Hi Joe
I think everything you said has merit. Also, when you start with the DAC, you're "getting the signal right" at its source (excluding an external storage device). This could be helpful in the settling process too. Thank you for trying CS!
Confessions of an Audiophile Junky-I Got Center Stage With Pitch Perfect Sound
- Thread starter Steve Williams
- Start date
Hi Joe
I think everything you said has merit. Also, when you start with the DAC, you're "getting the signal right" at its source (excluding an external storage device). This could be helpful in the settling process too. Thank you for trying CS!
For me this is THE most important point
When people purchase these from me I always inquire where they will be placed. Many say their "amps". I suggest to them that we recommend starting with the signal path source so the DAC is the best source. Having done this now 4 times in my system where I am now day 9 on the digital side, I found myself muttering that my digital path sounded better than my analog. That was a bitter pill to swallow until I switched from the digital side to the analog.I will be doing this again on Wed as tomorrow I am day 10 and I am getting full benefit of the CS. Having done this before and waiting for the phonostage feet to burn in I can say that once again analog ruled supreme once they did. This time around I will also be placing these under my Studer A810 as well as my Doshi tape pre. Like mountain joe I found the biggest pop came from under my DAC to the point where I was listening to a lot of digital
So my recommendation for people is to start at the source (DAC, phonostage, external storage device), then to the preamp, then to the amps and lastly to the power supplies and external crossovers. With so many out in the field now I can say that the burn in time IMO is highly system specific
These are also not recommended for use under speakers or directly under a turntable. Certainly if the TT is sitting on a slab, that slab can then be placed on 4 CS feet.
Everything in the universe obeys first law and second law of thermodynamics. I am not sure what you mean by your footer is second law dominant and the other isolation method is first law dominant.
It seems that from your explanation that your footers will decrease the entropy of the equipment they place under. I think Davey wants to know how your footer achieve that. Is it simply by draining the vibrations more effectively?
If the weight helps the break in process, is it possible that you place these footers under some clamping machine before you ship them to your customers?
Hi Russ
I'm glad to hear you're getting back to normal. You're not alone! Years back, I fought the same battle. For me, things are very much back to normal and I'm sure the same good fortune will be yours.
Thanks Joe. I am already feeling the benefits and have not even received the path report yet. I hope that you read my V3 comments. I am so happy with the CS footer.
Hi adyc
We've filed for patent protection and until this is resolved, I cannot reveal details. Sorry.
I have never claimed and do not claim that the weight of the component has any effect on the settling process. In my opinion, clamping the feet would not do anything more than waste time and/or cause damage. I hope this helps.
Just a short update on the Center Stage footers. These damn little things are really a blessing for digital listeners who listen to opera. In my system are bringing a sense of realism I have never experienced before. Sometime ago I listened to some opera mastertapes in a top system using a Telefunken M15 / Doshi front end and appreciated the very natural sound, slightly drier, in a positive sense, than what we usually get from the best opera LPs. I would say it was approaching more the cleanness of real opera listened from row F, without excessive voice emphasis due to any reinforcement. Curiously it is what I am getting from the Vivaldi DAC with the Center Stage footers - natural voices, well separated and nuanced, supported by the orchestra, but having their own space. Lots of detail, without any of the artifacts that usually come with old digital recordings played in analytical systems.
BTW, the usual suspects were "Rigoletto" (Giulini, Domingo, DG) and Maria Callas "Mad Scenes", an wonderful EMI compilation from Donizetti, Thomas and Bellini operas (Rescigno, Philarmonia Orchestra and Chorus).
BTW, the usual suspects were "Rigoletto" (Giulini, Domingo, DG) and Maria Callas "Mad Scenes", an wonderful EMI compilation from Donizetti, Thomas and Bellini operas (Rescigno, Philarmonia Orchestra and Chorus).
Hi microstrip
I have to say that this is a huge compliment. In my opinion, opera is THE most difficult genre of music to reproduce free of dynamic compression. In many operatic pieces, the demands composers place upon the human voice intentionally creates violent dynamic swings that obfuscate musical reproduction. When you say that the human voice is “realistic” and “natural” and separate from the orchestral passages, you speak directly to me. You tell me that I have done my job right. It took me 17 years and a completely innovative approach to problem solving to fully get that right. I say to you, thank you. Thank you for those words. You have no idea how deeply gratifying those sentences are.
One question, if you don’t mind. Can you remind me which components CS is under?
