Turntable Isolation Journey

Hi @mulveling It is no secret on the Gon that I have spent a lot of time over the years producing structures to support equipment and speakers.

It was my loaning to a friend the AT616 Footers I continually utilise so they could experience suspended speakers, that made such an impression that they were prompted to try out an easier to acquire design, which become Townsend Bases and are now advocates of these. I am more very confident in suggesting them to be tried as I have first hand experiences of Townsend Bases in use and the benefits they create.

We will have shared similar ambitions and intent, but our environments used for setting up the System are quite different to the one in your report. I started out on  Concrete Floors and Concrete Ceilings with Brick and Plaster Finished walls.

I am now using my Structures in an environment where there are Concrete Floors,  Dry Wall Board Ceilings with Brick and Plaster finished walls. 

I also share the confidence you have expressed in the use of a foam, I use it as a Tier Material in a range of densities and even have one that has proven over the past seven years to be chosen over other options for materials that have a similar structural property. This foam is a product that is substantially compressed and weighs in at approx' 700Kg a Cubic mtr. As an up to date outlook, It does look like from now on Densified Wood is likely to supersede this Compressed Foam material in the positions it has been used.

Many years ago I tried affordable footers, inclusive of Squash Balls, Spent Squash Balls collected from Sports Centres and Hockey Pucks (some will claim a Hockey Puck should be spent as well when used as a footer material). One other affordabe footer that might offer a further improvement is a Astronomers Tripod Footer, they are like a Hockey Puck but absorb energy that would cause the resolution of the Scopes reflections to be less sharp, due to energy transferral through the Tripod.

I have really enjoyed the learning to be had over many years of creating structures, there is most likely a off the shelf short cut, but it will most likely come with quite a few 0000's in the price tag. Such a short cut will not allow for such investigations into how certain materials interfaced in certain ways can change a perception of how the audible qualities are effected. There is also the strong possibility the structures produced are performing as a close match or share parity with the off the shelf product. 

I will also mention Solid Tech 'Feet of Silence', used as a footer in direct contact with the Plinth of the TT in use, this footer has shown to be quite an attractive option in place of the AT 616. I am yet to discover a footer that has made the same impression as this one. There are designs of footer available that are variant of the FOS, and are much more affordable. One forum member who has contributed regularly to the Analog Section, has made it known in a previous post they use a variant design and are quite impressed with how they perform.       

a 

@mulveling It is the continuation of creating experiences with different materials in a Support Structure and the very positive outcomes, that has been the Cornerstone of my other endeavor, which has been to work with electrical interfaces, mainly those that are achievable by a non-EE skilled individual.

When the Source and System are able to deliver in a manner that has a much reduced smearing and the details, micro details and envelope of a note and vocal are manifesting in a way that is quite perceivable as being improved. Changes to interfaces that are effecting the signal path are able to create very noticeable affects on the presentation and quality of the signal. It may be time to swap out or reconfigure some of the Cables used. A change of a Cart' Tag Wire can be quite something. Tube Rolling if some tubes are kept for this can also be revisited, as there is even more on offer from these simplistic exchanges, when the source and speakers are delivering in an improved condition.

I n my present listening environment, I have a Robust Design for a Cantilever Wall Mount Shelf that is set up to be used.

This can take substantial weight. I have used it with a Tiered Sub Plinth Set Up built of it and also have had a Sub Plinth Suspended from it.

Either of these methods have presented quite similar, their are small differences, as is always the case when a variant of a Support Structure is produced.

Due to Source Equipment Security concerns the Cantilever has not had the weight loaded in a manner I usually put in place on top of a Rack Structure. 

The Cantilever Shelve is used for the Digital Source and the Rack is used for the Analogue Source.

When creating the Structure under the Rack, producing methods for the Bracing of the Rack (dense foam as separator and tension strap the Racks together), along with the methods used to produce the TT Supporting Structure above the Racks Top Shelve. The assembly has proved to be very good for creating interesting discoveries and continued reconfigurations of the Structure has really honed the presentation to one I do not want to be without. 

