Mana ?

These are very old racks that Naim used to use so ineffectively during demos.

The new supports they recommend are Hutter (www.hutter.co.at) - which seem to be doing a much better job at it. Their website is currently a bit "fuzzy" - so to help, look for the Racktime Basic hi-fi supports with Sound Bases.

Andrew

Andrew Randle
2B || !2B;
4 ^ = ?;

quote:

---

look for the Racktime Basic hi-fi supports with Sound Bases

---

What is this ?

Arie

.... they're the product ranges by Hutter. They also do ordinary furniture units (don't let that put you off - the Racktime units were designed by a hi-fi nut).

Andrew

Andrew Randle
2B || !2B;
4 ^ = ?;

What I ment is - what is the name of the site ?

Arie

The rack you have shown is a new rack made by Hutter for MUISCLINE our German distributor. It is a low cost unit and is not the same performance as Racktime from Hutter. Just good value and well made, sounds ok too!

Can I get the site name of Hutter or musicline ?

Is the sound is okay for the LP12 too ?

The rack looks beatiful - and seems to be lower than my 3 shelves stand (I hate towers).

Arie

The website is www.hutter.co.at

Andrew

Andrew Randle
2B || !2B;
4 ^ = ?;

I went to the site and it is a fuzzy one.
I sent them a request - let's see if they answer.

Arie

I said I THINK that a high table is not stable, I don't know Mana and a member responded to that the the Mana are okay even when use a high table.

I have some reasons to doubt the Mana quality compare to its price but as I didn't try it by myself I can't say it.

Arie

quote:

---

I have some reasons to doubt the Mana quality compare to its price but as I didn't try it by myself I can't say it.

---

Please, do explain!

Rico - musichead

It is a problem because it is a theoretical case and I know that sometimes in the audio field things are going well even if they shouldn't.

Theoreticaly - so I was told - it is not a good idea to use glass shelves especialy for an equipment with metal legs.

There are several kinds of tables with glass sheves sold in Israel, and I was adviced not to use this kind of tables.

There is another theory that says that wooden tables are better than metal ones.

And the last, and it was argued with members in the forum, there are no evidence for serious qulity sound compare between differnt kind of tables - and no one can tell he deeply checked the differences between cheap tables vs expensive
tables.

I heard this points from people who know very well the Mana tables so for myself I consider seriously these arguments.

Arie

quote:

---

it is not a good idea to use glass shelves especialy for an equipment with metal legs

---

...only if you have the metal and glass touching directly, I'd suspect; advocates of the higher end Naim CD players and Mana supports recommend the use of 3M feet on the Naim player. Apparently, this tiny little modification makes all the difference... I'll hold my hand up to admitting to never having heard the 3M feet on anything other than my (lightly) modified LP12
(a kinda wannabe Ninja, without the expensive bits :-( )

See the previous threads...

John

quote:

---

...my (lightly) modified LP12 (a kinda wannabe Ninja, without the expensive bits).

---

John:

What exactly is the modified Ninja LP12? I remember TF making reference to his Ninja LP12 but I don't recall if he ever said what the modifications actually were.

Paul

quote:

---

advocates of the higher end Naim CD players and Mana supports recommend the use of 3M feet on the Naim player

---

Not all. There are many dissenters (do a search if you don't believe me...).

The 3M feet give you a sharper, more clinical, less fluid sound. Without the feet, you gain a bit of "air", soundstage and bass extension (or is that wallow...discuss ).

Andy (currently without the feet on his CDS1/phase3/52/2x135/DBL).

I hope to hear Mana reference at Omer house, he was also kind eanough to suggest me to check it at my home.

I'll tell you what it does to me when I hear it.

I saw your table at your site - there is an Israely manufacturer who sells tables almost similar to yours - and are not cheap !

Arie

John

quote:

---

I also now agree with Tony that people without Mana (or perhaps Hutter--I haven't heard it, but I trust some of those who recommend it) are getting only about half the performance out of their system that they should.

---

That ain't quite what I'm saying. The people who have chosen Quadraspire, Base, Hutter, Mana, or anything else by auditioning and comparing are quite correct to do so. It’s the ones that choose a stand by a dealers opinion, my opinion, your opinion or anyone else's other than their own that are the idiots. I think the whole issue comes down to personal preference.

The Quadraspire faction often describe Mana as exaggerating the leading edge and being over metronomic, I find this very, very interesting, as to my ears Quadraspire rounds off transients and blurs timing a little. So it looks like we are actually hearing the same things, but choosing different 'right' answers (I am assuming in this that both parties have heard both Mana and Quadraspire correctly set up, there is quite an art to setting up both).

For me the Quadraspire solution gives a quite relaxed sound with the emphasis on flow, where as the Mana gives a more powerful and upbeat sound with the emphasis on groove. I find systems well set up on either capable of producing excellent results, though I personally far prefer the latter approach.

Tony.

I quite agree with most of what you said.

quote:

---

For me the Quadraspire solution gives a
quite relaxed sound with the emphasis on flow,
where as the Mana gives a more powerful and
upbeat sound with the emphasis on groove. I
find systems well set up on either capable of
producing excellent results, though I
personally far prefer the latter approach.

---

My experience exactly. The problem with QS is that
it can make the music a bit too laid back
and 'smooth'; staccato notes sound a bit legato,
inner details smear into pleasant tones, but the
information is essentially lost. With the Mana
rack, I found that that detail (timing, etc., and
(and this is crucial, the ability to place the
space around the notes is increased, thus
increasing the involvement and making the sound
appear much more detailed, alive and exciting).

The QS rack sounded at its best with slow female
vocal and this suited my tastes. However, the Mana is a great all-rounder; it seems to excel in all areas. Moreover, I had both racks concurrently for around three to four weeks (before I sold my QS), and the move to Mana made the QS sound positively slovenly in its pace. My kit is not as 'lively' as Naim, so 'maintaining the pace' was crucial.

The introduction of Mana all of a sudden made me
realise just how much untapped musicality my
relatively modest gear actually had, and every
level I've added since has increased all of the
positive traits.

A Naim user, with the usual fast Naim sound, might
be prepared to sacrifice a little pace for more
warmth and less 'edge'; one of the reasons I don't
own Naim is that I find the edginess just a little
bit too much for my ears, although I do enjoy the
Naim sound. A Naim owner might find that the QS
might 'tame' an edgy CDX or whatever; if an owner
finds that their system is too fast or energetic,
it's entirely possible that Mana might not be for
them, although in nearly every case I've ever heard of, Mana has delighted those who have tried and/or bought it.

A lot of it boils down to the image; QS is very
attractive, Mana more purposeful in its appearance. We each have our own set of priorities and for me, whilst the appearance was important, the benefits Mana brought to my system pushed the less attractive appearance (IMHO) to the back of my mind.

YMMV.

HTH.

John (going for the acronym record. TTFN! )

You have brilliant flair in summing things up.

I totally agree with you. So long as one hears different stands & makes an informed decision based on that, then that is the correct stand for that person. Simple isn't it!

Bob.