Ash Design Rack - Good Sonically or Not ?

I have an Ash rack. It looks fantastic, is very well made, and IMHO reasonably priced. I found the sound dreadful - very harsh and shouty. However putting a mixture of RDC cones and Nordost Pulsar points (I find them equally effective) under the equipment improved things dramatically. Turntable and CD player made the most difference, followed by the pre-amp. The sound is now detailed but much more relaxed. Hope to try the Fraim one day, but I am not unhappy with the Ash now - and it looks almost as good as the Fraim to my eyes.

Nic P

Here's a HiFi Choice review...not sure what to make of the statement that it was the most laid back sounding of the racks they tested.

FWIW

------------------
I want to die in my sleep like my Grandfather, not screaming like the passengers in his car.

Ash Design racks do look good, though. I'd like one to put under my telly, but they're a bit too expensive for that.

TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."

Cheers

Mark

TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."

How much approximately does the Quadraspire Reference cost?

thanks

Mark

Q4 Ref: last time i inquired, my dealer quoted £670 for a 4 tier table. £150 for each additional tier

enjoy

ken

Mark.

i know for sure that Isoblue > Q4 Standard

but i have not yet heard the Q4 Ref although i hear from my dealer that it is definitely better than Isoblue.

i was very close to buying a QS Ref last week, but something else got into the Fraim...

enjoy

ken

yes, it is. and yes, i believe they stock isoblue too (i saw it there once).

i have the same discomfort about QS Ref -- my cdsii right now is on the isoblue. at one point i was connecting the cdsii signal cable and while pushing the DIN, the cdsii slid fwd a bit and i could hear a rather worrying sound of the suspension from inside the player. i asked paul darwin when he came to my place and he assured me all was ok and that it is very unlikely that the suspension would come off its support points as a result of this.

now, the thought of putting my cdsii on a wobbly cdsii induces serious paranoia, no matter how good the qs ref is. but it has to be said i havent really assessed the Ref in any detail -- just seen it -- perhaps the wobble is not as bad (and hopefully it doesnt sound wobbly ). i will arrange an audition and detailed review one of these fine days when i have time. will be fraim vs qs ref.

does the qs ref have the same frequency balance as the qs std?

enjoy

ken

If the Isoblue floats your boat then I would assume that the Q/Reference would deffinately sink it. They are worlds apart in their respective lyrical and expressionate abilities.

I can however see the attraction in the reference stand as it appears to time like nothing before ever could until the penny drops that it does it in a very artificial digitised manner, plenty of exposed leading edge detail and a lack of intergrated musical flow.

This is of course only my view point but I would hope that it would alert those considering to purchase either stand that it is in no way whatsoever a "No-brainer".

Ian.

In my list of possible upgrades is a Fraim base unit for the Turntable and its power supply.

Peter

quote:

---

Well I guess somebody has to be the wolf in the flock. Sorry to say this but I think the Q/spire Reference table is a step backwards from an Isoblue.

---

I have never heard an Isoblue, so perhaps that is something better again, but the QS Reference does appear to be the best by a fair margin at its price. I've owned a good few supports now, some better than others, including everything from home-made racks to Mana, and the QS Ref is the best. Fraim is probably better but much more expensive and so I purposefully didn't hear it (in case it turned out to be an expensive demo )

quote:

---

the reference stand...appears to time like nothing before ever could until the penny drops that it does it in a very artificial digitised manner, plenty of exposed leading edge detail and a lack of intergrated musical flow.

---

Far from it. Its timing abilities are its greatest strength. If you find this artificial and digital sounding then heaven knows what you'd think about a Mana rack, which emphasises the leading edge even more (which sounds impressive, but ultimately doesn't work well with all kit, as I discovered for myself the hard way). Perhaps Isoblue is better, I couldn't say (not having heard it), but can I be controversial and say that it seems odd that you criticise the QS Ref for emphasising leading edges, when I would levy that same charge at a lot of Naim setups anyway, regardless of racks?

quote:

---

This is of course only my view point but I would hope that it would alert those considering to purchase either stand that it is in no way whatsoever a "No-brainer".

