Aesthetix Io On Active Isolation Platform?

EuroDriver · Jan 21, 2017

wisnon said:
Are Herzans better than Halcyonix (sp?).

On paper, the Herzan's active 3 axis displacement and 3 axis rotation to 1 KHz, looks more effective than the solutions from the other providers. I have been told for scientific applications, the Herzan is the performance leader. For audio applications the competing solutions need to be tested

Volunteers ?

Mike Lavigne · Jan 21, 2017

Ron Resnick said:
I understand how the Herzan insulates from external vibration the device resting on it, but how does the Herzan help with vibration generated within the tubes themselves?

the Herzan attenuates 'noise'. it does not care where it comes from. practically speaking most 'noise' (in degrees and levels of pressure) travels from the ground/floor through the rack to the Herzan. but air borne 'noise' also gets sensed and attenuated. if you clap your hands next to the Herzan you can see visually on the LCD screen that there is noise on the display that gets attenuated.

so tubes that are generating microphonics will be attenuated to the degree that it gets sensed. I'm not sure whether those tube microphonics are a result of external forces or somehow generated by the current thru the tube. but if some sort of noise is going on that gets sensed by the sensors it will be compensated for.

one thing is that the tube 'voicing' in any chassis involves the combination of the whole design which might need a certain type sound. it's possible a Herzan could cause an undesirable FR shift in some cases. likely not to my tastes, but maybe an issue for some.

no tweak is absolutely universal 100% of the time.

LL21 · Jan 21, 2017

Mike Lavigne said:
the Herzan attenuates 'noise'. it does not care where it comes from. practically speaking most 'noise' (in degrees and levels of pressure) travels from the ground/floor through the rack to the Herzan. but air borne 'noise' also gets sensed and attenuated. if you clap your hands next to the Herzan you can see visually on the LCD screen that there is noise on the display that gets attenuated.

so tubes that are generating microphonics will be attenuated to the degree that it gets sensed. I'm not sure whether those tube microphonics are a result of external forces or somehow generated by the current thru the tube. but if some sort of noise is going on that gets sensed by the sensors it will be compensated for.

Yes i remember seeing Audiocrack's table in action underneath the Scarlatti full stack, and those lights lit up the instant you clapped your hand or even placed a fingertip no the Scarlatti.

Ron Resnick · Jan 21, 2017

Mike Lavigne said:
the Herzan attenuates 'noise'. it does not care where it comes from. practically speaking most 'noise' (in degrees and levels of pressure) travels from the ground/floor through the rack to the Herzan. but air borne 'noise' also gets sensed and attenuated. if you clap your hands next to the Herzan you can see visually on the LCD screen that there is noise on the display that gets attenuated.

so tubes that are generating microphonics will be attenuated to the degree that it gets sensed. I'm not sure whether those tube microphonics are a result of external forces or somehow generated by the current thru the tube. but if some sort of noise is going on that gets sensed by the sensors it will be compensated for.

I did not know that. That is very interesting!

If one might normally locate a tube component on an HRS or CMS rack (whose design is intended to convert vibrational energy to heat and to dissipate away that vibrational energy from the component) should such a high-tech rack not be used to support a tube component if a Herzan also is in use? (I am thinking of your advice to have a Herzan "grounded" directly to the floor and to not have any visco-elastic material or other vibration absorber underneath the Herzan anywhere in the rack or support shelf structure. Or does the way these high-tech racks convert vibration into heat not create the problem you were concerned about?)

Mike Lavigne · Jan 21, 2017

Ron Resnick said:
I did not know that. That is very interesting!

If one might normally locate a tube component on an HRS or CMS rack (whose design is intended to convert vibrational energy to heat and to dissipate away that vibrational energy from the component) should such a high-tech rack not be used to support a tube component if a Herzan also is in use? (I am thinking of your advice to have a Herzan "grounded" directly to the floor and to not have any visco-elastic material or other vibration absorber underneath the Herzan anywhere in the rack or support shelf structure. Or does the way these high-tech racks convert vibration into heat not create the problem you were concerned about?)

my guess is that it would be a guess as to the result of adding compliance below the Herzan, my biggest concerns would be (1) that the Herzan's effectiveness might be compromised since two forces are working at the same time. like a car suspension on a moving roadbed. and (2) that some sort of cycle might occur where there is a constant sensor actuation from the movement below and the Herzan could be harmed. I know Ki Choi had a spongy floor underneath his Herzan and there was a problem from that.

but it might be just fine too.

above the Herzan likely would be positive and it's a good idea to try it. the Herzan's passive attenuation only goes to 1000hz, and so some additional passive might help. or not. try it and listen.

