Herzan Active Platform on Critical Mass or Harmonic Resolution Shelf and Rack

My understanding is that nothing beats active when it comes to keeping floor borne vibrations from reaching equipment. Passives like CMS, HRS, SRA and Symposium serve as grounds for equipment vibration (self, like motors and transformers and airborne) and convert that to low grade heat. The passives attenuate floor borne vibrations by making the path directional using interfaces (spikes, elbows) but do not cancel. If my understanding is correct then some context may be required in the decision making process. If I were say in an area with heavy traffic, perhaps a railway even or have suspended floors, in other words heavy subsonic activity, actives become more desirable. Absent that the passives deal with self noise so benefits can be had even without high airborne vibrations via loudspeaker output and can be heard at normal listening levels. I like the four brands above because their surfaces have no play and are quite rigid. They won't be playing pass the hot potato with a piece of equipment with lightly sprung suspensions like say my Townshend Rock 7. Theoretically then my assumption is that the holy grail would be a passive platform designed to work on an active base. The caveat is that some people actually like their sympathetic resonances. As far as I'm concerned, that is fine too.

Oh I guess I should also share that I find that some gear are less critical of platforms because of how they are built. Equipment using stamped plates instead of crazy "overkill" construction IME always result in a bigger difference even if both have their internal components suspended or damped.

Depending on your TT...I would imagine a Herzan on an HRS or CMS stand would improve the purity of sound even more with it than without. They won't fight each other. The only way to know for sure is to try it. My AF1 sits atop an HRS shelf designed for the AF1 and that sits on the Herzan which in turn sits on a custom welded rack made by Herzan. The one caveat is horizontal rigidity. If you can push on the side of a stand and get some movement, active isolation may not function properly.

JackD201 said:

My understanding is that nothing beats active when it comes to keeping floor borne vibrations from reaching equipment. Passives like CMS, HRS, SRA and Symposium serve as grounds for equipment vibration (self, like motors and transformers and airborne) and convert that to low grade heat. The passives attenuate floor borne vibrations by making the path directional using interfaces (spikes, elbows) but do not cancel. If my understanding is correct then some context may be required in the decision making process. If I were say in an area with heavy traffic, perhaps a railway even or have suspended floors, in other words heavy subsonic activity, actives become more desirable. Absent that the passives deal with self noise so benefits can be had even without high airborne vibrations via loudspeaker output and can be heard at normal listening levels. I like the four brands above because their surfaces have no play and are quite rigid. They won't be playing pass the hot potato with a piece of equipment with lightly sprung suspensions like say my Townshend Rock 7. Theoretically then my assumption is that the holy grail would be a passive platform designed to work on an active base. The caveat is that some people actually like their sympathetic resonances. As far as I'm concerned, that is fine too.

Oh I guess I should also share that I find that some gear are less critical of platforms because of how they are built. Equipment using stamped plates instead of crazy "overkill" construction IME always result in a bigger difference even if both have their internal components suspended or damped.

Click to expand...

Floor born vibrations can be dealt with through high mass, you don't need an active platform. The entire concept of a moving platform under a high mass turntable is counter intuitive to me, no different than sticking Stillpoints under speakers that also have moving parts. Active platforms are reactive modifying isolation based on the input, any idea how they react to turntable generated vibrations? Also some cancel resonances at lower frequencies this will affect the bass performance of a turntable or create an imbalance in the resonant frequency of that system changing the overall sound qualities. I didn't like what they did to the sound of my turntables but I have no idea how active works with other designs.

david

ddk said:

Floor born vibrations can be dealt with through high mass, you don't need an active platform. The entire concept of a moving platform under a high mass turntable is counter intuitive to me, no different than sticking Stillpoints under speakers that also have moving parts. Active platforms are reactive modifying isolation based on the input, any idea how they react to turntable generated vibrations? Also some cancel resonances at lower frequencies this will affect the bass performance of a turntable or create an imbalance in the resonant frequency of that system changing the overall sound qualities. I didn't like what they did to the sound of my turntables but I have no idea how active works with other designs.

david

Click to expand...

well.....no. not how it works. science uses high mass, and then.....active isolation, for it's most precise work with an electron microscope. if that was not how it worked why would they use it? go to a laboratory, it will be in a basement and will use a heavy table like what you use. and the electron microscope will be sitting on the heavy table.....a top an active device.

20 years ago it was using an air device with active leveling, now it's piezo-electric sensors and actuators.

high mass simply changes the resonant frequency but does not eliminate resonance. but it does allow the active device to operate optimally. your intuition does not account for the active device being able to stop and start. so it's not creating a character, only reacting precisely to ground resonance (your location is not immune to ground resonance).....adding focus and texture, removing smear and blur.

the active device is not settling and overshooting like a passive device. it's 500x stiffer than passive. and just so you know, an active device improves bass performance. adding a significant degree of bass texture. and until you hear what it does you won't know what you are missing.

your idea that somehow the moving parts of a turntable cause some sort of problem does not jive with how tt's work on these devices. and your tt's have less self resonance than others in any case.

if you take one of your big heavy tables, and add active isolation, there will be a benefit. do you need this benefit? different question. maybe it's not important. but there would be some level of benefit. you don't have 750 pound bass towers 6 feet from your turntables with potentially -3db at 7hz capability.

having heard your system at warp 9 I would wholeheartedly agree that any benefit would be marginal......but I have no doubt there would be some. likely your system has minimal feedback, not zero, but minimal considering the distance from your (sub)woofers.

