Herzan/Table Stable "Active" Isolation table.

[rockitman]

It's a game changer for me. If it wasn't I think I could have found another way to spend 12k.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Thanks MEP, I think we're talking the same language again. For me i HAVE got a dramatic upping in SQ going from belt drive tt/pivoted arm to direct rim drive tt/air bearing linear tracking arm, a fundamental paradigm shift in technology if ever there was one (two!). Moving from standard xover based tweeter/mid/bass spkrs to xoverless full range driver tech spkrs has been an amazing step up. About to move from SS to SETs, again fundamental jump in sound. These have all been major component, and further, technology, changes.
Of my system-wide improvements (cables/power/acoustics), balanced power has really been a boon, but this took some getting there. Acoustics, cables and racks, more incremental change. And this is what you'd expect.
This may all be a matter of semantics, small but nevertheless positive additive changes described in terms of radical improvements by the major proponents here. Maybe as these changes of power/acoustics/and then isolation improve a system, each successive change can really peel away another veil from so-called reality.
There is a good possibility I'm going to be able to audition some active isolation soon. If/when I do, my thoughts will appear here first.

 

[microstrip]

Well I have to admit, this thread is starting to get tiring having to provide a defense so to speak for our expenditures on active isolation. The antagonists are making statements based on no real first hand experience. I certainly don't spend money on my stereo for the hell of it. If I hadn't tried the expensive stillpoint devices and realized their real benefit, I Probably would not have gotten this 12k isolation shelf. The point is, I don't take spending money lightly. There must be a real benefit for me to change something. This item was a no risk proposition. If I didn't like it I could return it. Having my first unit go bad after 2weeks and having to wait another 3 for a replacement, my vinyl playback suffered and I missed it terribly. I can assure the detractors that the benefits are real and very significant, at least for my TT setup.

Christian ,

I have to say I admire you and Mike for supporting all this pressure. I have really enjoyed your posts and learned a lot from them. The evidence presented by the technical data of these tables and my readings about their features is enough to show me we are in presence of something of great interest. I can assure you that soon I will be able to participate with first hand experience. Perhaps as someone has wisely written (not in high-end context, I must say ) "An absence of problems becomes a measure of excellence".

BTW many high-end manufacturers spend a lot of effort and money in the mechanical properties of the cases of their electronic equipment, I am finding difficult to find why people seem so surprised with these vibration suppressing results.

 

[jazdoc]

Sadly, ths thread has jumped the shark...I'm outta here

 

[Audiocrack]

http://www.audiotechnique.com/reference/accurion/364_accurion_eng.pdf

For those who are interested but maybe not yet convinced a review of the Accurion/halcyonics silencer

 

[PeterA]

http://www.audiotechnique.com/reference/accurion/364_accurion_eng.pdf

For those who are interested but maybe not yet convinced a review of the Accurion/halcyonics silencer

Thank you for posting this link. It is a wonderful review. Do you know the price of the Accurion i4?

I noticed very similar results (by description) with my SME 30/12 on the Vibraplane. Interestingly, we have the same cartridge. Proper isolation for source components (and amps in my case) is not a controversial topic. I think the next level of investigation should be: is active isolation more effective than passive, and if so by how much and is the difference large enough to justify the price increase. It would also be interesting to compare the various competing active isolation solutions.

Just as turntables (and components in all categories) are essentially trying to do the same thing, we recognize differences in performance. Surely this is the case with different isolation solutions.

I hope Jazdoc, Mike and others return to the discussion, though they may be too busy listening to music.

 

[Steve Williams]

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ymisc&1337621698

seems that ~$15K is the price.

Of interest the member sold both his units after changing gear and finding that the changes weren't there any more

Here is a video of it in action

 

[Steve Williams]

Here is the ad that the seller ran

MSRP was $16K and he was selling them for $7K

http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649015783-halcyonics_silencer

 

[lapaix]

Isolation works!

Christian ,

I have to say I admire you and Mike for supporting all this pressure. I have really enjoyed your posts and learned a lot from them. The evidence presented by the technical data of these tables and my readings about their features is enough to show me we are in presence of something of great interest. I can assure you that soon I will be able to participate with first hand experience. Perhaps as someone has wisely written (not in high-end context, I must say ) "An absence of problems becomes a measure of excellence".

BTW many high-end manufacturers spend a lot of effort and money in the mechanical properties of the cases of their electronic equipment, I am finding difficult to find why people seem so surprised with these vibration suppressing results.

For a long time I have used a Minus-K isolation platform be under my CD player. There is not any doubt at all that it makes a huge improvement in every aspect of performance. (Besides that, the physics of the Minus-K technology is brilliant.) One thing that does have an effect on performance is the "drag" of the power cable and interconnects, which transmit some vibrational energy to the system. In a lab setting, everything is isolated. An instrument, say an atomic force microscope, is isolated from airborne vibrations, etc. That is clearly impossible in most domestic settings. Even without going to such extremes, it is clear that such devices are not empty headed tweaks, but are based on easily understood basic physics. I like the Minus-K platform because it is mechanical, and does not require an air pump. I do not think that active isolation is likely to be needed in most cases, but I have not done the experiment.

By the way, why bash people who spend a lot of money on their systems? If you want to drive a Ferrari you will not be able to buy one for the price of a VW.

 

[rockitman]

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ymisc&1337621698

seems that ~$15K is the price.