The Racks come with a cost, but it is bespoke produced for me by a now deceased friend who's hobby was wood turning. Footers are going to cost varying sums of money, there is a need to Spend that is difficult to avoid or Clone, this will be needed if the better experiences are to be had through using certain types of footer. The combined cost of all the materials and footers collected over quite a few years is probably less than a £1000, the recent acquirement of Densified Wood Board has been £500, but I do see more of this to be purchased as it has impressed so much. For me, I have paid to learn a variety of lessons, certainly not the type of monies a dedicated Isolation Platform will command. I have been hands on, enjoyed the curiosities and thought processes used, the monies have been well spent in my view. 

What is the outcome of working with the different interfaces that can be produced as a equipment support and for the management of energies thar are being transferred. For me the system that commenced being built approx' 20 years past and much of the early acquired devices that remains in use, is a keeper.

The system mounted on a well thought through structure has enabled me to have identified items used in the system that are in my assessments functioning as constraints.

The more recent choices made for the replacements of items recognised as constraints are pretty much showing to me, the system as built over many years is a superb experience and a is to be kept. 

Run parallel with this the non-EE Skilled interfaces that can be put in place and there is something very special to be achieved. I certainly don't consider needing new anything at a get on board fee of $5k, 10$ or up to $50K, I have demo'd A/B against items up to these values, and am not feeling there was something amiss from my end.

I am very familiar with the Vibrasystems Sandwiched Blue Foam Pads, I was able to acquire these as a 300mm square that was a surplus material. I was also able to pass on as gifts these same pads to the local HiFi Group.

The Local Hifi Group are Gaia III users after my introducing them to the AT 616. 

I also have used the same construction as the Vibrasystems Pad which is using a Sandwiched Cork. Each Types have been tried under as footers in direct contact with Sources, Amp's and Speakers and also as a Separator of Tiers in a Sub Plinth assembly. 

My experience with these pads used as above is that as a alternate material in a structure they will change the sonic at the time of their addition, but are not able to offer a attraction that has been discovered from other designs for Footers that have been adopted.

My experiences of working with structures as interfaces for equipment and the loaning of materials and devices used for these purposes, has yielded very similar results to what has been realised when doing similar with a TT Platter Mat. 

There is in my view no ubiquitous solution for a produced structure or use of a Platter Mat. When creating the experience, there are two factors to be considered. One being the capability of the device/materials in use to perform a particular function and then there is the unique preference for a sonic that is perceived as the most attractive to the end user.

The desirable sonic/presentation across a range of experienced users of audio equipment can be to the polar extremes. One seasoned user can prefer a lean transparent presentation, like myself, but where I stray is that I will welcome a little richness offered up for a certain genre of music, this makes my own preferences unique and I have worked to learn how to satisfy this within the used system. A SUT swap out, Platter Mat exchanges or a Cable or Valve exchange are easily carried out and more than enough to change the perception that a Lean or Rich sonic is presented.

Another seasoned user can pursue a Rich Warm Tone or even a Lush Overbearing Coloured Tone. There is certainly no correct or incorrect in my books, just end users who are happy with their creations.

As the OP's Thread Title suggests, A Journey has been undertaken to find a place where they are satisfied with what is used as a structure to get the best from their listening environment and to suit their preferences for how they perceive a sonic and presentation.

More importantly, as attractive as an Off the Shelve solution is, especially one that comes with a substantial purchase price, there is not any asurity, the sonic produced and the presentation is going to be satisfying to all who experience the device in use. For a selection of individuals it may be the very best experience to date, for a different selection of individuals the impression made may be quite different.   

@mulveling I can't recollect when I first started to consider room treatments as a subject to be better understood. I have been to numerous Trade Events and have seen plenty of Commercial Products and Room Treatments utilised in Demo' Rooms.

In the early days visits to Commercial Events were more about learning how the Audio Devices were creating a signal and how the Speaker was able to produce a sound. It was these experiences that steered me to become a advocate of and remain loyal to the Vinyl Source as a sole source for more than 25 years. A digital Source is quite a new addition in my system.