Ron Resnick said:

As CMS and HRS and SRA do not use anything squishy and each element of which each of these systems is composed (shelf, connector, rack and footer) is rigid and not moving, and the process by which these racks turn vibrations into heat does not result in movement, it makes some at least theoretical sense to me to place a component on top of a passive shelf on top of an active platform on top of a rigid stand.

Of course with a turntable reducing vibrations will change the sound, but does that improve the sound?

Click to expand...

does focusing a camera lens help? it sure should unless there are truths you don't want to reveal (take a picture of a woman's face with too much light or resolution....and get that scowl).....which can be what is going on. so nothing is a universal benefit since not everything get's better with more clarity.

there are special expensive lenses with just the right amount of blur.

in most cases more clarity and especially bass articulation is beneficial.....getting rid of (reducing) smear and blur is generally beneficial.

Guys, this is all becoming my big final area of investigation in audio
In my move to my new bespoke room, everything except one critical thing has improved thru the roof
But that's on digital only
On analog, I'm struggling to fully dial in my sound
Everything is there, but a kind of veil and softened impact, not so much in the low end, but more upper mids and treble
The critical difference for my tt is that I've gone from a 27x22 non floating wood on solid concrete floor in my previous London apartment, to my current 50x18 suspended wooden floor, new timber floor over existing Victorian joists roof space floor, and there is the inevitable springiness in it that one can't easily eliminate in such a massive span
I am running a Symposium Isis 3 tier rack which seems to be just fine on my digital, but I'm surmising now, w XV-1's answer to my PM, that it may be proving a liability on my tt
And now my thoughts have changed from beefing up the top tier where my tt is with a Symposium Quantum Signature uber constrained layer platform, to going the lab grade isolation direction, and providing an inert table just for my tt and using one of these devices, Herzan, Accurion or UK based Spiers And Robertson (from now on SR for this thread)
The q I want to ask is, my issues are more to do w transparency, dynamic snap and lack of treble incisiveness and sparkle, does active isolation help w all these?
I always got the impression it was more noticeable at the low end ie bass articulation and removing low mids/upper bass "sludge"

Mike Lavigne said:

well.....no. not how it works. science uses high mass, and then.....active isolation, for it's most precise work with an electron microscope. if that was not how it worked why would they use it? go to a laboratory, it will be in a basement and will use a heavy table like what you use. and the electron microscope will be sitting on the heavy table.....a top an active device.

20 years ago it was using an air device with active leveling, now it's piezo-electric sensors and actuators.

high mass simply changes the resonant frequency but does not eliminate resonance. but it does allow the active device to operate optimally. your intuition does not account for the active device being able to stop and start. so it's not creating a character, only reacting precisely to ground resonance (your location is not immune to ground resonance).....adding focus and texture, removing smear and blur.

the active device is not settling and overshooting like a passive device. it's 500x stiffer than passive. and just so you know, an active device improves bass performance. adding a significant degree of bass texture. and until you hear what it does you won't know what you are missing.

your idea that somehow the moving parts of a turntable cause some sort of problem does not jive with how tt's work on these devices. and your tt's have less self resonance than others in any case.

if you take one of your big heavy tables, and add active isolation, there will be a benefit. do you need this benefit? different question. maybe it's not important. but there would be some level of benefit. you don't have 750 pound bass towers 6 feet from your turntables with potentially -3db at 7hz capability.

having heard your system at warp 9 I would wholeheartedly agree that any benefit would be marginal......but I have no doubt there would be some. likely your system has minimal feedback, not zero, but minimal considering the distance from your (sub)woofers.

Click to expand...

As I mentioned I have no idea how active platforms perform under different turntables, I didn't like what air did to the sound back then and not keen on effects of active platforms on my tt now, particularly in the bass region. To be honest I see no correlation between a static microscope at a few thousand X or even tens of thousands magnification in case of electron microscopes and a turntable with moving parts, specially one that uses inertia as part of it's design. Resonance also plays a part in the overall sound of turntables/tonearms/cartridges inhibiting it reactively can have a negative effect. YMMV! In case of electronics I did hear improvements with both active air and electronic platforms compared to my racks.

david

spiritofmusic said:

Guys, this is all becoming my big final area of investigation in audio
In my move to my new bespoke room, everything except one critical thing has improved thru the roof
But that's on digital only
On analog, I'm struggling to fully dial in my sound
Everything is there, but a kind of veil and softened impact, not so much in the low end, but more upper mids and treble
The critical difference for my tt is that I've gone from a 27x22 non floating wood on solid concrete floor in my previous London apartment, to my current 50x18 suspended wooden floor, new timber floor over existing Victorian joists roof space floor, and there is the inevitable springiness in it that one can't easily eliminate in such a massive span
I am running a Symposium Isis 3 tier rack which seems to be just fine on my digital, but I'm surmising now, w XV-1's answer to my PM, that it may be proving a liability on my tt
And now my thoughts have changed from beefing up the top tier where my tt is with a Symposium Quantum Signature uber constrained layer platform, to going the lab grade isolation direction, and providing an inert table just for my tt and using one of these devices, Herzan, Accurion or UK based Spiers And Robertson (from now on SR for this thread)
The q I want to ask is, my issues are more to do w transparency, dynamic snap and lack of treble incisiveness and sparkle, does active isolation help w all these?
I always got the impression it was more noticeable at the low end ie bass articulation and removing low mids/upper bass "sludge"

Click to expand...

