• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Springs Under My Speakers: What's Happening?

(Sorry I don't have speaker measuring equipment to post data. For now I just have to say "this is what I heard...any explanation"?)


I recently tried a "tweak" for footers under my speakers that has had fascinating results. And I'm wondering about the explanation.

I've never been big on trying out tweaks and footers for my speakers, only once in a very-long-while throwing something in to the mix.

But my experience building my turntable isolation platform, and employing the Townshend spring-based isolation pods under the platform did pique my curiosity about springs used in other "vibration environment" cases, like speakers. I ordered and tried a huge number of isolation/vibration reduction materials and footers to test out when doing the turntable platform, and nothing came remotely close to the spring-based design of the Townshend pods. Without them under the turntable base, if I stomped around the floor big vibrations were easily felt with a hand on the base, and easily measured as huge ringing spikes with a seismometer vibration measuring app on my ipad and iphone. With the springs under the base, it just killed these vibrations. Stomping around yielded virtually imperceptible results hand on the base, and showed almost nothing on the measurement app.

I was intrigued therefore that Townshend also makes spring-based isolation bases for speakers to sit on, to decouple them from the floor. They are pricey so didn't want to just roll that dice (yet). I noticed some relatively cheap versions of the idea on Amazon:

https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B08DFHS7QT/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

So I thought what the heck and bought 8 of them.

To back up: I've tried spikes under my Thiel speakers and, when I had all that material around from making my turntable base, I tried throwing in a few things under my speakers, including some Isoacoustics pucks I had on hand. Frankly I didn't notice anything remarkable or too compelling in any case and preferred the speakers sitting on the floor, except that I had to add some Herbies Fat Glider footers to the bottom to help me slide around the speakers on my rug.

With loud, bass-heavy music the floor around my speakers is easily felt to vibrate quite a bit. First thing I did was put 4 spring footers under only my left speaker. With loud music, the floor vibrated as normal by my R speaker. But around my L speaker with the springs, vibration was gone in the floor. Couldn't feel a thing around the speaker. Plus, the spring-speaker did sound "different" when music was playing through both.

Anyway...replaced the footers on both speakers and slipped those spring devices under the speakers (making them a bit wobbly).

Whoah!

Basically it was like the entire sonic range "tightened and cleaned up." Bass instruments tightened, bass instruments became more holographically located in the sound field, the entire soundstage expanded, imaging more 3D, instruments and voices became smoother, more clearly defined, with distinctly finer resolution and nuance.

My Thiel 2.7 speakers replaced my earlier larger flagship Thiel 3.7s. The 2.7s are a slightly scaled down more budget friendly version and one thing the 2.7s never did was "disappear" quite to the extent of the 3.7s. Maybe it was due to the more heroic bracing and aluminum front baffle of the 3.7s I don't know. But all instruments floated free of the 3.7s, even hard panned instruments. But hard panned instruments have been more "stuck" to the 2.7s, making the soundstage a bit more triangular or curve shaped - good depth the more you move to the middle, less so, converging towards the speakers to the sides.

With the springs under the speakers this "triangle-shaped" soundstage completely went away! It was like the soundstage simply opened up width-wise, like one of those Cinerama screens opening up in the old theaters. That, with the increased soundstage depth, has me hearing a scale of soundstage I'm not sure I've experienced before (except possibly my MBL omnis).

To dial it back: all these are somewhat subtle, but the improvement in every area makes for a very significant change in the character of the sound. It's like a level of "blur" has been removed.

When I went back and re-read reviews of the Townshend speaker isolators, it was like word-for-word the type of sonic changes I have experienced. I'm not trying to pimp for Townshend audio so won't post videos for now, but he's done some interesting videos explaining the purported benefits of spring decoupling. I'm somewhat more skeptical about the Isoacoustics explanations for their products in that it's hard to see how it would work. But the very fact that I can so obviously feel (and measure) the decoupling effects of springs makes me think it's entirely plausible they may be doing something.

Does anyone have a good idea as to what may explain this effect?

Would the floor vibration have been adding some sort of "burr" to the sound, that is now removed? Or would the vibration of the speaker somehow interacted with the floor, the vibrations going back in to the speaker, when not decoupled?

The speakers are a teeny bit higher on the springs than on the footers, and I adjusted my seating height. But no matter how high or low my head, the overall change in sound was there.

Thoughts?
Youre moving energy in different ways with different feets below your loudspeaker .
Some is perceived as better , making the illusion of 2 channel sound better . It can be perceived as better but measuring worse, depending on how the measuring is done.
Different speakers behaves different so there is no ”magic” bullet for every speaker or floor.

