2. misc-audio
  3. 1078727040

Damping Vibration - Friend or Foe?


Hi All,

I have been reading many discussions regarding the use of damping in and around audio components here on Audiogon. I thought that the following discussion from the FAQ page of my company’s website would add a little clarity. The example here involves a home theater system but the same principles hold true for an audio only system.

Question: Some people claim that adding damping to components to control vibration can sometimes make them sound less dynamic and somewhat lifeless. Why should this be so when damping reduces the problems of vibration and resonance?

Answer: I have also heard the same comments a number of times. Unfortunately, people mistakenly attribute these negative changes in performance solely to the addition of damping to a component. If we look at the entire evolution of an audio or video system we can gain a much more clear understanding of what is happening and why it is happening.

Let’s say that John, who is an audio and video enthusiast, decides to put together a really nice home theater system. He reads a number of magazines, visits websites devoted to these topics and assembles a system composed of many highly rated components. John sits down to enjoy a well produced action movie but a few minutes into the first scene realizes that he’s not hearing or seeing what’s been described in the magazines by the reviewers. The highs are bright and harsh, the midrange is forward and the bass is bloated and ill defined. The video picture is also disappointing – the images are not very sharp or detailed, it looks rather two dimensional and the color is only so-so. What’s going on? These are all really good and pretty expensive components!

John decides to try different interconnect and speaker cables to deal with the audio problems. After two or three weeks of trying a number of different brands he decides on Brand X between the converter and the surround processor (it had the smoothest highs) Brand Y between the processor and the amplifiers (it had the best midrange) and Brand Z to the subwoofer (it had much better bass). In addition, he spent a many hours trying different speaker positions. It also happened that the cable between the DVD player and the video projector John chose was from Brand X - it reduced many of the video problems he was seeing. He then had a technician come out and recalibrate the projector for this new cable. Now John is happier with the system, after all, he even switched the front amp for a different brand. But after a few weeks he is still noticing that the highs have sibilance during loud passages, are still kind of bright, and the midrange, although better than before, still honks a little and is not that distinct on complex dialog. Plus imaging is good but not great. The bass is better but he’s had to try the subwoofer in nine or ten different positions and, of course, the one that sounded best was right in the middle of the walkway!

John is bummed but starts thinking about acoustical treatment for his room and decides that adding some of that will surely make the system sound great. He borrows a bunch of different devices from a number of dealers and spends all day and night Saturday and Sunday trying all of the devices in different combinations and positions. By 11:59 P.M. on Sunday night he’s finally found the best compromise that takes care of many of the other audio problems, although some still remain.

All this work has left John exhausted but happy for a couple of months. He can now at least enjoy watching movies but increasingly is annoyed by the remaining audio and video problems. Over time he’s also noticed some new problems he hadn’t noticed before!

Well, now what? John does more reading. He’s read about vibration control before but now starts to think more seriously about it. He knows that Brand B’s products (high-mass and high-absorption damping devices) get great reviews and have won lots of awards so he decides to try them. He places a compliant decoupling platform on the shelf, a high-mass and high-absorption isolation platform on top of the compliant platform, the DVD player on top of the high-mass platform and a high-mass damping pod on top of the DVD player and the surround processor. Well just about all of the remaining audio and video problems are now gone – the highs are very smooth, the midrange is clear and the bass is much tighter, the video picture is far better – but somehow things sound constricted and lifeless. John likes the improvements but is not very sure that this is good thing overall.

What is really going on? As we’ve seen, John has taken a fairly convoluted road to reach the point of trying the damping products. Along the way he has made many choices of associated components, accessories and set-up to optimize the system. “Optimize“ has mostly meant reducing obvious and subtle problems and enhancing certain other aspects of performance. Unfortunately, much of this effort has been an attempt to reduce the negative audio and video artifacts of vibration contamination. The choice of cables, acoustic treatment devices, speaker position, etc. have all been made to ameliorate the SYMPTOMS, not the CAUSE of the problem – vibration! Once the cause of the problem is eliminated, the system shows itself for what it is – a system where the highs and mids have been pushed down in level and dynamic range because of acoustical treatment devices and associated components, where imaging has been manipulated by speaker position and acoustic treatment to compensate for random out-of-phase elements, where subwoofer position has been chosen as a compromise, where video calibration and associated components have been selected to compensate for vibration induced jitter and other artifacts in the video bitstream, etc., etc., etc. It is no wonder that John was under-whelmed when he added the damping devices!!