As I learnt about Vinyl, the interest in the Mechanics of the devices used become quite developed and I met with many to learn how they were addressing the need to be creating interfaces that are crucial to attempt for an unadulterated sound being produced. This is a interest that is still strong today, there are plateaus that are camped on, but the getting to the Summit is still the climb to be undertaken.

Room Treatments have come into the equation when I was quite interested and practicing methods to improve mechanical interfaces. The curiosity was is the works undertaken due to the listening environment, hence, supporting structures and room treatments evolved as an interest and educational experience.

I highly recommend room treatments, there is extensive information on how to do DIY Absorption Panels and Diffusers. If this does not suit, there are also off the Shelf Absorption / Diffusers that will be quite suitable and not necessarily expensive. There is the trade off if a room is to be a main living area, as the method to conceal the treatments and blend them in as decor' might mean a little extra thought is needed for the aesthetics and if buying off the shelf this can be with increased costs. 

As stated before, if these subjects are addressed, support structure, and room acoustics, revisiting simple to exchange interfaces on the Signal Path, i.e, Cables, Valves, SUT,  will shine a new light on some of the earlier choices made.

The Link is not a recommended site to purchase from, but it will give a consolidated overview of how aesthetics can be considered.

https://gikacoustics.co.uk/?gclid=CjwKCAjw6vyiBhB_EiwAQJRopouz8t8L6CMjxTWSTCFXWP9EQTqtQZ9fA-JxNyPo42R66Q2bXH

In the US there is the added advantage that Ice Hockey is a popular sport.

Asking for spent pucks to be put to one side to be picked up when a batch are available, will offer an experience with a valued footer that has a difference to its elasticity through the usage it has incurred.

As stated previously, I used Squash Balls in a Spent condition to experience their influence with a noticeable change to the elasticity. 

@thr1961 There is a decent sum of money parted with to get to the TT>Tonearm>Cart' now in use.

To produce a support structure that can be very satisfying does not take large amounts of monies to begin with.

Have a look at Barry Diament Audio (some claim he gave Townsend Products their earliest ideas to go to market with), some of the methods seen on Diament Audio  are now evolved, where it can be seen others are utilising his suggestions/variants of the suggestions on other forums, it will be speedy to see ideas can be put in place for small monies.

Hockey Pucks and other simplistic footer methods can be compared.

I have revisited my evolvement through materials and it was a material referred to as Sorbofoam that superseded my use of Squash Balls. Sorbofoam is available in different thicknesses and densities. I chose a Hard Foam as I had at the time devices that has substantial weight.

Sorbofoam was later shown to have a worthy alternative, which is a Pipe Lagging Material from the Company Armaflex. I have both of these foam materials in my possession today and still utilise them during trials and keep them in use if they are the preferred material.

To experience any of the above is not going to impact on the finances, the real requirement is making time to change materials and evaluate how they are offering a change for the better/worse, or just a tweak to the sonic seasoning.

Any change of material will create a change to the sonic to manifest, the better trained the ear, the quicker the sonic change will be detected.

The assessment is for the best, when it is being identified that a new manifestation n has developed.

Quite simply, a certain area of the frequency range becomes improved and as a result details from within this frequency range become more evident. Once there is feel for it, there becomes the intent, to produce a presentation from the frequencies that are the preferred choices for the end user. As stated, I like Transparent/Lean, which to me is a Tight, Clean Rolled Off Bass Note (No perception of Overhang). This base condition, enables a well Project Upper Mid' and High Frequency. Then there is the quirk, I don't want this for all Genre listened to, like the perception a Rich Tone is present, I can achieve this instantly with a couple of minor changes.     

I have had an experience as a result of working with structures and Platter Mats, where a Backing Vocalist on a Track was quite subdued and fixed in the Background. Following toying with Structure and Platter Mats, this Vocal changed to the point the Backing Vocal was prominent and almost on parity with the lead vocal. I have no doubt in my mind for that the Vocal during this part of the recording, was what the engineer was wanting, the vocal was intended to become that prominent. Small Monies and a fair allocation of time enabled that experience to manifest.       

