VPI SSM lacking bite

I agree they tighten thing up vs. other more compliant isolation schemes, I'm just saying relative to metal spikes and other ball bearing supports I've tried.

I also have trouble comprehending any sort of suspension/compliant device under mass loaded tts. You want to drain any minute vibrations away from tt. any compliant device introduces sympathetic movement back into tt, these asynchronous movements should smear/soften the sound (I hear this). I understand these sorts of devices decoupling from external vibrations, but they seem counterintuitive for draining internal vibrations. Still waiting to hear a good explanation for using these devices on mass loaded tts.

Lack of bite and softened transients are part of the problem with my SSM setup, I'm still in the process of figuring out the problem. I've worked on isolation and modding phono pre to this point, still not where I want it.

Others claim these problems are not inherent to VPI, I've not come to any conclusions on this. I think an arm upgrade would be very revealing, go for the Graham and let us know your results.

I forgot to mention, I do have Cerabases I use elsewhere in system. IME, this is not the best way to go in aleviating the problems you have. Cerrabases tend to soften the sound just a bit compared to spikes and/or Aurios. I would go back to trying stock VPI spikes and/or trying brass spikes. Stanwal has previously mentioned having good luck with the Star Sound spikes, I plan on trying.

As usual your arguments make sense, I will try the springs. Now, any suggestions about what springs I should order for aprox. 300 lbs divided by 4 springs, ie. aprox. 75lbs per spring?

Dave, is LF mechanical energy truly benign, slower oscillations should impact sonics as well, I prefer to drain off all energy maximally. The fluctuations between motor and tt are just another complication. I suspect it might be best to spike motor as well, haven't tried yet.

My take is that VPIs should be best situated with large mass spikes coupled to massive vibration sinks maximally decoupled from external vibrations, ie. wall mounted or cement slab decoupled from rest of flooring.

I will soon be building a huge sandbox (planning on over 300 lbs sand), changing out stock spikes for Star Sound large mass brass spikes, figure out some means to spike motor, all mounted on my de-coupled wall shelf. This should test my theories, based on previous exploration in this direction I expect much better performance.

Dave, I agree that a soft spring mattress on the beach decouples you from the surf, but this is more analogous to using something compliant underneath the the sandbox. Essentially you are de-coupling from external energy (the surf). Any vibrations within your body (assuming bodies vibrate :-) are still being reintroduced into your body from the compliant mattress.

I've been thinking about your spring arrangement for some time, I'm willing to give it a try. Should be good experiment with my wall shelf and huge sandbox. The only issue is determining which springs to try, I will have somewhere around 300+ lbs to support.

While I can understand the negligible effect of the springs on the movement of arm and stylus, not reintroducing vibration into tt, and greater de-coupling from external forces. I'm still not sure that internal tt vibrations can travel down springs into the stable surface below that, seems to me vibrations would get caught up in springs, both external and internal generated energy would be fighting each other in spring. I would think those vibrations would have greater drainage through the very sharp spikes I'm currently using.

I suppose the greatest isolation I could muster would be wall shelf supports made from a more aborptive material than my present steel supports. This would both serve to better absorb energy from tt, sandbox vibration sinks, sandbox, maple platform, and de-couple from external energy.