Springs Under My Speakers: What's Happening?

[Purité Audio]

If only someone would post before and after measurements that show the silenced floorboards.
Keith

 

[MattHooper]

If only someone would post before and after measurements that show the silenced floorboards.
Keith

19 pages in, the subject already addressed, and you still haven't figured out this isn't the thread isn't for you?

BTW, I did post some measurements earlier, showing the effects of placing springs beneath the speakers. They show some clear level of decoupling, reduction of vibrations, both from speaker to floor and floor to speaker, using a vibration measuring app:

Springs Under My Speakers: What's Happening?

That makes sense to me and I'd like to give it a try. How critical is the "tuning" of the decoupling device relative to the mass of the speaker and anything else that's in the equation? I obviously can't just plop a sub with two concrete pavers down on a slab of foam, it'll just compress. But...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I don't have anything more sophisticated to measure with, but the general principle of decoupling vibrations between speaker and floor are demonstrated in those measurements. Does this absolutely establish that I'm hearing a difference? Not to the level of evidence you want of course, which is why this thread isn't for you.

However, since you are big on demanding measurements to support claims:

You've claimed my impressions are merely imagination.

Can you support that with measurements? In other words, show that decoupling speakers from a springy wood floor with springs would NOT have any audible consequences?

(Some who have actual experience in vibration control have already chimed in to say audible differences would be quite likely).

 

[Emlin]

19 pages in, the subject already addressed, and you still haven't figured out this isn't the thread isn't for you?

BTW, I did post some measurements earlier, showing the effects of placing springs beneath the speakers. They show some clear level of decoupling, reduction of vibrations, both from speaker to floor and floor to speaker, using a vibration measuring app:

Springs Under My Speakers: What's Happening?

That makes sense to me and I'd like to give it a try. How critical is the "tuning" of the decoupling device relative to the mass of the speaker and anything else that's in the equation? I obviously can't just plop a sub with two concrete pavers down on a slab of foam, it'll just compress. But...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I don't have anything more sophisticated to measure with, but the general principle of decoupling vibrations between speaker and floor are demonstrated in those measurements. Does this absolutely establish that I'm hearing a difference? Not to the level of evidence you want of course, which is why this thread isn't for you.

However, since you are big on demanding measurements to support claims:

You've claimed my impressions are merely imagination.

Can you support that with measurements? In other words, show that decoupling speakers from a springy wood floor with springs would NOT have any audible consequences?

(Some who have actual experience in vibration control have already chimed in to say audible differences would be quite likely).

Really, get out of the rabbit hole that you've fallen into. Now!

 

[MattHooper]

Thanks Ken. Yes I had your previous posts in the back of my mind. Just thought I'd put things in a more clarifying question form.

If you are asking me, I have already voiced my opinion and reasoning.
#2 would isolate speaker from or to the floor-boards . meaning vibrations from the speakers can not travel to and from the floor boards. Granite, by default is dead acoustically . its sheer mass means it requires a lot of energy to disturb its stationary inertia , and its particle construction should not have a resonance.
So, layering it with steel plates is not necessary, but a compliant isolation between the floor-boards and the granite is.
If the cabinet has resonances, this method may control some of the lower frequency ones, but it would not be a cure.
This method, allows you to hear the speakers, not the floor-boards !

FYI, suspended chasis turntables, isolate in similar manner.
A heavy platter solidly attached to a chassis and then suspended, means vibrations from outside can not disturb the platter. The mass of the platter/chassis provides the stationary inertia , springs are the isolation.

I hope I can try coupling the speakers directly to the granite. It could be tricky to pull off. I'll let you know how it goes if I do.

As to granite not having resonance, that doesn't seem to track what I'm seeing. If I have the granite raised on spikes and I knuckle rap the granite, there is a clear ringing tone. If I place the granite directly coupled to another layer - e.g. hockey pucks or the MDF/sorbothane layer - that hollow ringing sound is gone with a knuckle rap. It's a dead "thonk." That makes sense I think, since most materials will still vibrate, and I wouldn't think 1 1/4" of granite would be enough to fully stop resonance.