There are different construction schools for moving resonances- some move resonances higher in frequency ( stiff /light cabinets and hard feets ) and some lowers them ( heavy cabinets with rubber/ spring feets )
 
No, I don't. Please read my post #292 (again?).

Spoiler: I always get butsted by some completely unrelated stuff, also in other threads. And then the same questions are asked over and over. As if some were not the least interested in technical information but in just chitchatting stereo along common 'wisdom'.

So, in post #292 I lay out why and what to do. Previously, again spoilered by chitchat, I gave an example and a *very* practical manual how to do to full success with kitchen material, literally. Without calculatons, without measuring!

Really, it is not me to complicate things. Did you actually know that damping is nonsense in this endevour, did you know that "spikes" show the properties of a spring leading to relevant resonances in audio band, did you know that using four instead of just and only three is a foolish (litarally again) sin nowhere else exhibited but in so called hifi circles?

And not the least I really wonder why so man are talking with full engagement but never show any objectively understandable results.

Youre moving energy ...making the illusion of 2 channel sound better . It can be perceived as better but measuring worse, depending on how the measuring is done.
... no ”magic” bullet for every speaker or floor.
There are different construction schools ...
Could you support your musings with relevant theory or praxis? I've got some education in this field, worked in it, by the side, scientifically to some success, but I don't understand what you're after. What is 2-channel sound as to be a testing method by bested illusion in perception? Two schools that cover all the different combinations of floors and speakers?

Are you willing to develop the field anew from grounds up, defining a target and such? Nice, go ahead :)
 
Last edited:
Adding mass simply lowers the natural frequency of the whole structure , what you want is a properly designed loudspeaker in the first instance.
ie one whose enclosure does not store energy which ‘could ‘ cause resonance.
Keith
Err?
Even the best designed speakers sitting on a bouncy castle will have issues at bass. unless they weigh a ton! in which case they rip through the bouncy castle.
Speakers coupled to a large mass (i.e. solidly and acoustically joined) can enjoy the increased inertia of the mass and "Sink" their cabinet's bass resonances into the mass.
In addition by decoupling the large mass from floorboards you put a barrier for any residual vibrations to go from or to the speaker-mass assembly.
BTW, metal spikes don't vibrate!
Three spikes are better than four.
 
Even the best designed speakers sitting on a bouncy castle will have issues at bass. unless they weigh a ton! in which case they rip through the bouncy castle.
Speakers coupled to a large mass (i.e. solidly and acoustically joined) can enjoy ...
Please don't take it personally. I'm out. Please read post #292. It is all already layed out by well trained personnel in this field.
 
Please don't take it personally. I'm out. Please read post #292. It is all already layed out by well trained personnel in this field.
At the Swedish expert forum Faktisk.io it is proved that a loudspeaker cabinet must have a weight ratio of about 1:1000 coneweight/cabinetweight to not interfere audible with a music signal . Thus, a bookshelf loudspeaker with a conemass of 20 gram should weight about 20 kg . A big subwoofer with a coneweight of 100 gram should weight 100 kilo. If this is done, the feet construction below the speaker cabinet are almost irelevant.

A very easy experiment one can do is to place concrete slabs on the subwoofer and listen If the sound gets less ”smeared” .

Spikes below an unbraced floorstand speaker with thin walls will get more resonances concentrated between 100-500 Hz , and soft rubber feets will have less resonances in that area.

Music is ordered frequencies in the time domain and the sound from a cello starts with resonances, a string is touched and the moving air is resonating in the cello wooden cabinet, producing a tone.

Knowing this - a loudspeakercabinet with some resonances between 100-500 Hz standing on spikes can be perceived as more ”alive” in the sound - its a small coloration but sometimes its needed in the flawed stereo system.
 
Last edited:
Good to see your post!

I have that app too, but I found it a bit hard to navigate so I used a simpler one.'

BTW, someone posted this video on the General forum, which I'd seen before:


I've been planning on possibly doing a marble or granite bass, but the result there for the ringing of the concrete blocks under the speakers makes me wary.
Scientifically?Sensitivity of acoustic outcome versus positioning in room? Again, repeatibility? None! The chain of causual dependency in terms of mechanics/physics, none! How deeply can you trust a youtube presenter, speaking hastily emotional on the urge to convince? Nil. Wonders every day.

These guys run the sweeps without hearing protection, and the background 'music' rumbles on and on.

At the Swedish expert forum ... to not interfere audible with a music signal . ... and listen If the sound gets less ”smeared” .
A lot is lost in translation I assume. I give it the benefit of doubt. But yiu address me, a pro/ in exactly this field, with musings from an audio forum handing out some numbers without a definition of what the effect shall be? You say 'interfere with music signal' and 'smear'? I take for granted that there are less arbitrary means to communicate.
 
