Springs Under My Speakers: What's Happening?

[pjug]

The video flashed those graphs pretty quickly and I didn't try to pause and capture them to be able to look closely. But I wonder if the differences are not a low frequency, maybe similar mitigation can be achieved with cheaper padding. It would be nice to see a more complete investigation with microphone measurements, and presented in a readable document instead of video. A job for for undertasked @amirm ?

 

[catalogguy]

After getting a set of floor standers that needed feet suitable for a hardwood floor, i convinced myself to "spring" for a set of Gaia isolators. I swear, with those things on, the speakers sound like they are right in the room with me!

 

[MattHooper]

After getting a set of floor standers that needed feet suitable for a hardwood floor, i convinced myself to "spring" for a set of Gaia isolators. I swear, with those things on, the speakers sound like they are right in the room with me!

I'm sorry you had such poor results.

My speakers "disappeared" with the spring footers ;-)

 

[Thomas_A]

These things were investigated quite many years ago, and it is possible to find situations where soft vs spikes gives audible differences. The Swedish Audio-Technical Society wrote a couple of articles in the end of 1980's regarding soft feet and spikes, and from this the Sonic Design feet were made.

http://www.sonicdesign.co.uk/info.htm

I am not sure if there were other similar speaker feet at the time.

 

[ernestcarl]

This could be one of those cases were simply looking at measurements or a graph isn't a good substitute for hearing it yourself, where what look like subtle differences on a graph have a larger subjective impact. (After all, subtle-looking differences in an upper frequency response in a speaker measurements can translate in to someone finding a speaker "too bright" to enjoy, vs another slightly flatter response).

In my case, presuming the spring footers I'm using are causing a similar type of improvement, I'd probably look at those graphs and think "eh...kind of interesting I guess." But when I actually hear what it does for the sound, like I just truly upgraded to better speakers, it's extremely significant and worth doing.

I’m not at all opposed to tweaks and mods. But there are things one can do that can give a more apparent measurable and audible change — EQ, adjustments in the height, angles, and positioning, acoustic treatments, upmixing stereo to mch surround. If the change from the added footers is truly, “extremely” significant, then it should be reflected in the measurements as well — that’s all I’m saying. Whether it’s worth doing or not is completely up to the person, of course.

 

[richard12511]

I’m not at all opposed to tweaks and mods. But there are things one can do that can give a more apparent measurable and audible change — EQ, adjustments in the height, angles, and positioning, acoustic treatments, upmixing stereo to mch surround. If the change from the added footers is truly, “extremely” significant, then it should be reflected in the measurements as well — that’s all I’m saying. Whether it’s worth doing or not is completely up to the person, of course.

Indeed. Anything that is audible is measurable. The inverse is not always true. Given that microphones are far more sensitive than our ears, if it's audible, it will show up in the measurements. Something that's very audible like this will definitely show in measurements, and I'm actually curious to see in the measurements what's actually being changed. I'm wondering if several of my systems can't be improved with a tweak like this. I'm using the spikes approach, but only because that's what the stands I bought from amazon came with.

 

[NTK]

I wonder if the bodily sensation of the presence or absence of floor vibrations will affect our perceived sound quality.

 

[MattHooper]

I wonder if the bodily sensation of the presence or absence of floor vibrations will affect our perceived sound quality.

It does a bit, in my case. I often have my feet up on an ottomon while listening and I'm used to feeling the bass through the floor/ottomon on my legs. That doesn't seem to be happening, there is a bit less "room feel" to the bass. Though with the right content there is a palpable bass presence that I can feel. It's just not as consistent. Depending on what you want, it seems a bit of a trade-off. Sometimes I'm missing the more direct connection to the bass, other times I'm really appreciating the better nuance and clarity of the bass.

 

[Chromatischism]

I wonder if the bodily sensation of the presence or absence of floor vibrations will affect our perceived sound quality.

That is my experience. I have tested this two ways:

1. With and without a rumble filter on the subs
2. Swapping single sealed subs for dual-opposed (force canceling) subs in the same locations and with the same frequency response

The rumbles provide desirable impact (for me). However, when the rumbles are taken away, the mind focuses more on tonal nuances and could easily fool itself into thinking there is more clarity when in fact the rest of the sound coming from the speaker/sub is objectively the same. It's a similar effect that people experience when they think sealed speakers have "faster" bass. My hypothesis is we only have so much sensory bandwidth and we need to find the most pleasing balance.

 

[Coach_Kaarlo]

I wonder if the bodily sensation of the presence or absence of floor vibrations will affect our perceived sound quality.

Listened free field to my system last night - large balcony with concrete tiles suspended above the structural slab below.

Floor cannot vibrate, yet I still experience the kick and physical sensation of sound at SPL's between 85 and 95 Db, bodily, and also through the furniture. I guess everything sound waves touch will be excited if it can be, if not it will transfer, and if it cannot transfer it will absorb. For the record I experienced the sound with great enjoyment.....so my perception was positive.

A funny example, when doing sweeps at -20DBFS, I get distortion when something in the room rattles, and I can also hear the excitation, worse at lower frequencies because of the energy. The audibility might be hard to isolate sometimes, but the measurement is a clue to go and look.

 

[MattHooper]

Little update:

After getting used to the spring footers under the speaker for about a week I had some more observations.