As I mentioned before, for my turntable set up I tried various layers. I had two layers of MDF and they sounded relatively dead but still obviously resonated with rapping/hitting them. When I placed a sheet of steel between them, surrounded by wall damping as well, that MDF structure just went "dead" in terms of the knuckle rap test. It was more like rapping on rock than wood. I don't have measurements, but it was clear the resonance character was changing.

So just going on that experience and personal hunch, I figure I'll get a similar higher deadoning effect doing a constrained layer with the granite vs just my current single layer of granite. Ultimately it seems it would be too complext for the average joe to predict the resonant character and possible results in the room, which is why I'm having fun just trying different things and getting impressions.

 

[Purité Audio]

19 pages in, the subject already addressed, and you still haven't figured out this isn't the thread isn't for you?

BTW, I did post some measurements earlier, showing the effects of placing springs beneath the speakers. They show some clear level of decoupling, reduction of vibrations, both from speaker to floor and floor to speaker, using a vibration measuring app:

Springs Under My Speakers: What's Happening?

That makes sense to me and I'd like to give it a try. How critical is the "tuning" of the decoupling device relative to the mass of the speaker and anything else that's in the equation? I obviously can't just plop a sub with two concrete pavers down on a slab of foam, it'll just compress. But...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I don't have anything more sophisticated to measure with, but the general principle of decoupling vibrations between speaker and floor are demonstrated in those measurements. Does this absolutely establish that I'm hearing a difference? Not to the level of evidence you want of course, which is why this thread isn't for you.

However, since you are big on demanding measurements to support claims:

You've claimed my impressions are merely imagination.

Can you support that with measurements? In other words, show that decoupling speakers from a springy wood floor with springs would NOT have any audible consequences?

(Some who have actual experience in vibration control have already chimed in to say audible differences would be quite likely).

“I have just seen a flying pig’,
Keith

 

[MattHooper]

Really, get out of the rabbit hole that you've fallen into. Now!

*(psst: different people enjoy doing different things).

You've got over 500 posts on this forum already. Think of how that time could have been spent doing other productive actions! Time to get out of this rabbit hole now and stop posting for a while?

 

[MattHooper]

“I have just seen a flying pig’,
Keith

It’s just your imagination, <--- positive claim.
Matt.

 

[Emlin]

*(psst: different people enjoy doing different things).

You've got over 500 posts on this forum already. Think of how that time could have been spent doing other productive actions! Time to get out of this rabbit hole now and stop posting for a while?

Ok... But turn your criticism of me back to yourself. Get help, please.

 

[MattHooper]

Ok... But turn your criticism of me back to yourself. Get help, please.

Do you mean the comment about the amount of posts here, since I have many more than you?

That's the point: I enjoy participating in this forum, like you do. I would never tell you to stop posting here if you enjoy it. Informing people is one thing; telling them what to do is another. That can take the form of presuming your own goals and criteria over theirs.

It's like someone who only streams music trying to tell someone who enjoys vinyl "You need to get out of that rabbit hole and stop *now*!"

Why do you insist on telling someone else to stop doing something they like doing, just because you wouldn't get enjoyment out of the same thing?
You likely do things I wouldn't choose to do, but I'm not going to tell you to stop and "get help, please." That would be obnoxious...if you take the hint.

 

[Emlin]

Out of care, that's all.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

I hope I can try coupling the speakers directly to the granite. It could be tricky to pull off. I'll let you know how it goes if I do.

You don't need to bolt them. just use anything solid between the bottom of the speakers and the slab. the weight of the speakers would make a good bond. This way, you can also reposition the speakers later to get the right toe-in angle. I use three dome-head bolts under the speakers, two at back, one at front. By adjusting the front bolt, I can adjust the lean angle too.

As to granite not having resonance, that doesn't seem to track what I'm seeing. If I have the granite raised on spikes and I knuckle rap the granite, there is a clear ringing tone. If I place the granite directly coupled to another layer - e.g. hockey pucks or the MDF/sorbothane layer - that hollow ringing sound is gone with a knuckle rap. It's a dead "thonk." That makes sense I think, since most materials will still vibrate, and I wouldn't think 1 1/4" of granite would be enough to fully stop resonance.