@thr1961 You stated "but hoping not to spend the extra dollars right now after the Safir..."

My comments and suggestions offered were to encourage the investigation and experiences that be learned from, as a result carrying out trials that have proved quite valuable in my listening environment. Nothing ventured, Nothing Gained, is the usual outcome of not being inquisitive and creating experiences.

There is a suggestion you bypass the ideas referred to, that are made by most of the contributors to the thread, negate all forum members reported on experiences and go straight for a $5K ancillary.

This is a typical Gon response from a select very small selection of members using the Analog Section. These few are always speedy at bringing to the forefront, that it is a multi $$$$$$'s fix. Very Very few are taking these individuals advice as far as I can work out.

The Plinth underneath the Racks is something that I have done.

The Racks in my set up are mounted on two Steel Sheets 1100mm x 700mm x 12mm. The two steel sheets also have their own support Structure underneath produced from Granite and Hard Foam. It is this foundation that was the game changer for me, the improvement that was noticed has been notable and will be maintained. 

The fact that Densified Wood has been offering real improvement on the top of the Rack System, leaves the question does the inclusion of Densified Wood at the Base of the System produce a further attraction to how the structure performs.

A friend and I are also seriously considering a Rack Produced from Densified Wood, but for me there is a deep ingrained sentiment attached to the Racks I am using.  

Screed Flooring laid in Laboratories has additional measures put in place for certain Companies designs for how a Screed Floor is to be laid onto substrate materials. Certain Pharmaceutical and Research Companies, especially those turning over 40 Billion+ annually are taking vibration being noticeable in the Lab' seriously and are putting quite a lot of engineering research into pre-screed laying measures being in place that are serving to isolate the screed from the energies transferred through a buildings super structure. This is created by using substrate materials that are highly effective at stopping energy transferral to the Screed. 

I learnt of this as a result of having a good communication/friendship develop with a Quality Manager responsible for producing Laboratory Flooring on a project I have been involved in, when I was informed the Screed Floor was designed to be de-coupled from the structure as a means to minimise energy transferral and reduce vibration within a Lab', as well as Floor Finishing materials also being selected with this same goal in mind as well I was all ears.

I have this specialised Substrate Material at home and in use as part of a Structure on my system, it is assembled as a 500mm Deep Lamination. This has a Hard Foam Layer upon it and is topped with a 200Kg Granite Engineers Flat Plate mounted on it. 

Again not many are experiencing their Audio Equipment on this type of structure, and this has proved to be a killer to build, definitely a young mans sport, but also serves a role as a superb support for my Amplification and with another Tier Structure placed on it, works superb as a mounting location for an Idler Drive TT. 

I am sure I can go out and spend £1K+ on a version of a Support Structure for my Amp's, but I have no asurity the items utilised are able to come near the method I have evolved to having adopted, that has proved to be substantially less than the commercial route offerings.   

@mulveling When extending the investigation of Structures, to the experiencing how these can impact when used under Speakers, if the design is a Cabinet Type, either Stand Mounted or Floor Standing. To date, I have not encountered a demonstration using suspension under the Cabinet that has not had a positive impact. The suspension has an immediate effect on the tidying up of the lower frequencies, the change for the betterment is immediately discernible.

The benefits of this overall takes a little time to assess, in my own system working with my Floor Standing Cabinet Speakers mounted on a Two Tier Plinth Structure, the addition of AT 616 Footers was the 'cherry on the cake', the overall presentation become gathered and the Bass Notes jumped out as having a perception of being quite honest as a rendition. Further extended listening was leaving the perception the Mid's and Upper frequencies were more projected and with a much improve detail being discovered. Notes/vocals were noticeable for having a envelope that could be traced as the sound formed into something that has a sense of being tangible. The sound produced, certainly was seeming to be coupled to the room with an improvement and this was undoubtedly more attractive to experience.

Valve Amp's are really going to Benefit for the Structures placed under them.