Ron Resnick · Jan 21, 2017

I understand about not having compliance below the Herzan. My question is whether the "filters" on a CMS rack constitute compliance or does CMS dissipate vibration through means other than compliance (which I think is the case)?

Mike Lavigne · Jan 21, 2017

Ron Resnick said:
I understand about not having compliance below the Herzan. My question is whether the "filters" on a CMS rack constitute compliance or does CMS dissipate vibration through means other than compliance (which I think is the case)?

likely ask Herzan to review the CMS white paper.

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...Steve-Williams&p=425179&viewfull=1#post425179

Steve Williams · Jan 21, 2017

Mike Lavigne said:
likely ask Herzan to review the CMS white paper.

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...Steve-Williams&p=425179&viewfull=1#post425179

for me the real question is why would you need both. For me it's either or but not both

Ron Resnick · Jan 21, 2017

Steve Williams said:
for me the real question is why would you need both. For me it's either or but not both

That is exactly the question.

We have testimony to the effect that adding a Herzan to a non-compliant stand improves the sound.

All Points Bulletin: Has anyone experimented with a Herzan or a Vibraplane or a Minus K platform on a CMS rack?

Jeffy · Jan 21, 2017

Very interesting, so some tube components, maybe solid state as well, may not sound its best under one of these devices. The designer designed these components with the vibration distortion of the internal components intact. I am wondering if some people get that certain component now to sound too sterile.

microstrip · Jan 21, 2017

Mike Lavigne said:
my guess is that it would be a guess as to the result of adding compliance below the Herzan, my biggest concerns would be (1) that the Herzan's effectiveness might be compromised since two forces are working at the same time.(...)

Just writing it in another way - the great advantage of the Herzan is the wide bandwidth high isolation avoiding the ultra low frequency resonance of other passive systems - see http://www.herzan.com/resources/tutorials/active-vs-passive-vibration-control.html.

Why adding a low frequency resonator in series with it compromising its performance? And yes, if more specific isolation or damping is needed I would insert it between the table and the equipment never under the table but even there we must avoid some elastic materials.

Mike Lavigne · Jan 21, 2017

Jeffy said:
Very interesting, so some tube components, maybe solid state as well, may not sound its best under one of these devices. The designer designed these components with the vibration distortion of the internal components intact. I am wondering if some people get that certain component now to sound too sterile.

it could move gear more toward a neutral frequency balance. my guess based on observations of what the Herzan does is that it would never push things to sterility or bleached or dry. but it could make it less sonorous, and more nuanced and textured. think less smear/blur, more detail. a trade-off I would prefer and a more real presentation. but different than possibly intended by the maker.

so the change should be good depending on one's perspective. but the issue here is that it could change the voicing.

LL21 · Jan 22, 2017

Mike Lavigne said:
it could ... make it less sonorous, and more nuanced and textured. think less smear/blur, more detail. a trade-off I would prefer and a more real presentation. but different than possibly intended by the maker.

so the change should be good depending on one's perspective. but the issue here is that it could change the voicing.

Absolutely agreed in my own personal experience if passive isolation where it was clear that clarity, detail, instrument separation improved...but where tonal balance had to be monitored throughout the process of finding the optimal isolation for each component. Now, i fully admit i personally believe Stillpoints Ultra 5s DO change the voicing slightly with an ultraclear but teeny-bit thinned upper mid frequency range...and it drove me absolutely crazy for hours until 3am trying to figure out how to keep all that glorious clarity without having a Steinway sound like an electronic keyboard (no depth/power of key strike and tone)...and i finally figured out that adding Nimbus Couplers to the top of the Ultra 5 (directly underneath the component) was exactly the right tonal depth, power and balance...while maintaining the detail that i so enjoyed from the Ultra 5.

Now, passive components might possibly come with a lot more issues than active...i am just noting my personal experience with isolation. And I also admit the tonal shifts may have been the passive isolation rather than the equipment...but i instinctively doubt it was ONLY the equipment. I have to imagine some of it was the electronics reacting to the isolation as well. Fortunately, i think in the end the electronics react extremely well to the particular isolation we've got.

In sum, i absolutely believe that I managed to maintain the tonal quality of the original equipment we bought...but with far greater bass power, slam, detail, air, etc, etc...but boy it took 24 straight hours of work one weekend plus periodic finetuning thereafter until we got the 'formula' right to my ears. That may/may not be the case with Herzan/active but buyers beware it may not be 100.0% plug and play.

spiritofmusic · Jan 22, 2017

In my new room, which is such an impvt, certain supports that wked before and don't now ie Mooks
And others that didn't much but do now ie Symposium solid footers
I am intrigued to see where lab grade isoln on my tt goes
Accurion i4 was a step up in London, but here in my new room...?

