Hello,
I've been poking around lately with the idea of how changing/altering the feet of my aluminum cabinet speakers might improve on or reduce their ability to work effectively in my room. I am trying to avoid the use of subjective sound quality related opinions in this post in an effort to better stay in line with this forums target purpose for existing but some mention of that will no doubt be inevitable just to make a point or better explain what I mean.
I've read various posts found on WBF and other places about Coupling/Decoupling..etc but am unclear on a few items. My speakers come with spikes that are permanently attached to their Outriggers. The manufacturer has been on record as saying that coupling and the use of their Spike is the way to go but I wonder if they have forgotten about the poor slobs like me with suspended wooden floors when they make this blanket recommendation. I've used that configuration in the past and it resulted in lots of excess bass boom and floor borne vibration in the room.
I've seen various products on the market that claim to have the ability to transform vibrational energy into Heat via the use of foam/sponge like materials that are sandwiched between two metal plates (an example would be Symposium Svelte Shelves). Its claimed that ideally the speaker should rest directly on these platforms without the use of Spikes or as an alternative a small round disk is placed between the speaker cabinet and the platform. Both of these techniques are said to provide a better pathway for vibration to follow due their much larger contact surface area compared to a Spike.
This brings me to some questions. From what I have seen almost all speaker feet or floor protector type devices are round/conelike in their shape. My assumption for the use of this common shape is that it may help more evenly distribute whatever vibration is being fed into them in a nice even 360deg pattern. Just a theory! But when it comes to a Spike we are talking about a tiny point which appears to instead attempt to create a perfect 90deg angle from it and the surface it sits on to try and drive the vibration itself directly thru whatever surface it sits on.
A few questions:
1. Is a Cone/Round shape better then any other shape in terms of vibrational energy evacuation?
2. Can a perfect Square Cube evacuate energy just as effectively as a round shape?
3. Is the material used in the make up of the footer more important then the shape itself?
4. If a Spike is placed into a square cube (maybe 1" on all sides) that has a single hole that passes all the way thru it that is big enough to accept at least half of the Spikes length which in turn alters the contact point of the Spike to now be much further up near the fat base of the cone like shape what could we expect the outcome to be in terms of effectiveness as a speaker footer? Just as good as the original tiny tip or not as good? (An example below)
5. What if the cube below is combined as explained in q#4 above with a Svelte shelf like platform? Do you think it will be more effective or less effective then the Spike on its own at lowering in room boom and floor borne vibration?
Some deep stuff no doubt but could be an interesting discussion nonetheless.
I've been poking around lately with the idea of how changing/altering the feet of my aluminum cabinet speakers might improve on or reduce their ability to work effectively in my room. I am trying to avoid the use of subjective sound quality related opinions in this post in an effort to better stay in line with this forums target purpose for existing but some mention of that will no doubt be inevitable just to make a point or better explain what I mean.
I've read various posts found on WBF and other places about Coupling/Decoupling..etc but am unclear on a few items. My speakers come with spikes that are permanently attached to their Outriggers. The manufacturer has been on record as saying that coupling and the use of their Spike is the way to go but I wonder if they have forgotten about the poor slobs like me with suspended wooden floors when they make this blanket recommendation. I've used that configuration in the past and it resulted in lots of excess bass boom and floor borne vibration in the room.
I've seen various products on the market that claim to have the ability to transform vibrational energy into Heat via the use of foam/sponge like materials that are sandwiched between two metal plates (an example would be Symposium Svelte Shelves). Its claimed that ideally the speaker should rest directly on these platforms without the use of Spikes or as an alternative a small round disk is placed between the speaker cabinet and the platform. Both of these techniques are said to provide a better pathway for vibration to follow due their much larger contact surface area compared to a Spike.
This brings me to some questions. From what I have seen almost all speaker feet or floor protector type devices are round/conelike in their shape. My assumption for the use of this common shape is that it may help more evenly distribute whatever vibration is being fed into them in a nice even 360deg pattern. Just a theory! But when it comes to a Spike we are talking about a tiny point which appears to instead attempt to create a perfect 90deg angle from it and the surface it sits on to try and drive the vibration itself directly thru whatever surface it sits on.
A few questions:
1. Is a Cone/Round shape better then any other shape in terms of vibrational energy evacuation?
2. Can a perfect Square Cube evacuate energy just as effectively as a round shape?
3. Is the material used in the make up of the footer more important then the shape itself?
4. If a Spike is placed into a square cube (maybe 1" on all sides) that has a single hole that passes all the way thru it that is big enough to accept at least half of the Spikes length which in turn alters the contact point of the Spike to now be much further up near the fat base of the cone like shape what could we expect the outcome to be in terms of effectiveness as a speaker footer? Just as good as the original tiny tip or not as good? (An example below)
5. What if the cube below is combined as explained in q#4 above with a Svelte shelf like platform? Do you think it will be more effective or less effective then the Spike on its own at lowering in room boom and floor borne vibration?
Some deep stuff no doubt but could be an interesting discussion nonetheless.