Center Stage Foot Is Awarded a 2017 Brutus Award From Positive Feedback Online
A few weeks ago, a complete signal path of Center Stage feet was delivered to David Robinson, Editor-in-Chief of Positive Feedback Online. David was kind enough to slog through the settling period as many of you have and/or are doing now. We are very pleased to announce that Center Stage received a Brutus Award from David Robinson. The applicable text is shown below and the complete article with an explanation of the Award and the award process is available through the link. (Note: the mention of other CMS products was not edited out because doing so would have reduced the coherence of the article):
But Joe wasn't done yet! Not too long before Ted Denney arrived here, I hosted a visit from Joe and Joy once more. They, like Ted, were also arriving near the cusp of decision for the Brutus Awards this year, and had another rack system for the PASS Labs Xs 150 Monoblocks and Power Supplies that had been installed. This would take the current Critical Mass Systems Black Diamond amp stands and convert them into a two-level rack system with a QXK Rack Frame.
The new Center Stage Feet from Critical Mass Systems
Additionally, they had a radically new isolation component, the Center Stage that they were very anxious for me to try. Normally, this would have not been a problem, but there were two considerations here:
The Center Stage would require 7-10 days to settle in, since initially it would introduce some chaos to the sound of our system; and,
The days were short!
To cut to the chase, the QXK Racks and Mk. III Filters proved themselves to be exemplary performers, as I noted in my earlier review. Every one of them is clearly of Brutus Award quality, and will receive them.
The Center Stage Feet proved to be a remarkable experience. Joe warned me in advance that the initial experience with them would be…well, unpleasant.
"You aren't going to like it at first," said Joe.
And he was right.
First Joe, Joy and I listened for a while to the system, so that they could get a baseline sense of what it sounded like. Once they had that down, we placed a number of these devices, four per component, under all key elements of our reference system. Then we fired things up again, and gave another listen.
Ugh!
It really was horrible! Everything sounded…yes, chaotic. Frequency ranges were strangely disconnected from each other and inorganic, harmonics and tonalities were off, even soundstaging and imaging sounded flummoxed and befusticated.
Wow. I listened for a few minutes, and then we all decided that enough was enough.
"Don't worry," Joe told me. "Give it about 10 days, and then you'll hear it all really begin to come together. It's go up and down before then…but after then, it will come to amaze you."
I've known Joe for a long time, and have pretty deep experience with his design genius, and so took him at his word.
And you know, he was right again.
The effect of the Center Stage Feet once the system stabilized was to create a serious enveloping effect. It was extraordinary; it was if a two-channel system was shape-changing into a surround system. Greater depth, too. More gob-smacking audio space voyaging!
Interestingly, the effect was further enhanced with the arrival of the Synergistic Research system…better and better still! (Note: SR System installed after CS feet - JL)
Damn…the CMS QXK/Mk. III designs and the Center Stage Feet really did deliver.
And since they did, so will I: The Critical Mass Systems QXK Rack, MXK Spikes, Mk. III Filters, and the Center Stage Feet all receive Brutus Awards in 2017, and "Ye Olde Editor's Very Highest Recommendation!" with pleasure.
For more information on Critical Mass Systems components, contact:
Joseph Lavrencik, Critical Mass Systems
www.criticalmasssystems.com
info@criticalmasssystems.com
630.640.3814
Center Stage Feet: Designed and manufactured in the USA by Critical Mass Systems
Sold through Pitch Perfect Sound
Steve Williams
9 Raes Creek Lane
Coto De Caza, CA 92679
833.268.7784
sales@pitchperfectsound.com
www.pitchperfectsound.com
All photographs and processing by Robinson
Here is the full text link: https://positive-feedback.com/audio...-robinsons-brutus-awards-2017-part-the-first/ - Dr. David W. Robinson, Editor-in-Chief, Positive Feedback, Issue 94
A few weeks ago, a complete signal path of Center Stage feet was delivered to David Robinson, Editor-in-Chief of Positive Feedback Online. David was kind enough to slog through the settling period as many of you have and/or are doing now. We are very pleased to announce that Center Stage received a Brutus Award from David Robinson. The applicable text is shown below and the complete article with an explanation of the Award and the award process is available through the link. (Note: the mention of other CMS products was not edited out because doing so would have reduced the coherence of the article):
But Joe wasn't done yet! Not too long before Ted Denney arrived here, I hosted a visit from Joe and Joy once more. They, like Ted, were also arriving near the cusp of decision for the Brutus Awards this year, and had another rack system for the PASS Labs Xs 150 Monoblocks and Power Supplies that had been installed. This would take the current Critical Mass Systems Black Diamond amp stands and convert them into a two-level rack system with a QXK Rack Frame.
The new Center Stage Feet from Critical Mass Systems
Additionally, they had a radically new isolation component, the Center Stage that they were very anxious for me to try. Normally, this would have not been a problem, but there were two considerations here:
The Center Stage would require 7-10 days to settle in, since initially it would introduce some chaos to the sound of our system; and,
The days were short!
