Here's what Greg Timbers had to say ( a while back ) in relation to the discussion about the 4367 ( & it's 15" woofer ) and anchoring.
"Anchoring" is a pretty broad term and ( IMO ) doesn't necessarily imply or demand the use of spikes.Originally Posted by GT
Yeah true spikes are easy though and they make great levelers!"Anchoring" is a pretty broad term and ( IMO ) doesn't necessarily imply or demand the use of spikes.
Rob
"I could be arguing in my spare time"
Hi Earl
I think that quote would be appreciated in the 4367 first listen thread.
Thanks a lot for the post from Greg Timbers!
This is what I tried to say in post 7... The coupling to the (hard) floor enables the speaker to gain restoring forces, which yield to a hard bass kick, dynamic impact and good transient response.
As Greg Timbers said, if there is any rocking e.g. movement of the enclosure, this energy is gone and wasted. Thatīs why I avoid decoupling speakers on hard floors.
Of course you donīt need spikes to do this, any good coupling will do. I prefer 3 speaker stands as 4 usually tend to wobble.
He did use the phrase "coupled to the floor", though. This is where the controversy lies. I have my Velodyne subs on 2" clay ceramic patio stones with the mentioned fiber pads on top with a rubber mat against the cab. The clay ceramic blocks any LF so there's a good test to determine whether coupling direct or isolating is best. In this scenario, you can isolate and directly couple ala Greg's assertion to "no movement" but still detach any frequencies transferring into the substrate. My uneducated experiential opinion says it's the ultimate, all things being equal, optimization in all other parameters. Why would you want the room to ring?
The room will ring as well with decoupled speakers, because all the walls, floor and ceiling are still induced by air sound pressure. The impact noise which can be avoided by decoupling the speakers is just a small proportion compared to the air sound pressure...
Nevertheless, if the speakers are very close to the turntable decoupling may is a significant improvement. In my experience a mounting-device to attach the turntable to a wall is another solution.
I guess I'm calling into question your assertion that coupling the speakers directly to the substrate adds only a small % of over all resonance. My experience shows otherwise by a large extent. Could be that by the time jet plane spl is reached, coupling becomes moot but ime, the point of cancellation is no where in sight at spls of 105-110 db. The difference is quite observably large.
I have a concrete basement with a wooden first floor over it. I have my subs spiked to the basement floor. The amount of energy coupled to the wooden floor through the air can be significant. I also have an upstairs system with the sub spiked directly to the same wooden floor. There in much more energy coupled from below through the air than from the upstairs sub that is spiked directly to the floor. That's my experience.I guess I'm calling into question your assertion that coupling the speakers directly to the substrate adds only a small % of over all resonance.
Rob
"I could be arguing in my spare time"
Lol really a flimsy sounding board you familiar with my local building codes. Do have a clue to what that floor weighs?? So when I have a sub spiked to my flimsy sounding board I get let less coupling than from the room below. That not apples and oranges it obvious that the acoustic output from the subs bellow has a much greater effect through the air borne acoustic coupling than actually having a sub mechanically coupled to the floor with spikes.Sure, you have a concrete speaker cab with a relatively flimsy wooden sound board acting as a diaphragm. How is that a comparison to coupling/decoupling within the same listening space? Apples and oranges
Rob
"I could be arguing in my spare time"
I hate to interfere with such robust discussions but JBL never mounts any floor standing directly on the floor..
They offer two spikes and rounded metal feet with coasters to protect tiled and Lino floors.
There is the now obvious benefit of stability to spikes but the point is the enclosure foot print is large compared to the contact area.
Common sense suggests a large surface area is more likely to allow transmission of vibrations or audible sound in either direction from floor to the loudspeaker and loudspeaker to the floor if the enclosure is directly on the floor the large surface area has less pressure per square inch than the spikes and is likely to move or resonate on the floor at variety of frequencies. (either boards or carpet). The audibility of this needs to be assessed but I think most people recognise an audible difference when compared either way.
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)