Ron Resnick · Jan 23, 2017

No Mooks?

What did the Mooks sound like now that they didn't sound like before?

bonzo75 · Jan 24, 2017

Ron Resnick said:
No Mooks?

What did the Mooks sound like now that they didn't sound like before?

He has a set of giants, and the only place they can fit under is his power box. They cannot fit under his CDP, pre, etc, which is where Mooks make the difference

BruceD · Jan 24, 2017

bonzo75 said:
He has a set of giants, and the only place they can fit under is his power box. They cannot fit under his CDP, pre, etc, which is where Mooks make the difference

Agree I replaced the Stillpoints under my CDP with set of Mook GDR's--all I can say is WOEW!!

The Stillpoints ---G O N E!

BruceD

spiritofmusic · Jan 24, 2017

This is the joy and frustration of this subjective hobby
In London, my experience was like Bruce's
Ultra5s impvd my cdp but Mooks Giants turbocharged it
Texture, bass, tonality all maxxed out
Here in the new room, some of the impvt in tone remained, but a certain sluggishness now apparent
Switching to Symposium solid footers is a more neutral impvt in my current situation

GuillaumeB · Jan 24, 2017

spiritofmusic said:
This is the joy and frustration of this subjective hobby
In London, my experience was like Bruce's
Ultra5s impvd my cdp but Mooks Giants turbocharged it
Texture, bass, tonality all maxxed out
Here in the new room, some of the impvt in tone remained, but a certain sluggishness now apparent
Switching to Symposium solid footers is a more neutral impvt in my current situation

Fascinating. I haven't tried the Mooks but have had Ansuz Ceramics, Diamonds and now DTC pucks in my system. Also tried Stillpoints, including Ultra 6 pucks.

Most if not all seem to do something to shift the tonal balance of the system. Ansuz pucks seem to emphasise the bass when under my Devialets. Under the Totaldac server and DAC it's a different effect although I am not convinced it's neutral.

The most extreme was the Stillpoints Ultra 6 under the Absolare Integrated. At first it turbocharged everything. Then I realised it was fatiguing and there was way too much treble energy (along with everything else). Have gone back to the (Stabilian Quatro) feet that came with the amplifier, not quite as exciting but things seem more balanced.

At present I am experimenting with HRS vibration plates and Nimbus Assembly pucks, well the pucks arrive today. The plates had a great effect of calming everything down and I'm looking forward to seeing what the Nimbus add to the party.

Guillaume

LL21 · Jan 24, 2017

GuillaumeB said:
Fascinating. I haven't tried the Mooks but have had Ansuz Ceramics, Diamonds and now DTC pucks in my system. Also tried Stillpoints, including Ultra 6 pucks.

Most if not all seem to do something to shift the tonal balance of the system. Ansuz pucks seem to emphasise the bass when under my Devialets. Under the Totaldac server and DAC it's a different effect although I am not convinced it's neutral.

The most extreme was the Stillpoints Ultra 6 under the Absolare Integrated. At first it turbocharged everything. Then I realised it was fatiguing and there was way too much treble energy (along with everything else). Have gone back to the (Stabilian Quatro) feet that came with the amplifier, not quite as exciting but things seem more balanced.

At present I am experimenting with HRS vibration plates and Nimbus Assembly pucks, well the pucks arrive today. The plates had a great effect of calming everything down and I'm looking forward to seeing what the Nimbus add to the party.

Guillaume

Guillaume...i agree with your comments indirectly, since i own Ultra 5s...you have to be very, very careful in my system. I found that using HRS Nimbus Couplers on top of the Ultra 5s...and THEN placing the component on top was 'ideal' in my system. We got the density of tone back which went missing slightly and became 'unlistenable' as a sacrifice i was not prepared to make...and yet i have to admit the clarity and definition that the Ultra 5s brought in instrument separation and bass clarity, depth and detail was ALSO something i was not prepared to sacrifice once i'd heard those benefits.

Since you have HRS...which i also use quite a lot of...M3 Isolation platforms and plenty of HRS double-thickness damping plates...you might just be able to experiment.

Aesthetix Io On Active Isolation Platform?

Well-Known Member

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator

Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Member Sponsor

VIP/Donor

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Well-Known Member

Similar threads