I have done a lot of work with all Valve Amp's/Valve Devices owned, to keep it simple and to create a worthwhile experience, the Phonostage is a good device to use to learn from. It can soon be learnt where the detail able to be produced is to become smeared, or much improved upon, through the use of differing materials and configurations for the structure.

It is my use of the AT-616 footers as demo' items to show others the benefits of suspending their own speakers that has been instrumental in convincing the speaker owners there is more to be attained from the set up for owned speakers.

This has extended across Speakers with a Box/Cabinet Design and ESL's.

The 616's are Holy Grails to find readily available in reasonably good condition and in quantity's to suit a Speaker Support.

Townsend Designs and Gaia Designs are alternatives adopted and used in conjunction with a Sub Plinth, by individuals who have felt the need to maintain the good impressions made. 

I will state again, the best impact I have had as a footer under a TT and CDT > Valve DAC is when using Solid Tech 'Feet of Silence'. There are footers that are a close mimic to these as method top create a suspension footer and are much more affordable. I encourage others to investigate the alternate options readily available.

@mulveling One very important material that is being overlooked in your list of Materials, is the B25 Panzerholz (Densified Wood), it is the most upper layer of the Tiers produced and is the one used to support all of the critical mechanical components required for the TT to function. 

It is for the best, to not overlook the magic that this material brings, when used for the role to connect all the critical mechanical operating parts together. 

I would even encourage as an investigation that Densified Wood to be used as a exchange material for the Base of the Sota TT. 

The Link will give an indicator as to the values offered from a Phenolic Impregnated Densified Wood.

https://www.lessloss.com/page.html?id=80

@mulveling This conversation for myself is now heating up, P'holz gets me all fired up. 

More importantly, I retired from building a system many years ago, and took on the task of working with interfaces that the system is dependent on, Electrical, Mechanical and Acoustic have all been thrashed out. This Subject under discussion on P'holz, is where I am now at with a New Material being utilised for Mechanical Interfaces and it is superseding all other choices for materials that are in use.

The Taiko Sub Plinths are very good in my view, as they are P'holz, but are even better for one other thing, they really show how much money can be saved when sourcing the Panzerholz Material B25 Cross Grain Structure oneself. If a Fibonacci Arch is routed into the acquired board of P'holz, then the Taiko is almost mimicked. By acquiring the P'holz oneself, they can be assured the Spec' for the material is the one that is most desirable, as tests available to be seen to confirm this.

How the P'holz is acquired and how much is to be paid is for oneself to decide on, getting the Spec' correct is very important.

As a guideline my last purchase of the same P'holz as above was for a Board of a dimension 2mtrs x 1mtr ( 6' 8" x 3'3") which cost £850. This could be cut to produce 10 Boards @ 500mm x 400mm ( 20" x 16"), coming in at £85 per Board that can be used as a TT's Plinth, Plinth/Chassis or Sub Plinth.

I have been using two Tiers of P'holz as a Sub Plinth, seated on and separated by AT-616 Footers. Depending on the weight of the Audio Device, I have a selection of footers to be used to separate the device from the Top Tier.

This support method has been taken to other homes as well and loaned for demonstrations, it is a unanimous agreement that betterment is to be had when utilised. Usually the assessment is that unidentified smearing is discovered as having been removed, as it is replaced by new insights to detail being presented, that is a very attractive outcome as the initial observation.

The Sub Plinth Assembly has been used under a variety of different Drive TT's, where it really shone in a unexpected way, was when it elevated a Garrard 401 to new heights. The method has also undoubtedly honed the presentation for the better from other TT's. A few who have been present during Dem's and have an interest in P'holz are now using P'holz as Sub Plinths in their own systems.

There has been similar outcomes, but not as noticeable when used with CDP's and CDT's > DAC's, the biggest audible tidy up being when Valves are present in the Digital Device.

A Valve Power Amp' that had been Imported and demo'd at a local HiFi Group event was considered to be mediocre, but OK for the retail price. When put on the P'holz Sub Plinth Assembly the Amp' become much more gathered in the lower registers and was quite unrecognisable, as the Mid's and Highs were very present as a result. 