Err?
Even the best designed speakers sitting on a bouncy castle will have issues at bass. unless they weigh a ton! in which case they rip through the bouncy castle.
Speakers coupled to a large mass (i.e. solidly and acoustically joined) can enjoy the increased inertia of the mass and "Sink" their cabinet's bass resonances into the mass.
In addition by decoupling the large mass from floorboards you put a barrier for any residual vibrations to go from or to the speaker-mass assembly.
BTW, metal spikes don't vibrate!
Three spikes are better than four.
What does that mean, bouncy castles!
Loudspeakers don’t ‘sink’ anything, they are continually vibrating that is why is is essential that the enclosure does not store energy which could cause resonance and perhapd colouration.
Keith
 
Also, you spoke to an "either or" approach, mass loading or decoupling with springs.
It's not either/or!
It's a ratio, and super easy to calculate and to visualize!!!

For a mass connected to a solid object by a spring...
1681142659483.png

The resonance frequency is:
f = sqrt(k/m)
Where:
k is the spring constant (units are Newtons / Meter, the amount of force required to stretch the spring a given distance)
m is the mass
Increase the mass, the frequency goes down like 1/sqrt(m)
A stiff spring has a higher spring constant. Increase the stiffness of the spring and the frequency goes up by sqrt(k).
It's a ratio!

(Note that this is the same physics that is going on when matching turntable tonearm effective mass to cartridge compliance!)

Of course, it's more complicated than I just wrote, see what @thewas posted earlier:
Your speaker-on-springs is part of a coupled harmonic oscillator with the floor which is a springy thing as well. Also, there is damping (like the damping in your car's shock absorbers).

I do think that measurements with REW (for instance) and a mic would be revealing and might begin to answer your OP question. Might be interesting to see if there are harmonic distortion components that change with speaker coupling to the floor. I am not sure that an accelerometer on the cabinet while stamping on the floor is an interesting test. Listening impressions are not useful for this type of phenomena. We used to sell really expensive Goldmund dual-density cones for $180 each back in the late '80s based on sighted listening tests... and cables, and all sorts of other accessories, and to be clear accessories do not make the sound!:facepalm: The cones did nothing to the sound, the listening did everything for the sale.;)

I recommend getting out a mic and REW.
 
i can appreciate a lively discussion, but I still say: it depends on your floor. If you sit on a concrete slab, it probably won't become a sounding board. If you have wood floors, some are notorious for resonances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MAB
But there has to be enough transmission to produce an audible resonance , I would just like to see some actual FR measurements that show an audible difference, not the usual’ I bought some expensive cup and ball feet and now the bass is much tighter’.
Keith
 
But there has to be enough transmission to produce an audible resonance , I would just like to see some actual FR measurements that show an audible difference, not the usual’ I bought some expensive cup and ball feet and now the bass is much tighter’.
Keith
Agreed. Just pointing out that testing with a concrete slab may not reveal much effect.
 
Agree a company who made lab isolation came to my place ( wooden suspended floor) years ago and measured with a four plane accelerometer, huge horns bass heavy music played as loudly as we could stand and according to them far less structural borne vibration than they had anticipated.
They were considering making loudspeaker isolation but abandoned the idea after the tests, I used one of their rolling air diaphragms tables under my turntable, difficult to know if it made that big a difference because once it was under it was just too much of a hoo-haw to swap it out.
Keith
 
Please don't take it personally. I'm out. Please read post #292. It is all already layed out by well trained personnel in this fie
I wouldn't take it personally.
I tried to read your post 292 again, but as soon as I hit :
Another is the elasticity of a spike. Everything becomes soft,,,,,
I start giggling and can not read the rest, perhaps if you re-post it and put that clause right at the end. :)
 
Just watch from 15 to 15:40:
One word silicone and in more words:
I give up!
Interesting video.
A few points:
- He is in an attic, if I see things correctly.
As such, he would have unique room acoustics. The ceiling is not as solid as a downstairs room. The wooden suspended floor is surely Live.
- His speakers are pretty heavy already, but are not floor standing. They do require stands, but perhaps not additional mass.
- The FR and waterfall results are interesting, but the source of low frequency issues on all results, appear not to be from the speakers, but the floor vibrations! think about it, a simple compliant decoupling underneath the speakers reduces them. in all occasions he had the very low resonances and an 80Hz one.
- The choice of concrete blocks used is questionable. They don't really provide a solid foundation, and they ring like a bell.
A two inch single large (600x600) garden paving slab weighing 30kg+ or a thick marble or granite slab would not be excitable as much, specially sitting on a compliant dampening layer such as thick Sorbothane. The decoupling and the mass of the slab mean that floor vibrations can not travel to or from the slab. The mass+decoupling will act as an energy sink for the speaker cabinets.
Such an arrangement only works for larger floor standing speakers, though.
 