Fine, my slab of granite is dead, dead acoustically. if yours isn't you can try a sheet of MDF glued to the underside of the slab. I would cut the wood an inch smaller on every side, to give the slabs a better look. Then use your springs, gels whatever under the wood, on top of floor-boards. The MDF and glue should kill off any ringing of the slab. (No Nails glue).

As I mentioned before, for my turntable set up I tried various layers. I had two layers of MDF and they sounded relatively dead but still obviously resonated with rapping/hitting them. When I placed a sheet of steel between them, surrounded by wall damping as well, that MDF structure just went "dead" in terms of the knuckle rap test. It was more like rapping on rock than wood. I don't have measurements, but it was clear the resonance character was changing.

The steel plate added the extra layer and mass. I bet marble or granite or even a concrete slab would gave given better results.

So just going on that experience and personal hunch, I figure I'll get a similar higher deadoning effect doing a constrained layer with the granite vs just my current single layer of granite. Ultimately it seems it would be too complext for the average joe to predict the resonant character and possible results in the room, which is why I'm having fun just trying different things and getting impressions.

What you want to achieve by all these endeavours is null-out the effect of the floor-boards.
Once energy from the speakers is transferred to the floor-board, it excites the floor-board resonances. The floor-boards start to sing with the sound, and also these resonances can travel back to the speakers, distorting the sound.
By using a mass (granite, concrete garden slabs, etc.) mounted on an isolator (springs, gel layers, Sorbothane), the energy transfer gets reduced.

 

[MattHooper]

You don't need to bolt them. just use anything solid between the bottom of the speakers and the slab. the weight of the speakers would make a good bond. This way, you can also reposition the speakers later to get the right toe-in angle. I use three dome-head bolts under the speakers, two at back, one at front. By adjusting the front bolt, I can adjust the lean angle too.

Good. Thanks.

BTW, one of my goals is having the speakers easily moved to play with position and toe in. My problem is the speakers sit on a shag rug so reliable marking is not easy.
The best markers I've found are velcro carpet markers:

https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B08HCWVRHM?psc=1&ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_product_details

Which I cut straight.

The most accurate is if I have a square base on the floor to move (e.g granite base) which gives good corners to mark as reference. That's why my ideal would be for the granite to just sit on the floor as a base to move around.

Fine, my slab of granite is dead, dead acoustically. if yours isn't you can try a sheet of MDF glued to the underside of the slab. I would cut the wood an inch smaller on every side, to give the slabs a better look.

I will definitely be cutting (and painting) any MDF sheet if I end up using one. First I'm going with the slightly thicker, more solid granite base I'm going to make, but still leaving enough room to add MDF, spikes, footers or whatever if I want.

Then use your springs, gels whatever under the wood, on top of floor-boards. The MDF and glue should kill off any ringing of the slab. (No Nails glue).

The steel plate added the extra layer and mass. I bet marble or granite or even a concrete slab would gave given better results.

Why do you think so over the constrained layer version of the granite? As I said, a combination of steel and wall damp material made a really big difference in solidity
with MDF, vs MDF alone. Much less ringing. I don't see why it wouldn't have a similar benefit with granite, vs granite alone.

I used this (thin) wall damp material:

WallDamp . - Acoustic Sciences Corporation

WallDamp. ASC, the industry standard for Pro Audio & Studio & HiFi. Manufacturer of the TubeTrap, StudioTrap, AttackWall & QSF.

www.acousticsciences.com

It worked wonders. I not only used it for my MDF/Steel platform under my turntable, but since I had a bunch left over I stuck it all over my metal rack. I have an old Lovan modular metal rack (hollow) that rings like a bell if you knock it. With the wall damp squares attached that ringing goes dead, a solid "thonk" like the metal is much thicker. Now, I don't really think there was any sonic benefit to this in terms of my sound system. But just in terms of the deadening effect of that wall damp material, it's quite legit.

