HRS M3 vs Symposium Ultra platform


Has any one had any experience with either of these platforms? I'm looking to place one under my CD player.
Seems to be a huge difference in price.
Thanks
marty
Marty,

Those tweaks that "work" (affect the sound) have a sonic signature. Most of the time, dampening vibration is desirable, particularly because it improves clarity and resolution. But, I am just warning that whether one likes the result is a matter of taste, system tuning and synergy. That is particularly the case with components like speakers and turntables. A turntable that effectively controls internally generated vibration and blocks external vibration may be described by some as quiet and well behaved, while others might characterize that same table as lifeless--it is a matter of taste and how each component interacts with or complements others.

Because CD players are mechanical devices, they generate a lot of vibration internally and are probably sensitive to external vibration so shelves or rollerblocks would normally be expected to have a substantial impact on the sound. More often than not, I would expect a positive effect, but, there is the possibility you won't like the effect.

I have also heard amps placed on Silent Running Audio (SRA)platforms. Those are quite effective too, but can be quite expensive. Like the HRS platforms, the SRA platforms are customized for each particular component (the weight and weight distribution of the component is factored into the design so that the dampening layers are optimally compressed).

Another caveat: It is easy to get caught up in certain obvious improvements, like greater clarity and resolution of detail, and end up losing something else that is harder to quantify or explicitly recognize ("musicality" or repose and grace). I've done this myself with certain tweaks. I wish it were the case that there is a defined formula or path for "improvement," but it really is not that simple.
Hi Larry
I agree with what your saying especially "It is easy to get caught up in certain obvious improvements, like greater clarity and resolution of detail, and end up losing something else that is harder to quantify or explicitly recognize ("musicality" or repose and grace)."
I would suggest that the HRS does not have a sonic signature. It does not tip the top end to create hyperdetail. It does not add warmth to the midrange. It does not lower the bass. It simply removes component generated vibrations so you hear your equipment. Whatever you put on it, you will get more.

Many products remove certain vibrations but not all. This results in a sonic coloration. Whether you talk about a shelf, footer, or rack, most will do some things. And many of those things are sonically fine. If you need to speed-up the sound, or slow-down the sound, then this can be accomplished at many price points. The HRS just results in a purity and clarity, IMO. It may not hit you over the head on a brief audition, but I think it is the foundation of a long-term satisfying system.

I would suggest you try an HRS platform when one comes-up used. If you don't hear a difference, you could probably sell for very little loss. Consider supplementing with the HRS nimbus footers as well and allow some time to allow your ears to adjust to what it does.
The HRS is far superior to the SU stuff. I had both. If you want one of best get the HRS.

RTN has it right.