To cut to the chase, the QXK Racks and Mk. III Filters proved themselves to be exemplary performers, as I noted in my earlier review. Every one of them is clearly of Brutus Award quality, and will receive them.
The Center Stage Feet proved to be a remarkable experience. Joe warned me in advance that the initial experience with them would be…well, unpleasant.
"You aren't going to like it at first," said Joe.
And he was right.
First Joe, Joy and I listened for a while to the system, so that they could get a baseline sense of what it sounded like. Once they had that down, we placed a number of these devices, four per component, under all key elements of our reference system. Then we fired things up again, and gave another listen.
Ugh!
It really was horrible! Everything sounded…yes, chaotic. Frequency ranges were strangely disconnected from each other and inorganic, harmonics and tonalities were off, even soundstaging and imaging sounded flummoxed and befusticated.
Wow. I listened for a few minutes, and then we all decided that enough was enough.
"Don't worry," Joe told me. "Give it about 10 days, and then you'll hear it all really begin to come together. It's go up and down before then…but after then, it will come to amaze you."
I've known Joe for a long time, and have pretty deep experience with his design genius, and so took him at his word.
And you know, he was right again.
The effect of the Center Stage Feet once the system stabilized was to create a serious enveloping effect. It was extraordinary; it was if a two-channel system was shape-changing into a surround system. Greater depth, too. More gob-smacking audio space voyaging!
Interestingly, the effect was further enhanced with the arrival of the Synergistic Research system…better and better still! (Note: SR System installed after CS feet - JL)
Damn…the CMS QXK/Mk. III designs and the Center Stage Feet really did deliver.
And since they did, so will I: The Critical Mass Systems QXK Rack, MXK Spikes, Mk. III Filters, and the Center Stage Feet all receive Brutus Awards in 2017, and "Ye Olde Editor's Very Highest Recommendation!" with pleasure.
For more information on Critical Mass Systems components, contact:
Joseph Lavrencik, Critical Mass Systems
www.criticalmasssystems.com
info@criticalmasssystems.com
630.640.3814
Center Stage Feet: Designed and manufactured in the USA by Critical Mass Systems
Sold through Pitch Perfect Sound
Steve Williams
9 Raes Creek Lane
Coto De Caza, CA 92679
833.268.7784
sales@pitchperfectsound.com
www.pitchperfectsound.com
All photographs and processing by Robinson
Here is the full text link: https://positive-feedback.com/audio...-robinsons-brutus-awards-2017-part-the-first/ - Dr. David W. Robinson, Editor-in-Chief, Positive Feedback, Issue 94
Contemplating jumping ship then Kedar ?
It would be interesting to compare these against one of my sets of GDR Mook's.
Contemplating jumping ship then Kedar ?
It would be interesting to compare these against one of my sets of GDR Mook's.
Just let me know when you want to. We now have a comparison of CS vs Q-Pods
Steve, congratulations on the Brutus Award. Could you provide a link to the comparison between the CS and QPods?
Posted here by Mountain Joe who has now ordered these on 4 separate occasions for his system
Ok, I’ve been busy with work, audiophile events, and what-not but now able to do some serious A/B/A/C/A comparisons of the CS footers.
In this case the footers in question are under my PS Audio DS DAC (running Huron FW) and they’ve now settled in for 3 weeks so I assume they’ve reached their peak performance or pretty close to it.
In the above sequence:
A = CS footers
B = stock feet on the DAC
C = Magico QPods (3)
I listened to Rickie Lee Jones CD (redbook) – I find this original CD was very well mastered and is a good reference for such comparisons.
I first listened to several tracks with the CS footers- having not touched them in 3 weeks. The sound was open, dynamic, with punchy, tight base, lots of air around the vocals and instruments, with an immersive soundstage.
The vocals in particular convey a sense of realism that I never knew my DAC was capable of.
I then removed the CS footers and let the DAC rest on its stock feet. I immediately noticed the soundstage shrank with most of the energy coming from between the speakers whereas with CS it was extended beyond my speakers – but also more evenly distributed in space (i.e. not squished between the speakers).
More notably, the imaging was more vague with instruments bleeding over into the dead space between (especially in the bass region) – i.e. there was less air between the instruments and less definition in the imaging. The bass was less articulate with noticeable bloom. And lastly the vocals lost that sense of realism and tonal correctness.
I then re-inserted the CS footers as close to their original locations as possible and everything came back as noted above. Lots of clear, open, air between the instruments, articulate bass, and very realistic vocals.
Next came the QPods – this was a bit easier to manage as they are taller than the CS footers so I left the CS footers in place and simply lifted the DAC and inserted the 3 QPods close to the 2 CS footers in the back and one in the center front.