What you want to achieve by all these endeavours is null-out the effect of the floor-boards.
Once energy from the speakers is transferred to the floor-board, it excites the floor-board resonances. The floor-boards start to sing with the sound, and also these resonances can travel back to the speakers, distorting the sound.
By using a mass (granite, concrete garden slabs, etc.) mounted on an isolator (springs, gel layers, Sorbothane), the energy transfer gets reduced.

Yup, that does re-iterate your view which I appreciate. It tells me what you think would be best for reducing speaker vibrations from influencing the floor.

As I've mentioned, it seems...so far...that I'm looking for some hybrid: some decoupling but not too much. I'm going by ear (not only because it seems like it would be very complex to measure, but also even if I were identifying differences with measurements, it would still come down to which I preferred by listening).

 

[FrankW]

I'm going by ear

Laughably incorrect. That would be, by definition, blind listening. The only thing you go by blind, is "by ear". You are going by anything but "by ear", without cognizance as usual.

 

[caught gesture]

However, since you are big on demanding measurements to support claims:

You've claimed my impressions are merely imagination.

Can you support that with measurements? In other words, show that decoupling speakers from a springy wood floor with springs would NOT have any audible consequences?

Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat.

 

[MattHooper]

Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat.

Exactly.

Sometimes people don't even notice when they've made a positive claim (even when challenging another claim). (I'm a bit of a philosophy nerd sometimes, so can't help notice these things).

 

[MattHooper]

Laughably incorrect. That would be, by definition, blind listening. The only thing you go by blind, is "by ear". You are going by anything but "by ear", without cognizance as usual.

You really have a problem recognizing context, don't you?

Or...at least when you have it in for someone. Funny, I was recently reading the show reports section and saw your reply here, thanking someone for giving their impressions of various speakers at Axpona:

Axpona 2023, my show report

I went to the Axpona audio show this weekend. For the first time in my four years of Axpona, I went for two days. Why two days? Primarily because when tickets went on sale, there was a deal for two day passes. I was glad I did two days as I had a lot more time for detailed exploration and...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Did you trip all over yourself criticizing them for daring to write their impressions without having listened to all those speakers in double-blind conditions?

Of course not. On ASR we all understand that any sighted listening comes with caveats. If you need that repeated over, and over, and over, and over, and over...well...the problem isn't with other people.

My sighted testing has exactly the same status, and are presented as such, as I have clearly acknowledged countless times. Remember how you said I "missed" Amir's points about the nature of sighted bias, and I corrected you with posts I made years ago explaining exactly those issues? Remember I pointed out my tag line, acknowledging the liabilities of sighted listening, is staring you in the face at all times?

The fact that you can not acknowledge I have given plenty of caveats regarding my or anyone's sighted listening because you are experiencing "Can't-Admit-I'm-Wrong-On-The-Internet-Syndrome" is your problem, not mine.

 

[caught gesture]

Exactly.

Sometimes people don't even notice when they've made a positive claim (even when challenging another claim). (I'm a bit of a philosophy nerd sometimes, so can't help notice these things).

Without getting into a game of "burden tennis”, the standard for evidence to meet the burden of proof is usually determined by context and community standards and conventions. As the name of this forum is audiosciencereview, I would say that the onus is on you to provide some measurements if we are to adhere to the science aspect of this forum, otherwise what is the point of the forum?

 

[FrankW]

You really have a problem recognizing context, don't you?

I have zero issue recognizing 19 pages of sighted audiophile fantasies. I saw and did this, heard this and that.

I would say that the onus is on you to provide some measurements if we are to adhere to the science aspect of this forum, otherwise what is the point of the forum?

Exactly, though all the measurements in the world won't supplant a basic controlled listening test.
Which Matt et al will never do.
.

 

[caught gesture]

I have zero issue recognizing 19 pages of sighted audiophile fantasies. I saw and did this, heard this and that.


Exactly, though all the measurements in the world won't supplant a basic controlled listening test.
Which Matt et al will never do.
.

Echoic memory being about four seconds, I don’t think a controlled listening test would be feasible in this situation. Making the changes would take too much time.

 

[FrankW]

I don’t think a controlled listening test would be feasible in this situation. Making the changes would take too much time.

Too bad. Controlled still required.