Of interest the member sold both his units after changing gear and finding that the changes weren't there any more

Here is a video of it in action

I think Mike indicated a real but more subtle improvement under his preamp. The biggest benefit is under a turntable. This individual appears not to own one. Digital only.

 

[PeterA]

Mike and Christian,

I've been meaning to ask you both. Do your respective turntables also have separate power supplies? I ask because I found that the power supply of my SME benefits from also being isolated. This is why I had an extra large custom steel ballast plate cut for above my Vibraplane. It is designed to preload the Vibraplane but also so that I could place the power supply away from the motor side of the turntable and on top of the Vibraplane. The improvement was not as great as with the turntable, however, it was quite noticeable and about as significant as isolating each of my amps. Unfortunately, I don't know if the top plates of the Herzans are large enough to do this.

 

[rockitman]

My motor is built atop one leg of the lower plinth. No out board control unit.

 

[Bill Hart]

Mike and Christian,

I've been meaning to ask you both. Do your respective turntables also have separate power supplies? I ask because I found that the power supply of my SME benefits from also being isolated. This is why I had an extra large custom steel ballast plate cut for above my Vibraplane. It is designed to preload the Vibraplane but also so that I could place the power supply away from the motor side of the turntable and on top of the Vibraplane. The improvement was not as great as with the turntable, however, it was quite noticeable and about as significant as isolating each of my amps. Unfortunately, I don't know if the top plates of the Herzans are large enough to do this.

Ideally, wouldn't it be better to have the motor controller completely isolated from the platform (and associated anti-vibration device) on which the turntable itself rests? In other words, have the motor controller subject to its own anti-vibration or decoupling devices?
I raise this only as a theoretical point. In actuality, I think I'd be hard pressed to hear much difference in isolating the motor controller of my table, though I have experimented with different 'passive' solutions.

 

[microstrip]

Ideally, wouldn't it be better to have the motor controller completely isolated from the platform (and associated anti-vibration device) on which the turntable itself rests? In other words, have the motor controller subject to its own anti-vibration or decoupling devices?
I raise this only as a theoretical point. In actuality, I think I'd be hard pressed to hear much difference in isolating the motor controller of my table, though I have experimented with different 'passive' solutions.

I would say no - the two separate active systems with six axes freedom to cancel vibrations would affect the stretching of the belt, causing speed changes in the turntable. But please consider I do not have an active isolation platform yet.

 

[Bill Hart]

I would say no - the two separate active systems with six axes freedom to cancel vibrations would affect the stretching of the belt, causing speed changes in the turntable. But please consider I do not have an active isolation platform yet.

Micro, just to be clear - my 'motor controller' (and i think the same is true on the SME) is not integrated with the motor itself, it is simply the electronic box. Perhaps I wasn't clear in my question.

 

[microstrip]

Micro, just to be clear - my 'motor controller' (and i think the same is true on the SME) is not integrated with the motor itself, it is simply the electronic box. Perhaps I wasn't clear in my question.

In this case two tables would be theoretically better - but IMHO only theoretically. And then we could add a table just for the cable!
The Forsell Air Force One has the controller in the box of the flywheel, it is why I considered this case - separate motor box.

 

[audioarcher]

Who is going to be the first to put their entire system on active devices? Excluding speakers. That would be an interesting experiment.

I bet putting one under the entire rack and also under each component itself would be the ultimate. A bit costly though. Why not a Herzan isolation room. Put the whole room on a platform as well.

 

[PeterA]

Micro, just to be clear - my 'motor controller' (and i think the same is true on the SME) is not integrated with the motor itself, it is simply the electronic box. Perhaps I wasn't clear in my question.

This is correct with the SME.

 

[PeterA]

Ideally, wouldn't it be better to have the motor controller completely isolated from the platform (and associated anti-vibration device) on which the turntable itself rests? In other words, have the motor controller subject to its own anti-vibration or decoupling devices?
I raise this only as a theoretical point. In actuality, I think I'd be hard pressed to hear much difference in isolating the motor controller of my table, though I have experimented with different 'passive' solutions.

Yes, I think it would be better in theory and probably in practice. But, absent the space requirements and expense, I found that placing my motor controller on a shared steel ballast plate over passive isolation is much better than having it simply on a different shelf. Also, in the case of my SME, the platter, arm, and cartridge are further isolated from the controller and motor due to the integrated SME isolation towers. I tried it both ways, and it definitely sounds better with the speed controller on the isolation plate.

I've shown this before, but to illustrate it again, here is the set up:

 

[PeterA]

I would say no - the two separate active systems with six axes freedom to cancel vibrations would affect the stretching of the belt, causing speed changes in the turntable. But please consider I do not have an active isolation platform yet.

This is a potential issue. I think the active platforms like Herzan are more stable than passive platforms like the Vibraplane. If one has an outboard motor with a long belt to the platter, placing these on two separate Vibraplanes would cause the potential problem of one Vibraplane loosing air at a different rate and this would change the level and tension of the belt and effect speed. I would not do this. Two Herzans under a Micro Sieki for instance might be okay, but not two Vibraplanes, IMO. Syntax, over on Audiogon has this arrangement and reported no problems to me, but my passive, non-self leveling Vibraplane (under one amp) does indeed need periodic refilling, so I would not try this under a belt drive turntable. One self leveling Vibraplane under a compact TT design works fine though.

This is perhaps another advantage to an active unit like the Herzan.