mapman
"VIbrations are vibrations except some can be eliminated and some not. You have to identify the source and determine if can be removed or not. If so, remove it. If not, tehn do what one will to deal with it as needed.
We can agree on that. If teh source is the earth’s seismic activity, it is what it is and one can determine whether they need care or not."
Sorry, but IMHO that’s quite an oversimplification of what this particular thread is really all about. I don’t agree that we should be so dismissive.
Let’s summarize, shall we? We have two points of view - one that ignores seismic type vibrations and claims the only source of vibration that matters to the sound is the induced vibration from the component, including vibration resulting from the mechanical acoustic waves striking the component. The other side of the argument, I.e., your humble scribe, is that all vibration is BAD for the sound, *especially low frequency structureborne vibration. The simple glass of water experiment perfectly demonstrates how powerful the seismic type vibrations actually are. Yet, I also address induced vibration in my designs and philosophy. See the difference? Of course anyone is free to ignore anything. I just happen to think that's uh, ignorant.
So, actually it’s not helpful to the discussion nor does it move the discussion forward to use expressions like, "vibration is vibration" or "it is what it is." Obviously there are folks who don’t consider everything or try to fix the numerous problems we know exist in high end audio. But hiding one’s head in the sand is not really a smart option IMHO. Are we supposed to be contented cows?
If seismic vibration is actually not an issue for high end audio how come at least 10,000 audiophiles have bought Vibraplane isolation stands? It’s not logical, Captain.
