Audiophile Base Tweak...

Posted by: ken c on 11 January 2001

i seem to recall that audiophile bases could be improved (for naim equipment by removing(??) the rubber feet(??). can someone who has the details please enlighten me??

enjoy...

ken

Posted on: 11 January 2001 by Joe Rosovitz
Ken,

I believe the late JV stated that the CDSII did not like the small rubber feet under the Base platforms and that would suggest that they be removed if you put a CDSII on a Base platform. I don't remember if it's been mentioned anywhere in the forum if other Naim gear are affected by the removal of the rubber feet. You might try doing a search and see what turns up. I think there was a thread in the old forum....

Joe

Posted on: 11 January 2001 by ken c
joe, many thanks. i thought the tweak was generally applicable. i dont believe one can search the old forum.. can one??

enjoy...

ken

Posted on: 11 January 2001 by dave simpson
Removing those feet wil improve all "sprung suspension" Naim cd palyers.

Good to see you back Ken !

regards,

"Robert" dave simpson

Posted on: 11 January 2001 by ken c
hi steve, no you are not thick. my original message wasnt clear. i meant the bard rubber(?) feet at the bottom of the base.

now, here is a real dumbo one --- how do you remove those feet, they dont appear to screw off. is this change reversible?? grateful for some more info from those who have actually done it, of seen it done...

enjoy...

ken

Posted on: 11 January 2001 by Joe Rosovitz
Ken,

They simply pull off. You need to get under it a bit but they'll come off quite easily.

Joe

Posted on: 11 January 2001 by dave simpson
Ken,

We are talking about the thin, rubber bumpers (furniture protectors) on the bottom of the large, cylindrical feet attached to the metal bars. Do not attempt to remove the "true" feet. They are glued-in permanately.


hope this helps,


dave

Posted on: 11 January 2001 by David Dever
If you've got a complete BASE rack(s) setup, you should try removing the bump-on feet under all of your equipment. Oddly enough, this makes an incredible difference in the amount of information passed through the system--not just the source.

Note, though, that a slightly warped shelf that might work fine with the rubber feet may cause a non-footed shelf to rock, especially under light equipment...sometimes this can be alleviated by rotating the shelf or (brute force method) placing something heavy on it, e.g., a power amplifier.

Hope this helps,
Dave Dever, NANA
(trying the Mana / BASE hybrid one more time)

Posted on: 12 January 2001 by ken c
hi dave simpson, you will not believe what i was about to do!!! many thanks for clarifying that quickly!!! ha ha ha ...

to others, who have responded to my query, many thanks for your help. and not a single "m" or "h" word...

enjoy...

ken

Posted on: 12 January 2001 by Allan Probin
Dave,
quote:
trying the Mana / BASE hybrid one more time

I'd be most interested in reading your findings with this, either on the forum or via e-mail.

I have a Mana 4-tier amp stand on order (still!) for my XPS/Supercap/250 (and maybe 82 on the bottom shelf) but still undecided on what's best for the CDSII head-unit.

When the amp-stand arrives I'll experiment with a number of configs including the CDSII on mana and I also have a spare Base01 platform to compare. Without actually hearing the combination, I have this deep suspicion that the best arrangement might be CDSII on Hutter, everything else on Mana. What do you think ?

ken:

quote:
and not a single "m" or "h" word...
Doh !

Allan.

[This message was edited by Allan Probin on SATURDAY 13 January 2001 at 00:50.]

Posted on: 12 January 2001 by David Dever
Allan-

Here follows the specifics:

BASE racks (bottom to top): SP01 starter pack (cones) + S120 + S170 shelf packs, with BASE platforms (rubber feet removed) on each...three of these.

Mana Reference tables were set up from a previous arrangement after (and here's the clincher) completely disassembling them for a few hours, as I may have overtightened the nuts (or was paranoid thereabouts). This is the very first time I've ever been able to get the Mana table to work under the CDS II at Phase Two.

System (will copy to "Systems Analysis" thread):

1997-vintage LP12 with pre-Cirkus bearing & Mana 3M feet (orange) / ARO / battered Linn Troika (soon to be replaced short-term with Lyra Helikon) / PREFIX K, on Mana Reference table, Armageddon underneath

CDS II on Mana Reference table, no 3M feet!

NAC 52 / SUPERCAP / NAP 250 on BASE rack

SNAXO 3-6 / SUPERCAP / NAP 250 on BASE rack

empty / XPS / NAP 250 on BASE rack

CDS II on Mana Reference table, 2m DIN 5-5 interconnect

year-old DBLs (cherry) with 10m A5 white in 12' x 15' room with hardwood floors, curtains, futon and the occasional noisy radiator.

The stands are a work in progress at the moment.

Dave Dever, NANA

[This message was edited by David Dever, NANA on SATURDAY 13 January 2001 at 01:13.]