The QPods provided a more “analog” sound to the DAC with more definition in the imaging than the stock feet, but not as good as the CS footers. Still noticed some blooming in the bass but better soundstage than the stock feet. If I hadn’t heard the CS footers, I would probably be happy with the sound of the QPods but the CS footers take my DAC to another level of realism, bass definition, and airy, open, immersive soundstage.
I then removed the QPods and let the DAC settle back onto the CS footers that were still in place. Again, the air, the bass, the immersive realism all came back.
Btw – Joe sent me a shim as I couldn’t get all four footers to make contact under my DAC so I used one of these under one of the footers. The shim is aluminum and 1/32” thick – it is placed under the footer where it contacts the shelf per Joe’s instructions.
As a final note, I have to say after listening to several albums in a variety of formats, the realism in the vocals brought out by the CS footers is sometimes startling. Closest I’ve heard digital playback come to sounding live. This is true of the instruments as well but most prominent in vocals imo.
I’m still letting the footers under my phono stage settle in and will report on those in a week or so.
For my DAC, the CS footers are by far the most significant upgrade I’ve made and easily worth the $1,200. Btw the three QPods are $900 for comparison – I will now be using these in my second system ??
Ok, I’ve been busy with work, audiophile events, and what-not but now able to do some serious A/B/A/C/A comparisons of the CS footers.
In this case the footers in question are under my PS Audio DS DAC (running Huron FW) and they’ve now settled in for 3 weeks so I assume they’ve reached their peak performance or pretty close to it.
In the above sequence:
A = CS footers
B = stock feet on the DAC
C = Magico QPods (3)
I listened to Rickie Lee Jones CD (redbook) – I find this original CD was very well mastered and is a good reference for such comparisons.
I first listened to several tracks with the CS footers- having not touched them in 3 weeks. The sound was open, dynamic, with punchy, tight base, lots of air around the vocals and instruments, with an immersive soundstage.
The vocals in particular convey a sense of realism that I never knew my DAC was capable of.
I then removed the CS footers and let the DAC rest on its stock feet. I immediately noticed the soundstage shrank with most of the energy coming from between the speakers whereas with CS it was extended beyond my speakers – but also more evenly distributed in space (i.e. not squished between the speakers).
More notably, the imaging was more vague with instruments bleeding over into the dead space between (especially in the bass region) – i.e. there was less air between the instruments and less definition in the imaging. The bass was less articulate with noticeable bloom. And lastly the vocals lost that sense of realism and tonal correctness.
I then re-inserted the CS footers as close to their original locations as possible and everything came back as noted above. Lots of clear, open, air between the instruments, articulate bass, and very realistic vocals.
Next came the QPods – this was a bit easier to manage as they are taller than the CS footers so I left the CS footers in place and simply lifted the DAC and inserted the 3 QPods close to the 2 CS footers in the back and one in the center front.
The QPods provided a more “analog” sound to the DAC with more definition in the imaging than the stock feet, but not as good as the CS footers. Still noticed some blooming in the bass but better soundstage than the stock feet. If I hadn’t heard the CS footers, I would probably be happy with the sound of the QPods but the CS footers take my DAC to another level of realism, bass definition, and airy, open, immersive soundstage.
I then removed the QPods and let the DAC settle back onto the CS footers that were still in place. Again, the air, the bass, the immersive realism all came back.
Btw – Joe sent me a shim as I couldn’t get all four footers to make contact under my DAC so I used one of these under one of the footers. The shim is aluminum and 1/32” thick – it is placed under the footer where it contacts the shelf per Joe’s instructions.
As a final note, I have to say after listening to several albums in a variety of formats, the realism in the vocals brought out by the CS footers is sometimes startling. Closest I’ve heard digital playback come to sounding live. This is true of the instruments as well but most prominent in vocals imo.
I’m still letting the footers under my phono stage settle in and will report on those in a week or so.
For my DAC, the CS footers are by far the most significant upgrade I’ve made and easily worth the $1,200. Btw the three QPods are $900 for comparison – I will now be using these in my second system ??
Congratulations Joe and Steve - it is great to see the Center Stage footers getting the recognition they deserve. But the Positive Feedback article does not refer one aspect of the footers - they are terribly addictive : even the local UPS man started commenting about the small boxes I am getting from the US and I am going to need a few more ...
I have been using the footers under the cj GAT , the ARC REF40 and the DCS Vivaldi DAC - those have all gone through more than the 10 day burn-in day. Yesterday I inserted 2 sets under the ARC REF250's - I am switching for the Lamm M1.2's while the ARC go through the burn-in time using load resistors. I have now figured somewhat better your brilliant approach - having experienced several times the burn-in raggedness opened my mind to the alternative formulations of the second law of thermodynamics.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |