My Continuum Audio Labs Caliburn Project

[Lee]

Hi Lee,
congratulations on a great table. It is gorgeous. what are you using to lift/isolate the table from the stand?

Nothing fancy yet. Plan on getting the Minus-K down the road next year.

 

[Lee]

Thanks Lee. It was a pleasure to get to work with this next level record spinner!

Thanks again Mike!

 

[BruceD]

Nothing fancy yet. Plan on getting the Minus-K down the road next year.

Hello Lee,

Congrats on the TT it is indeed a benchmark unit still up there today with the best out there
-it was deemed ahead of it's time when originally launched.

I am familiar with the time line it's backers and designer etc and if I may suggest you might want to pop a PM to Mark Doehmann the designer
he is on the forum here to ask about the Minus K with the Caliburn and whether he would endorse same.

Just a thought--don't know if you have experienced the MK's but if the TT is not completely level in its internal items placement ,setup re the MK can be a Pain in the Ass.

Anyway no problem just enjoy the music and good Listening!

BruceD

 

[Lee]

Hello Lee,

Congrats on the TT it is indeed a benchmark unit still up there today with the best out there
-it was deemed ahead of it's time when originally launched.

I am familiar with the time line it's backers and designer etc and if I may suggest you might want to pop a PM to Mark Doehmann the designer
he is on the forum here to ask about the Minus K with the Caliburn and whether he would endorse same.

Just a thought--don't know if you have experienced the MK's but if the TT is not completely level in its internal items placement ,setup re the MK can be a Pain in the Ass.

Anyway no problem just enjoy the music and good Listening!

BruceD

Mark and I have been talking and he did recommend the Minus K device. He is a good guy and also likes Porsche as much as I do.

 

[XV-1]

Hello Lee,

Congrats on the TT it is indeed a benchmark unit still up there today with the best out there
-it was deemed ahead of it's time when originally launched.

I am familiar with the time line it's backers and designer etc and if I may suggest you might want to pop a PM to Mark Doehmann the designer
he is on the forum here to ask about the Minus K with the Caliburn and whether he would endorse same.

Just a thought--don't know if you have experienced the MK's but if the TT is not completely level in its internal items placement ,setup re the MK can be a Pain in the Ass.

Anyway no problem just enjoy the music and good Listening!

BruceD

He definitely endorses Minus K. He got Fremer to retrofit a Minus K a few years back.
He also uses Minus K platforms incorporated in his Doehmann turntables.

 

[TLi]

I would suggest adding active isolation platform. Active is better than passive in this application.

 

[XV-1]

I would suggest adding active isolation platform. Active is better than passive in this application.

What turntable manufacturers uses active isolation?

Mark Doehmann has said he has tried active and he prefers the Minus K solution.

 

[TLi]

What turntable manufacturers uses active isolation?

Mark Doehmann has said he has tried active and he prefers the Minus K solution.

The Thorens New Reference uses built in Seismion active isolator. I use Herzan platform under my Air Force Zero. The results are very positive.

In general, it is not a good idea to double stack isolators of the same kind, ie active over active or passive over passive. There is a good chance that they will oscillate. Continuum uses passive suspension, adding another passive device will only give marginal benefit if there is any.

Air Force Zero uses air bulbs suspension and active isolation brings it to another level. It is easily demonstrated since one can turn the active platform on and off. The difference is well noted.

I think you need a Seismion under your Continuum.

 

[Lee]

The Thorens New Reference uses built in Seismion active isolator. I use Herzan platform under my Air Force Zero. The results are very positive.

In general, it is not a good idea to double stack isolators of the same kind, ie active over active or passive over passive. There is a good chance that they will oscillate. Continuum uses passive suspension, adding another passive device will only give marginal benefit if there is any.

Air Force Zero uses air bulbs suspension and active isolation brings it to another level. It is easily demonstrated since one can turn the active platform on and off. The difference is well noted.

I think you need a Seismion under your Continuum.

I am not convinced of that. I trust what Mark is telling me as his advice has been proven on many things. Also, the Minus K version is specifically built for and integrated in the Castellon stand.

 

[Lee]

I was just on the Seismion website. The high end product can handle 80kg but that’s a problem as the Caliburn is north of 90kg weight. I suppose they would have to make a more heavy duty one.

 

[TLi]

I was just on the Seismion website. The high end product can handle 80kg but that’s a problem as the Caliburn is north of 90kg weight. I suppose they would have to make a more heavy duty one.

I tried SAT XD1 turntable. It has Minus-K platform and it sounds good. I tried a few other turntables with different active isolation platforms and experienced the difference.

My limited experience can be summarized as follows:
1) Turntable with rigid suspension should use passive isolation, such as SAT.
2) Turntable with soft suspension should use active isolation, such as TechDAS, Continuum and Vertere.
3) Passive isolation is good in higher frequency, say upward of 50Hz.
4) Active isolation is good for lower frequency, down to 0.5Hz.
5) There is a benefit of mixing active and passive isolation as they cover different frequencies.

I don't claim to be an expert but do experienced a number of different combinations with different isolations. Seismion can certainly custom made isolator that suits your turntable. My Herzan AVS-LFS was custom made for my Zero. All you need to do is ask.

 

[Lee]

I tried SAT XD1 turntable. It has Minus-K platform and it sounds good. I tried a few other turntables with different active isolation platforms and experienced the difference.

My limited experience can be summarized as follows:
1) Turntable with rigid suspension should use passive isolation, such as SAT.
2) Turntable with soft suspension should use active isolation, such as TechDAS, Continuum and Vertere.
3) Passive isolation is good in higher frequency, say upward of 50Hz.
4) Active isolation is good for lower frequency, down to 0.5Hz.
5) There is a benefit of mixing active and passive isolation as they cover different frequencies.

I don't claim to be an expert but do experienced a number of different combinations with different isolations. Seismion can certainly custom made isolator that suits your turntable. My Herzan AVS-LFS was custom made for my Zero. All you need to do is ask.

Your observations seem valid but several reviewers have talked up the Minus K. I will certainly do more research. The Caliburn is said to be good to the single digit hz range.

Congrats on the Zero! I was awfully impressed with Jacob’s. What is the rest of your system?

 

[TLi]

Your observations seem valid but several reviewers have talked up the Minus K. I will certainly do more research. The Caliburn is said to be good to the single digit hz range.

Congrats on the Zero! I was awfully impressed with Jacob’s. What is the rest of your system?

Even passive isolators can go down to a few Hz, just the reduction of vibrational energy is reduced. Active isolator is more efficient in lower frequency and that is a fact.

Not all isolators (active and passive) are the same. There are different level of active isolators and I tried quite a few. Highend active device clearly out performs any passive ones. I consider that is a fact too.

My system consists of Magico M6 speaker, Kondo G1000i and Kagura 2i tube amp, TechDAS Air Force Zero turntable with SAT tonearm and DS Audio Grand Master Extreme cartridge. Cables are all Nordost Odin Gold.

 

[Lee]

Even passive isolators can go down to a few Hz, just the reduction of vibrational energy is reduced. Active isolator is more efficient in lower frequency and that is a fact.

Not all isolators (active and passive) are the same. There are different level of active isolators and I tried quite a few. Highend active device clearly out performs any passive ones. I consider that is a fact too.

My system consists of Magico M6 speaker, Kondo G1000i and Kagura 2i tube amp, TechDAS Air Force Zero turntable with SAT tonearm and DS Audio Grand Master Extreme cartridge. Cables are all Nordost Odin Gold. View attachment 113249

Nice system.

 

[DasguteOhr]

I was just on the Seismion website. The high end product can handle 80kg but that’s a problem as the Caliburn is north of 90kg weight. I suppose they would have to make a more heavy duty one.

FS: Halcyonics Accurion i4 Large active Base

IMHO one of the best turntable bases around, I tried HRS, Micro Seiki AIR, Herzan, Subbase Audio and finally the "Accurion i4 large" had the best performance . I have choosen the large version, so I was able to install large turntables or amplifiers on the base, which will work up to 105 kg...

www.whatsbestforum.com

 

[Dohmann]

The Thorens New Reference uses built in Seismion active isolator. I use Herzan platform under my Air Force Zero. The results are very positive.

In general, it is not a good idea to double stack isolators of the same kind, ie active over active or passive over passive. There is a good chance that they will oscillate. Continuum uses passive suspension, adding another passive device will only give marginal benefit if there is any.

Air Force Zero uses air bulbs suspension and active isolation brings it to another level. It is easily demonstrated since one can turn the active platform on and off. The difference is well noted.

I think you need a Seismion under your Continuum.

TLi - Yes well put and fully agree not ideal to double stack isolators. Congratulations on your Zero - an absolute magnum opus from Nishikawa who I had an excellent rapport and audio friendship with. He was a big influence on my audio journey from Micro days!

I’ll only comment on MinusK in this instance in regard to Helix. We use the Minusk inside Helix One and Helix Two with good effect. They even work well for other tables as they provide the first line of defence on structural noise.

Www.Minusk.com publish nomograms ( transmissibility plots) that show 0.5Fz as the resonant frequency. This is the point at which the device will oscillate if externally vibrated at 0.5Hz. As soon as the external source of vibration is higher it starts to attenuate. By 2Hz it’s pretty impressive isolation and this is where it typically outperforms many commercial air bladder based systems.

So passive solutions like MinusK typically have the lowest starting point at which isolation starts to kick in and most active systems cannot get to 0.5Fz. Most are around 6-10. Some very special designs like Seismion and Herzan etc go lower.

A typical platter mass (moving object) will have a continuous interaction with the servo of an active system. Tuning that to avoid overshooting on the servos is complex and delicate as most active systems are targeted at stabilising and rapid settling time of a device under test which is not moving continuously.

MinusK are good from 0.5hz up to about 100hz. After this they taper off. By adding additional damping to address settling time the system can be very finely tuned to work with a rotational mass to provide laser stable points on a wall 100 feet away (was the limit of our test area)!

The challenge when comparing available commercial devices is they all tend to publish different styles of nomograms (Transmissability curves) with different graduation on each axis so comparing these graphs is difficult without complex conversions. I look for the lowest published Fz.

Why do I like the passive systems? A few reasons. They are very quiet and reliable. It means one less source of noise (motor, bearing, acoustic, structural, hvac and flexural to name a few culprits). They don’t require power or air pumps or leak monitoring and periodic re-inflation.

So to isolate or not isolate (Shakespeare was after all a scientist ?

Imagine if Universities, Defence technology companies, satellite clean rooms etc the world over could simply pour a big concrete slab and build a lead filled cast iron or polycrete base to mount delicate measuring equipment on top.

One would think “I hit it with a hammer and it sounds like nothing moved, job done - no vibration is ever gonna get through that”……but alas all it takes is a blurry image on the microscope to tell you it’s a big fail as the structure noise in the building punches right through. The phone call to Minusk/Seismion/Herzan/Newport starts…...

Same goes for tables. Mass is only going to get you so far. If you want the maximum you need to add lab grade isolation performance.

Seismion and Herzan are both really excellent solutions and I’ve heard them both working under tables with great effect. If you try them and like them, fantastic, as they all offer performance improvements over non isolated methods.

Even Neumann cutting lathes had low frequency (Bungie) suspension frames to isolate the cutting lathe from floor borne vibrations. It’s not the design that matters so much as the performance. Pendulum bungie systems offer great performance in low frequency isolation but might not be partner friendly with home decor

By bringing in genuine proven laboratory grade isolation technologies such as the devices under discussion the world of analog reproduction can be enhanced. Typically the bass signatures are improved by better definition, delineation, texture, speed etc. Better open airy top end as well. Less overhang and bloat.

Oh and they even work on drilling rigs built into harsh mining facilities in jungles in New Guinea.

After completing that job I thought analog problems were easy to solve but “famous last words”

I’m still learning about analog and it constantly surprises with what is left in the groove.

I personally think we are in a golden age where music reproduction from source performer to home performance. I’d love to hear your Zero one day and I’m sure your system sounds amazing!

Onward and upward !!

 

[bonzo75]

Very nice sounding continuum in Paris with Schroeder LT + MSL, Schroeder BA plus Miyajima mono, into a Kondo G10, G1000, Kagura, Klangfilm bionor, many shun mooks, Elrod cables, next to Studer C37. Warped records sound great with vacuum

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I was just on the Seismion website. The high end product can handle 80kg but that’s a problem as the Caliburn is north of 90kg weight. I suppose they would have to make a more heavy duty one.

the other issue with active to keep in mind is that it does not discriminate what resonance to attenuate. if your turntable chassis transfers resonance to it's footers to bleed off into the shelf it's sitting on, as most turntables do, then the active device will try to attenuate that resonance and it will cause a loop of noise and actually make things worse, not better, increasing noise....and possibly burning out the active device as it's not designed to continually work that hard.

so not every turntable is a candidate for active. with passive you don't have this issue.

and you won't know about this unless you (1) try it first, and (2) your active device has a read out screen to be able to actually view what is going on. it is possible your thru-chassis resonance is low enough that the net effect with active might still be positive. or maybe some sort of decoupling shelf could be inserted between the active device and the tt footers to lower the transferred resonance. but then that would effect the sound too. need to investigate fully.

in my system, only my Wave Kinetics NVS has zero thru chassis resonance. my CS Port string drive and my (now departed) Saskia model two both were too noisy for active. not yet checked out my Esoteric T1 but i suspect it's separate motor chassis would transfer plenty of resonance.

 

[Lee]

the other issue with active to keep in mind is that it does not discriminate what resonance to attenuate. if your turntable chassis transfers resonance to it's footers to bleed off into the shelf it's sitting on, as most turntables do, then the active device will try to attenuate that resonance and it will cause a loop of noise and actually make things worse, not better, increasing noise....and possibly burning out the active device as it's not designed to continually work that hard.

so not every turntable is a candidate for active. with passive you don't have this issue.

and you won't know about this unless you (1) try it first, and (2) your active device has a read out screen to be able to actually view what is going on. it is possible your thru-chassis resonance is low enough that the net effect with active might still be positive. or maybe some sort of decoupling shelf could be inserted between the active device and the tt footers to lower the transferred resonance. but then that would effect the sound too. need to investigate fully.

in my system, only my Wave Kinetics NVS has zero thru chassis resonance. my CS Port string drive and my (now departed) Saskia model two both were too noisy for active. not yet checked out my Esoteric T1 but i suspect it's separate motor chassis would transfer plenty of resonance.

According to Fremer the Minus K should get things down to single digit hz level or lower.

 

[Lee]

TLi - Yes well put and fully agree not ideal to double stack isolators. Congratulations on your Zero - an absolute magnum opus from Nishikawa who I had an excellent rapport and audio friendship with. He was a big influence on my audio journey from Micro days!

I’ll only comment on MinusK in this instance in regard to Helix. We use the Minusk inside Helix One and Helix Two with good effect. They even work well for other tables as they provide the first line of defence on structural noise.

Www.Minusk.com publish nomograms ( transmissibility plots) that show 0.5Fz as the resonant frequency. This is the point at which the device will oscillate if externally vibrated at 0.5Hz. As soon as the external source of vibration is higher it starts to attenuate. By 2Hz it’s pretty impressive isolation and this is where it typically outperforms many commercial air bladder based systems.

So passive solutions like MinusK typically have the lowest starting point at which isolation starts to kick in and most active systems cannot get to 0.5Fz. Most are around 6-10. Some very special designs like Seismion and Herzan etc go lower.

A typical platter mass (moving object) will have a continuous interaction with the servo of an active system. Tuning that to avoid overshooting on the servos is complex and delicate as most active systems are targeted at stabilising and rapid settling time of a device under test which is not moving continuously.

MinusK are good from 0.5hz up to about 100hz. After this they taper off. By adding additional damping to address settling time the system can be very finely tuned to work with a rotational mass to provide laser stable points on a wall 100 feet away (was the limit of our test area)!

The challenge when comparing available commercial devices is they all tend to publish different styles of nomograms (Transmissability curves) with different graduation on each axis so comparing these graphs is difficult without complex conversions. I look for the lowest published Fz.

Why do I like the passive systems? A few reasons. They are very quiet and reliable. It means one less source of noise (motor, bearing, acoustic, structural, hvac and flexural to name a few culprits). They don’t require power or air pumps or leak monitoring and periodic re-inflation.

So to isolate or not isolate (Shakespeare was after all a scientist ?

Imagine if Universities, Defence technology companies, satellite clean rooms etc the world over could simply pour a big concrete slab and build a lead filled cast iron or polycrete base to mount delicate measuring equipment on top.

One would think “I hit it with a hammer and it sounds like nothing moved, job done - no vibration is ever gonna get through that”……but alas all it takes is a blurry image on the microscope to tell you it’s a big fail as the structure noise in the building punches right through. The phone call to Minusk/Seismion/Herzan/Newport starts…...

Same goes for tables. Mass is only going to get you so far. If you want the maximum you need to add lab grade isolation performance.

Seismion and Herzan are both really excellent solutions and I’ve heard them both working under tables with great effect. If you try them and like them, fantastic, as they all offer performance improvements over non isolated methods.

Even Neumann cutting lathes had low frequency (Bungie) suspension frames to isolate the cutting lathe from floor borne vibrations. It’s not the design that matters so much as the performance. Pendulum bungie systems offer great performance in low frequency isolation but might not be partner friendly with home decor

By bringing in genuine proven laboratory grade isolation technologies such as the devices under discussion the world of analog reproduction can be enhanced. Typically the bass signatures are improved by better definition, delineation, texture, speed etc. Better open airy top end as well. Less overhang and bloat.

Oh and they even work on drilling rigs built into harsh mining facilities in jungles in New Guinea.

After completing that job I thought analog problems were easy to solve but “famous last words”

I’m still learning about analog and it constantly surprises with what is left in the groove.

I personally think we are in a golden age where music reproduction from source performer to home performance. I’d love to hear your Zero one day and I’m sure your system sounds amazing!

Onward and upward !!

Great post Mark. I will call you soon as I have some minor questions.