It's hard to say what's the cause spirit, there could be several reasons for what you're describing and it could be that's how your vinyl front end always sounded you just didn't hear it because your previous space muddled everything including your digital. You did say that improvements are through the roof in the new room! I wouldn't rush into making an expensive purchase of this nature without figuring out what's really wrong with your tt setup.

david

Dave, as I've grown older, the ironies of life become more marked
So, the room is a triumph in every way, if I was just listening to digital
Neutral and slightly damped, slap echo seems good ie present but not over reverberant, no apparent bass nodes
The moment I fired up my digital, the hairs on the back of my neck and arm went up, £60k/$90k of investment in a dedicated space w great acoustics and vastly purer power compared to London immed apparent as bigger soundstage, imaging I was never aware capable, bass extension and articulation and top end air
Just no downside at all
At a reasonable estimate, 3x better than my old space
No expense on uber pricey gear could have got me this in my old apartment
So now comes the grand irony
I install my tt, w cart dealer we spend a good 2-3 hrs levelling tt, plinth, platter, all CHECK, cart alignment device, vta, vtf, azimuth, all CHECK
And then proceed to play some wax
A lot of the impvts from my digital experience is there esp bass articulation and extension and stage width
I'm hearing details I haven't before on many lps
But on many others, something is lacking, as if there is a level of sub audible grunge masking treble sparkle and top end air
Manifesting itself as a lack of energy and overall transparency
But not on every Lp, and the overall tonal balance seems the same (ie I know it's my tt, it hasn't "changed" character as such)

So these are my thoughts
The digital has the shackles taken off by the new acoustics/electrics, all upside, no down
The analog has had its pants pulled down by the new blank canvas, and is a tad exposed and showing its limitations, despite the overall tonal character and aural signature being identical to before
Maybe things are so variable Lp to Lp w this microscope of a room, that vta needs to be adjusted Lp to Lp
Critically, my air arm is v fussy re losing locked in Vtf, due to the way the sensitive cart tonearm wires are dressed and pulled slightly as the air arm tracks, and this may be introducing slowing of sound I'm much more aware of
Maybe even, after a solid year of listening to top top digital in the form of Blue58's SGM server/T&A Dac8/HQP/dsd512, I've actually for the first time really "got" digital, I now prefer it, and "hear" analog as flawed

I'm not joking on this last point, I really really want for nothing when I hear Barry's top end digital

Now, my tt and arm are by no means "top end" either in price £4K/$7k, or uber engineering and finish, but I find the max torque rim drive and magetically isolated platter together w linear tracking air arm really convincing on bass start/stop, and detail retrieval, and throw in the speed and neutrality of my Soundsmith Straingauge cart w batt psu, urgency of sound and top end incision weren't missing in my prev place, but they are here

My guess is the problem is an amalgam
Flexy 50x18 floor introducing massive demands on the analog that active isolation would solve in an instant
My analog just revealed to be lacking that last 10%
My hard to sort vtf issues again laid bare in the new room
My late late conversion to top digital and seeming unhappiness w analog in comparison full stop

Time for me to stop hogging the aether

hi Spirit

A typical trick for loudspeakers on springy floors is to mass load the floor by laying down heavy stone composite like Corian between the floor and the speaker. Now you've got me wondering if that could do the trick under a TT rack too.

spiritofmusic said:

Maybe that's why Peter of Symposium Acoustics recommends active isolation w his passive Quantum Signature platform

Click to expand...

Is this right? Placing symposium platforms on top of active isolation herzan? Presume component sits on top of the symposium platform. Has anyone experimented this?

I'm wondering why Herzan are now offering an option w in effect additional passive isolation, if it's not to get the best of active <1Hz and active >1Hz
No doubt Herzan plus Symposium Quantum Signature would achieve this
However, Peter recommends the Quantum passive btwn the tt and the Herzan, so the passive mediates tt-borne vibn and noise, and the Herzan mediates flr- and air-borne vibn and noise

Ron, I may very well be
It's just that it excelled at dynamic snap and top end air in London, and this is somewhat MIA atm

Ron Resnick said:

I also think Corian is a good material. Caesarstone and Silestone probably are good too. Just not natural granite.

Click to expand...

I have read somewhere it is the combination of the materials that matters (was it Andy Payor at Rockport when describing how he creates the monocoque set of materials for his speaker cabinetry?). I believe HRS shelves are a combination of Granite, Aluminum, special Elastomer in some kind of sandwich combination?