---

Of course. What's good for one person isn't necessarily good for others - in all walks of life, really. I spent a lot of time really studying the effects my various racks were having on my kit recently and have to add that there's nowt more than personal preference to choose between them. In my case, the QS Ref (which is fine for my TT, as the QS Ref only wobbles when pushed, and I tend to try not to push the racks when they're playing anyway) makes my TT sound far far better than my previous supports did, despite its odd wobbliness...

TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."

2) Quadraspire Reference MK 1.

3) Quadraspire Reference MK II "bog seat" modification.

I am still at #2 while I await the arrival of #3.

They all sound different, but the differences don't stop there:

Each different wood or MDF finish has different resonant properties which affect the sonic characteristics.

I haven't heard a dem between the different finishes, but the black MDF is suppose to have the lowest resonance, and therefore adds the least of its own character to the sonic performance of equipment placed upon it.

So guys, those of you who have heard one or more of the different versions of QS, if possible, when making your comparisons with other stands, could you try to remember which version it was that you heard.

It's always a nice day for it Have a good one!
Steve.

wasnt aware that QS Ref came in Mk1 and Mk2. i wonder why the web site doesnt mention this?? how do potential purchasers know what is available? i dont even know what a bog seat modification is?? is that the one thats most wobbly with holes in the middle of each shelf...??

in fact the QS site does not list the Ref explicitly -- you have to go to "news" or somthing like that.

sorry, i shouldnt whinge at you -- after all you are not a Quadraspire rep...

many thanks for info anyhow ...

enjoy

ken

quote:

---

The best set up I've managed is to tighten the allen bolts only a 1/4 to 1/2 turn past finger tight. If you tighten as much as possible, you'll get lots of 'boing' from the rack.

---

When you say 'boing', do you mean that the music is affected by the tightness of the bolts, or just that the rack 'boings'. I have an Ash rack and I've never experimented with bolt tightness (oh no! Here we go) Are you referring to the shelf support bolts or others?

Re Pulsar Points, I have tried them under most of my equipment on the rack, at one point under everything, and now have none . I came to the conclusion that although they appeared to improve certain 'hifi' aspects, the system sounded less musical and 'together'.
At it's price I think it's a decent rack, the only problem being you can't add levels, and I've filled up the remaining shelf yesterday, thanks to a deal too good to resist (although it's bread and water for a while!)

Cheers

Ade
Ade

It may also shock you to learn that I have used Mana for over seven years, quite a lot of it if I am to be honest. This only leads me to deduce that you had not gotten the best out of the support system, or that you had a phase hierarchy imbalance problem. I would also suggest that saying Mana was "digital" sounding was way off the mark in comparison to Q/spire reference.

I have listened to the majority of accepted so called Naim friendly stands that have come along and the only one that has made me take note is the Isoblue. For it's price this is a seriously good rack. Although not worthy of replacing my Mana with, I am always prepared to look into new support methods. At approximately 10% of the value of my Mana, the Isoblue did some marvellous things, the Q/ref did not even hint at it.

As has been said before, this is only my opinion, but there are a few more who have said the same thing. Perhaps your system has different requirements and preferences to an all Naim one and could be the reason for some of your personal findings.

Ian.

I have also heard it sound insistant on the leading edges at the expense of what should follow in terms of envelope and decay into space of notes.

The system was CDX/102/Hi/250.

Swapping the 102 for an 82 made a huge improvement to the musical flow, and to image focus.

The 250 obviously highlighted weaknesses in the treble performance of a 102, and the QS Ref. only seemed to exacerbate the problem.

This may also explain why some people may have prefered the standard "furniture" QS.

However, if the system hierarchy is balanced from source downwards, the QS Reference can only thrill.

It's always a nice day for it Have a good one!
Steve.

Making comments such as that will have the paranoid amongst us suspicious of me being part of your gang, especially Bullseye.

