cones or sorbothane or both?


my next mission is to isolate my minimalist system.
please post your experience with isolation devices.
which one is better, cones or sorbothane? which device is best for cd player, amp or speaker? is it a good idea to use both (ie. sorbothane, puck, cone in that order under a component)? any links for cheap accessories and DIY products? no megabuck rack system or sand filled ziplock please. keep it simple and elegant. thx.
karabiyikoglu
Some forms do a better job or a different job of dissipating energy. Nothing is perfect. Do a search on Neuance shelves here or on the net and you will find info on the direction I have taken, and do not regret, and have not fiddled with for a year or so now (which is saying a big something by the way).
Cones and sorbothane disks are based on two different theories. Although there are those who would claim differently, I believe you negate the effects of cones using sorbothane anything. A cone is a coupling device, sorbothane disks are a decoupling and energy absorption device.

A cone, by putting the weight on a very small point, makes whatever is on top of the cone vibrationally couple to whatever is under it. In other words, if you put a heavy speaker on cones on the floor of your house, the speakers act as if they are a much heavier object. That means that vibrational energy will have a smaller impact on the speaker itself, because the vibrational energy is attempting to displace a much greater mass (your house).

A sorbothane disk, on the other hand, is designed to decouple two things by absorbing vibrational energy and turning it into heat. In other words, if you have something that is vibrating one one side of the footer, the footer absorbs the vibrations instead of transmitting the vibrations to whatever is on the other side.

Thus, if you put a speaker on cones and put the cones on a sorbothane footer on the floor, you may couple better to the footer, but you aren't coupling to the floor. You might as well just use the footers.

So, if you are trying to prevent vibrations from one piece of gear on a shelf to get to other pieces of gear, pucks may be a better solution. If you are trying to keep things from vibrating at all, cones may be better. I'm a believer in cones myself. YMMV.
thx for the replies. and yes there has been a forum thread in audioasylum just like this one.
the challenge in my case is;
i am living in a 100 year old house (hwood floors). my room is very small, so there is no room for audioracks, speaker stands etc. my system rests on a wooden desk (yes, even the monitors). i think i will try sorbothane hemispheres under my speakers and cones for the cd player. my heavy unico amp also stands on the cd player, is that a bad idea? shall i also put something in between them (like pucks)? edesilva, do you know a supplier of effective and cheap pucks?
In my humble opinion, the best, easiest, and not necessarily most expensive, is Zoethecus. No need to fuss with cones, blobs, etc. A really well engineered rack should be all you need, and I think Zoethecus fits the bill.
Contact Ken at Neuance. He does a shelf that does a fantastic job without a rack.