@Ken Tajalli I really didn't want you to look at the complete video (it's awful), just difference small isolator feats make and future more explained why with material physical properties.

Edit: who ever wants to argue physics good luck with that.
 
@Ken Tajalli I really didn't want you to look at the complete video (it's awful), just difference small isolator feats make and future more explained why with material physical properties.

Edit: who ever wants to argue physics good luck with that.
Don't knock them so hard. At least they tried to be objective about it and did some measurements, give them the credit.
Isolation alone is not the answer, if it was, all speakers would sound best, balanced on balloons!
But they don't . . .
It is all horses for courses.
Say, my suggestion wouldn't work on a thick solid concrete floor, but in a typical UK suspended floorboards, it does.
There is no one-solution that fits all.
 
@Ken Tajalli try with silicone!
They knocked them self with YouTube plaque, nothing I can do to top that.
Meby if it was a Roman concert (that contained natural rubber among other things) instead of today's one. Do we really need to discuss; fony, cheap, light, brittle, concrete blocks that ring among other things because they contain more chalk than cement in the first place?
 
Add mass.
Mass loading can be done with clamps, all thread and weight as you mentioned. I always add weight to the top of the cabinet if I'm trying to lower cabinet
noise. If you load a cabinet enough, a tap test with a malot sounds like green concrete vs an empty wooden box.
By adding width, length and depth to the base, you add stability. Unless the bottom of the cabinet was thin it has no purpose other than bottom heavy vs top heavy.

A way to avoid cabinet resonance by induction (outside vibration) and manufactured resonance is by material choice too. To dense vs not dense enough.

Cast magnesium/aluminum vs forged. There is a lot of difference in "RING" vs strength. What does a baffle have to do, WELL?

I have some speakers that are cast mag/alu. It's the best I've heard and they are 50 years old. Infinity Infinitesimal V 1 or 2. They make no noise and the
inside of the enclosure is not treated. Great speakers for a two way. Spendy too if you buy a pair.

Phase plugs, wave-guides, treated and well designed cabinet materials with narrower baffles all reduce distortion. It's a one up if you can decouple
the cabinets and equipment. If you can separate the Sub, Bass and mid/highs in separate enclosures it removes a lot of the timing issues along with
being able to project a center bass image from bass tracks. NOT SUB TRACKS.

I found that the if the driver baffle is made of a denser, thicker material, braced and then treated on the back side with @ TM Sound Coat (or simular),
it's a pretty easy endeavor from there to quiet down the volume portion of the cabinet. Liquid silicone, Flex Seal, Sound Coat, adhesive/sorbothane
AND long panel "braces/breaks" all add to a very quiet cabinet.

The issue I've had to cope with is material choice vs being able to shape the product. I'm not equipped to shape aluminum.
Certain hardwoods require water cool or very slow work. I'm pretty low tech when it comes to shaping wood. Analog :cool:

HDF vs MDF or combine the two. I have a pair of Elixirs that use a HDF baffle and base with a treated/laminated MDF cabinet. 375lb each. Heavy before
I added weight. I want to add a cap stone or cast one, bronze, iron, puter? A finishing piece to a 50 year war. LOL

Batting is pretty important too. I use a coarse fiberglass for sub/bass enclosures and highland wool for mids as a liner.

Springs, pods or air ride to decouple. Concrete floors over time will start to develop a drum effect as the stata below the concrete dries.
Unless the floor is anchored to friction pers via rebar to rebar on fairly tight centers 48" (8" to 12" tapered piers at least 48" tall) the floor will
bounce as it shrinks. The substata gets dryer and the concrete cures more and more. The earth below wicks the concrete above.

I've worked on jobs where they pressure grout under slabs to a certain pressure. The same with piers or columns if the engineer designs
in pressure soil mixed columns. Expensive but can withstand a heavy vertical load. Germany has a lot of anchors. Berlin is to the point
that you can't drill a hole without hitting an older anchor.. Washington state is close. LOL

The POINT of the story is points work on turntables for a reason. The points are on a deadened slab and the slab is on pod or springs tuned to
2-6hz (close). The point are for vertical load transfer, NOT Cha Cha Cha! (sub/bass). Pods or dampened springs take care of that if the springs are
dampened correctly. I use expanding memory foam earplugs inside the springs and spray the holders and springs with @TM Flex Seal.

Ok hands are crampin'

Chickens need feedin'

Regards.
 
Back
Top Bottom