Steven,

Perhaps then you could explain why a CDS II, 52,135 system had a hierarchial exposure problem.

Ian.

There may have been other variables, or it just isn't to your taste.

It's always a nice day for it Have a good one!
Steve.

We're all different and like different things, but to answer your question: no, the stands were setup perfectly - finger tightened bolts, all bang-on level, etc.

My point is that Mana definitely sounded (in a direct comparison, as was possible for a while) as if it was pushing forward detail in a slightly unnatural way (in the context of my own, non-Naim system - which, incidentally, is very non-ferrous (FWIW) and so I suspect a lot of this is down to synergy between non-ferrous preamps (DNM) and turntable (Clearaudio) with a non-ferrous rack (QS Ref) as opposed to the Mana which didn't really get on with the DNM preamp. In fact, so much so that I began to wonder if the non-ferrous thing was more than marketing snake-oil.

As for phases, I was at Phase 8 under sources, 6 under amps and between none and 2 under speakers, depending upon which point we're talking about. It does wonders for my Neat speakers, but simply didn't do it for my DNM kit, which is why I sold it on - incurring the wrath of some of the Mana Loyalist Paramilitaries along the way... hell, I was one for long enough!

Anyway, I digress, that's all water under the bridge. What I will say is that the QS Ref is (to date) the best sounding rack which I've used with my current system (Clearaudio:DNM:Neat) and certainly seems far more natural and musical than the Mana system which I was using with it before. However, that same racking system worked well with my previous preamp and LP12, so what we mustn't lose sight of is the fact that what might work for one brand of kit won't necessarily work for the others. Point in question, really.

For the record, I am with Oak-finished QS Ref mkI, due to the 'bog seat holes' in the MkII being incompatible with the feet on my TT and also my preamp (which would fall through the gap!)

TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Stockwell:
I have an Ash design tower rack. Like all racks it needs to be assembled correctly. It replaced a standesign 3 rack, the sound was definitely calmer than the stand design. I bought the optional cable management system, it's waste of time. The best set up I've managed is to tighten the allen bolts only a 1/4 to 1/2 turn past finger tight. If you tighten as much as possible, you'll get lots of 'boing' from the rack. It has two structural weaknesses IMHO, and these are the two rightangle pieces that are used to connect the top of the metal rack structure to the inverted U of the wooden façade. I replaced the original spiked feet with PowerPoints, obtained from RMS. Otherwise my Naim gear sounds best without additional tweaks. To my taste the tall rack is probably not the ideal support for a turntable, not that it's unstable, it's just not as rigid as I would like it. I think the system sounds fine in this rack, and I don't believe it's worth replacing it at the same price.

In my list of possible upgrades is a Fraim base unit for the Turntable and its power supply.

Peter

---

Peter,

I have also an ASH DESIGN RACK. I have 2 questions:
1/ How did you manage the messy cable network behind the rack ? Did you let it as it is, or did you "organize" it ?
2/ Where did you find the POWERPOINTS Spikes ?
I am also living in the West suburb of Paris.

Thanks for advise.

Jean-Claude

quote:

---

I have also an ASH DESIGN RACK. I have 2 questions:
1/ How did you manage the messy cable network behind the rack ? Did you let it as it is, or did you "organize" it ?
2/ Where did you find the POWERPOINTS Spikes ?
I am also living in the West suburb of Paris.

---

please send me private e-mail.

Peter

I will therefore be needing a rack of some sort, at present I only have a Nait 3R and a CD3.5 in negotiation, I also have an MD player, but that may not have to live on the rack as it is only for recording for the car....unfortunately I don't intend to stop where I am, planning for flat/hi caps, changing my Nait to a NAC adding a NAP etc....

I basically need something I can add to when new shelves become necessary....what are my options, and at what cost?? Bearing in mind the relatively low value of my existing system!

I can also find nothing about the Q4 Ref on the website, I can find a mention of the Q4 but nothing showing the differences between the 2...can anyone help here??

Thanks

Scott

enjoy

ken