First, aside from the positives I described - speakers "disappearing" more as a sound source, larger, wider, deeper soundstaging, more 3D imaging, seemingly clearer, finer detail...negatives where that the sound had less obvious punch and impact, sounded overall "softer," and the soundstage generally seemed to take a foot or two step back from the speakers.

So last night I took the footers out and I think I prefer without the footers. The sound just became more punchy and all around solid - an aspect I really seek in my hi-fi. It also sounds a bit more rich. Taking out the footers I did take a hit in some of the aspects I mentioned. The speakers didn't "disappear" as much, the soundstage did narrow, less depth, a bit less of that absolute clarity. (Not that the speakers actually don't do great soundstaging on their own - they are actually one of the best I've ever used. It's just that the footers took it to another level).

With the speakers on the springs, decoupled from the floor, the experience became a bit more like an electrostatic - an open, boxless window of sound, but also a bit more ghostly.

Of course I'd love to "get it all." I'm thinking I will still at some point try the Townshend isolation device under the speakers. They are more purpose-built, and also essentially don't raise the speaker at all, where the cheap footers had very thin springs, were quite wobbly, and raised the speaker something like 1 1/4" (I did initially adjust my listening height to compensate, but perhaps changing the height relationship with the bottom of the speaker/woofer and the floor may have influenced the sound too?)

 

[Chromatischism]

Maybe decoupled speakers and coupled subwoofers.

 

[MattHooper]

Maybe decoupled speakers and coupled subwoofers.

I'd thought of that!

In fact I'm going to be trying out a sub again tomorrow.

 

[richard12511]

I'd thought of that!

In fact I'm going to be trying out a sub again tomorrow.

I would try multiple subs, and hide them around the room so they're not visible. You could use something like the miniDSP DDRC88A with Dirac to integrate them. If you're just doing stereo, the 88A will automatically integrate, EQ(both individually and as a group) and time align up to 6 subwoofers. You can also you the BM software to optimize crossovers. Supposedly they have another bass management software now, though, that's more advanced, though I have no experience with that.

Getting the subs properly time aligned and integrated is hard to do manually, ime, and if you've got good tower speakers to begin with, you often end up with a worse sound than the towers on their own.

 

[Chromatischism]

I think of the 88A as a device that was created to solve the problem of no multi-channel Dirac processing available to home theater users at the time. You could add it to multi-channel amplification and away you go - but you still didn't have Dolby or DTS decoding so you had to use your AVR as a processor with preouts. It was awkward and expensive to chain all these components together. It's also not compatible with the latest version of Dirac with the add-ons.

Now that we have more AVRs coming online with Dirac built in, I would just choose one of them. Or not, because their pricing is ridiculous compared to D&M and not provably better. I would watch the Pioneer Elite name if you're interested in Dirac. The low price worries me because Dirac licensing is expensive which leads me to wonder how good could a $500 AVR be, but we'll see.

 

[richard12511]

I think of the 88A as a device that was created to solve the problem of no multi-channel Dirac processing available to home theater users at the time. You could add it to multi-channel amplification and away you go - but you still didn't have Dolby or DTS decoding so you had to use your AVR as a processor with preouts. It was awkward and expensive to chain all these components together. It's also not compatible with the latest version of Dirac with the add-ons.

Now that we have more AVRs coming online with Dirac built in, I would just choose one of them. Or not, because their pricing is ridiculous compared to D&M and not provably better. I would watch the Pioneer Elite name if you're interested in Dirac. The low price worries me because Dirac licensing is expensive which leads me to wonder how good could a $500 AVR be, but we'll see.

I agree with you, but usually those AVRs that have both 4+ subwoofer outs and Dirac built in are very expensive. If you can get an AVR that has 4 or more separate subwoofer outs with Dirac built in, you wouldn't need the 88A.

Another option (what I use) is an AVR with 2 subwoofer outs and a miniDSP 2x4HD to split the 2 subwoofer channels into 4 and time align them via software and then EQ via Dirac. It's not as automatic as the 88A solution, but it's much cheaper.

 

[Chromatischism]

Good point about the number of subwoofer outputs, I got fixated on other things and overlooked that part. I suppose I would just add a MiniDSP 2x4 HD to whatever AVR I'm using. How many people need to setup 6 subs? I guess that would be a case for the 88A.

 

[Zoomer]

Another option (what I use) is an AVR with 2 subwoofer outs and a miniDSP 2x4HD to split the 2 subwoofer channels into 4 and time align them via software and then EQ via Dirac. It's not as automatic as the 88A solution, but it's much cheaper.

Interesting, I'm trying to figure out how best to setup multi-sub with Dirac myself.
I'm not sure I understand your approach though. Are you using Dirac multi-channel?
If 2 subs are fed the same signal, how can Dirac EQ them seperately?

 

[Chromatischism]

EQ is done on the combined signal.

 

[pjug]

I'd thought of that!

In fact I'm going to be trying out a sub again tomorrow.

Seems like you are doing an awful lot of messing around without knowing for sure if there is much of a real difference. I would get a decent microphone and do some measurements, also record some music with the mic and compare with DeltaWave. You seem like the type of person who would also find reward in learning how to do this.

Also, making recordings of music played with and without springs will give you tracks for blind AB listening tests. The recordings might not sound so great, but they should sound different if the springs make an audible difference.