Also at issue is the fact that the designers of the components in the system have voiced their designs with vibration (most probably) present in their reference systems. They have compensated for the problems introduced by vibration and resonance by changing parts and topology to minimize the symptoms (not the cause) of that problem. It is quite possible that effectively eliminating vibration and resonance with damping is letting you REALLY hear how the component has been designed.

It is often the case that the choice of set-up, associated components, ancillary accessories, acoustic treatment, etc. has to be significantly and fundamentally reevaluated when adding devices that eliminate basic problems in a system – especially problems that are as pervasive and permeating as those brought about by unwanted vibration and resonance.

Best Regards,

Barry Kohan

Disclaimer: I am a manufacturer of vibration control products.
bright_star_audio
bright_star_audio OP
179 posts
 
Hi Eldartford,

Thank you for your question.

A well designed active (I assume you are describing an active pneumatic isolation mount) can do a good job by decoupling the device placed atop it from floor-borne vibration.

There are several limitations of the available commercial designs that preclude their use for audio (and video). The first is that most of the units available are made of steel and have steel top plates. Steel rings and can have negative electrical interaction with sensitive audio components (especially, but not exclusively, with cartridges and phono sections). Some models have stone options for the top plate but natural and artificial stone does not absorb vibration and has a tendency to ring. Some active pneumatic mounts have optional stainless steel top plates and they, at least, don't have the electrical interaction issues but still have ringing issues.

The overriding limitation of most commercially available active pneumatic mounts is that they cannot hold a large amount of weight. Your lab at work is a relatively quiet environment. Your listening room at home is not - it is being filled with high SPLs of music. The component on top of the active mount is being bombarded with large amounts of acoustic energy that is being absorbed into the chassis. In addition, the component is creating its own unwanted vibration internally (spinning motors, humming transformers, cooling fans, etc.). We want to restrict as much acoustic energy and as much internally generated vibration as possible from contaminating the signal flowing through the component. Adding high mass and high absorption above and below the component will accomplish this quite effectively but will also add considerable weight. Very few active pneumatic units can hold the weight required.

It is also interesting to note, as you stated "piers sunk deep into the ground with 2000 pound granite slabs on them" has not been very effective at eliminating vibration. This can illustrate that using mass and coupling only to try and control vibration is not adequate.

Please be more specific about how I can edit my post after its been submitted.

Barry Kohan

Disclaimer: I am a manufacturer of vibartion control products.
psychicanimal
1,738 posts
 
Eldart, I got the monoblocks! They seem pretty good in the vibration control department. The components are anchored around the cast chimney. Good.
flex
292 posts
 
Barry,
Regarding your recommendation of high mass, high absorption material above and below the component. In general, the argument against high mass is that it stores energy, especially lower frequency energy, and releases it back into the component, thus smearing transient edges, coloring sound, and reducing dynamics. Hence the argument for the use of lightweight materials that don't store energy. Do you find it possible to locate materials that so completely burn off the vibrational energy that there is no subsequent re-release back into the component? And are such materials broadband enough, i.e. operate at very low frequencies. Is it possible for any material to prevent low frequency transmission from the floor into the component, or is your solution then aimed just at reducing the resulting component vibration?

To edit your post: log in, then go to the post. There will be a highlighted line saying 'edit my post'. After editting, log out. This works until someone else posts to the thread.
bright_star_audio OP
179 posts
 
Hi Flex,

To answer your question adequately would require discussion of my products and that would not be appropriate in the Audiogon forums. I will attempt to answer you in more theoretical terms.

The most important concept for understanding how vibration affects an audio system and the best methods to control it is that ENERGY IS NEVER DESTROYED, IT CAN ONLY CHANGE FORM. The energy (vibration) that is created by the various sources in an audio system doesn’t just disappear, it must go somewhere and do some work. It left uncontrolled, it will cause the chassis and the internal constituent parts to vibrate and contaminate the signal. In order to eliminate the mechanical vibration we must change its energy to a more benign form. A highly effective vibration control device will accept the mechanical vibration from the component as efficiently as possible and transform it to thermal energy (heat) as quickly as possible.

What I can say is that there are materials and methods for combining and situating the materials that will absorb energy out of the component's chassis quite efficiently and will change that mechanical vibration to thermal energy very quickly.

Using light materials that don't store energy also means that thay cannot transfer the unwanted energy out of the component very efficiently and cannot transform it to heat very well.

Best Regards,

Barry Kohan

Disclaimer: I am a manufacturer of vibration control products.
bright_star_audio OP
179 posts
 

Flex,

I tried to log out and then back in but I still can't find an EDIT option near my post.

Thanks,

Barry
More to discover