc., creating problems that were first realized in tandem with our products.

Star Sound averages two refunds per annum for dissatisfaction in performance. With sales well into the thousands of units, we remain highly motivated by public response and acceptance. We also fully and openly admit there are unknowns that exist within our understanding and that of our systems performance. In 1999 we were the first company providing a trial period with refunds for every product ever sold. To the best of our knowledge in 2015 Star Sound the first company paying for third party testing in order to evolve the science.

Over time we have improved greatly upon the technology and overall sonic performance as demonstrated with the newer Sistrum Apprentice and Rhythm Platforms compared to the fifteen year older original Platforms and would jump at the chance to possibly get our second generation products back into your system for an audition.

Thank you for a providing good questions and participating in this thread.

Robert Maicks
Star Sound Technologies, LLC
Well said Robert.

I recently that Sound Anchor is teaming up with Stillpoints to create the ultimate speaker stand:

http://www.stillpoints.us/index.php/39-home-posts/125-coming-soon

IMO, SS already makes the ultimate speaker stand:

http://audiofederation.com/hifiing/2006/RMAF2006/report/500/part4/IMG_4185.jpg

Some of you may not know this, but Tom (Theaudiotweak) has patented a mechanically grounded endpin for the cello. The professional musicians who use it are giving him the thumbs up.

The SS technology is a flexible one. SRA or Stillpoints could not easily be used in that application or in walls like my sound room. JMHO.....:)
Dgarretson, all that I can say is that I have never been successful with even four points. Were six better than five, etc.?