I will suggest two uses for P'holz in your system, one will be easy to accept, the other a little more difficult, but very doable.

The idea of the extra tier added to the Townshend Sub Plinth, is the easiest to accept and will in my view be very valuable as a addition. If the material used as the additional tier is a Phenolic Resin Impregnated Densified Wood, that is produced with a Cross Grain Structure for the laminations, a compression to 50% of the original thickness is also desirable, there are other Brands of Phenolic Resin Impregnated Densified Woods that achieve this, but P'holz B25 is meeting this Spec'.

Note: It is not just the Densified Wood Material that brings on the magic, it is also the footers used as separators. The P'holz can be tweaked to a much more personal taste through trials on different footers. As stated in a earlier post, I have found the Solid Tech 'Feet of Silence' to be ideal for my unique preferences, there are much cheaper variants of these that are worthwhile trying out.  Another friend has settled on 'Sorbo Hemispheres' as their choice for a Footer, and another is using Knock Off 'Stillpoint Ultra 6's'. Trials will bring one to their own selections to suit their preferences. 

If the added tier is produced, I feel that there will be a giant step taken for your TT, to become a rival to the advanced in design sibling the 'Wood'.   

The next suggestion, and maybe not too easy to digest, but one I can't but help feel will transform the good impression further is to investigate the TT's Sidebar Tonearm Support.

I have been involved in experiments where the P'holz has been produced as a Headshell and a mount for a TA, (not a design that resembles a conventional Base Plate) Each has been A/B compared to previously used methods and each new method for a mechanical interface, has added something very special to the sonic.

Note: These changes are small, but are wanted to be maintained as they add to the attraction of the listening experience.

If the Sidebar can be swapped out for the B25 material, I do believe there will be a WTF moment from the impression being made.

Additionally, if this route is taken and a machining service is utilised to help produce the items, do ask for any waste materials to be turned into Cone Footers, this will not be regretted.     

@cd318 My evolving experiences with trialing methods to mechanically isolate my system and especially the Source of the system has always been in a environment where Concrete Floors and Brick Walls has be present.

I have never been exposed to very busy Transport that is in close proximity.

The methods I use today are different to the ones I used in the past at different homes. Is the earlier methods inferior to today's used methods?, or is the different homes/environments requiring a different approach to the methodology used for a support structure and the materials used?

I have stated in the past, experiences have shown to me there is not a ubiquitous solution for all environments, and then there impact on the sound from using materials, the produced sonic is one that can be altered/tuned, and when confident with toying with structures, the sonic can be produced to be close to the preference of the end user. This extended practice will equate to differences for selections of materials and how they are configured within a structure. 

I agree that the ambient environment being quiet, as a result of not being a hive of activities is a valuable asset. Also the quietness of the room dedicated to the audio experience is critical, this is where Room Acoustics comes into play and working with the space to minimise the impact of the sound produced on the sound being produced. All of the interfaces that are present whilst using Audio Equipment have a importance, probably all are equal.

Well thought out Electrical Interfaces can be extremely valuable at producing a detailing that is detectable/perceivable within the produced sound.

Good choices for materials and the positioning within the Room, will manage  unwanted sound, which can generate new sound or colour produced sound.

 The choice adopted for mechanical interfaces are broad, and some of the requirements that are working are shared within this Thread.

The best is to be had, if all three of the above are given considerations. 

@mulveling I have sent to you a 'PM'.

@thr1961 This thread has motivated you to investigate options on methods that can be used for mounting your very expensive recent purchase.

My experience is that the presentation and level of perception of the presence of the produced micro-detail, micro-dynamic and coherence of produced frequencies, is able to be controlled to a particular level of performance through creating a mounting for the TT, that assists with removing the environmental impact on the TT. When the TT is able to work free from being effected by ambient energy transferral, a Magic is discovered, and a condition is created that is not wanted to be undone.

I encourage further investigation, and suggest the Townshend Platform is another step, may be rested at for a period, but not the final step!