Posted on: 12 January 2001 by dave simpson
Ken- don't feel bad. 1235.36524 days ago Paul S. told me to remove the same feet. We were communicating via the written word also. I assumed, as you did, remove the "true" feet. Guess what ? The "true" feet are aluminum,glued into their mating holes and said holes are not painted for maximum glue adhesion....wonder how I know that ? :O


Dave D.- Please describe your "hybrid" Mana/BASE
installation. I've got plenty of both for experiments. Good to see you survived another show, great pics btw.


regards,

dave

Posted on: 13 January 2001 by ken c
david dever: from your posting, in what order are the components. for rxample, when you say "NAC 52 / SUPERCAP / NAP 250 on BASE rack.." is the nac52 on the bottom shelf. you may have picked up my posting suggesting that the bottom shelf may (strangely) be better for the nac52. however, i found this on the QS stand, which is installed fairly tightly (contrary to what i have read from some postings), atop an audiophile base (with its rubber shoes still in place). different stands may yield different results. when i have removed the rubber shoes from under the base, i will re-experiment and report.

i just wondered what your experience with the audiophiles was regarding placement of the 52, and perhaps other "source" type components as well.

enjoy...

ken

Posted on: 13 January 2001 by ken c
nice to hear from you again joe. how is your system sounding these days. i cant remember what you have now. do let us know what you find when you remove all the "shoes" off the bases...

enjoy...

ken

Posted on: 13 January 2001 by ken c
hi folks, i have just removed the shoes off of the base platform under my cd2. i wasnt expecting much, but this is a no brainer. just listening to "Schubert German Mass in G" Vienna SO -- i am now more aware of the harmonies and all the nuances of performance and interpretation. crescendos and decrescendos are more obvious. the most signficant is that i am listening to this cd now at a much higher volume than i normally do, and there is no sense of discomfort.

very worth while change. presumably only works in the context of naim systems (one wonders why??) else i would claim that audiophile have a design fault in using those rubber feet (or shoes as i call them...)

i have another base that i normally put under the nac52. i will barefoot this one as well, and if there is anything significant to report, i will do so.

if you have a audiophile bases and naim gear, go barefoot on the bases...

enjoy...

ken

Posted on: 13 January 2001 by P
Somebody (I cant remember who) suggested placing 3/16" ballbearings in the recess that is revealed when you pull off the rubber feet.

Now I spent a whole lot of time attempting this, only to be convinced, that somebody, somewhere, must be laughing out loud, big style! - it's imf****ng possible to do this! - kinda like some mad bagatelle game but a damn site more frustrating!

You think setting up the M word is crazy? - try this sucker!!! - I did !!!

Rispeck to all tweakers everywhere or whatever - keep em rollin!

P.

Posted on: 13 January 2001 by ken c
hi folks;

i did also try the barefoot base platform under the nac52, as i promised in an earlier posting. yes, there was a difference, and initially, i thought it was musically positive. however, after further listening, there also appears to be some loss of "warmth".

do note that the difference is quite small, and system is still playing music enjoyably.

however, jury still out whether this is an improvement, musically, or not. i will re-assess some time soon, and if there is interest, will report ...

enjoy...

ken

Posted on: 13 January 2001 by Martin Payne
quote:
Somebody (I cant remember who) suggested placing 3/16" ballbearings in the recess that is revealed when you pull off the rubber feet.

That was Julian Vereker, God rest him.

cheers, Martin

Posted on: 16 January 2001 by davidf
Interseting thing happened last night, I had my 82,cdx,old style 01, supercap on a 4-tier base rack and my lp12 on a tripod with a 250 sitting on the lower shelf of the tripod (on a flimsy shelf made out of ?mdf?). I am sending my 01 back to Naim to have it updated to the new style and therefore removed it from the Base shelf and moved the 250 off the flimsy tripod shelf and on the base shelf at the bottom, under the supercap. What I found was that the sound of my system improved- tighter base and more soulful midrange with voices particularly better and less hifi sounding. therefore I concluded that the improvement was due to moving the 250 onto the Base shelf ( it had been the only black box not sitting on a Base shelf). The only other possibility is that removing the 01 from the system caused the improvement. When I get the 01 back I will find out. I may need to get another level for the 01. david.
Posted on: 16 January 2001 by ken c
my apologies. i really meant jon malnick, i.e. you.

enjoy...

ken

Posted on: 17 January 2001 by Philip Pang
Hi Guys

Read with great interest the noticeable improvements heard upon removal of the feet, but to my ears, in my system, I much preferred it with the rubber feet back on...

Initial impressions were a tighter, faster, more dynamic sound; it was as it everything had gotten more "in place". But it also did other things to the sound, and I lost some warmth, "roundedness" if you will, especially to the vital midrange. Vocals sounded a little more recessed, more metalic, and somewhat "colder". It was quite akin to moving from analogue warmth to digital sterility... This was especially true for the CDSII, rather contrasting to JV's and Dave Dever's advice... strange. Must be my ears... but I suspect Base must have had their reasons for having those rubber pads on - it also secures the platform from vibration-induced movements on the frame.

I struggled to put everything back on, including under the CDSII, and got everything back - the fullness and warmth in midrange, with PRT and swinging bass for good measure. It sounded somewhat more refined, and more liquid, not so hard.

Just a difference in opinion, what I heard. I was expecting it to be a tweak for the better, but it turned up otherwise. But if removing your rubber feet pads works for you, then it does! Perhaps I'll experiment one more time with this and see what happens again.

Regards to all

Good listening; the music's still groovin'.

Philip

naimniac for life

Posted on: 17 January 2001 by Philip Pang
Hi Jon

Thanks for the tip.

No, I haven't gotten ball bearings under them, and am not familiar with the "famous Vukwich", but wouldn't that mean a very unstable and movable platform?

What's the most appropriate diameter size of the ball bearings to be used?

Good listening; the music's still groovin'.

Philip

naimniac for life

Posted on: 18 January 2001 by Philip Pang
Thanks Jon, I'll go get me some.

Good listening; the music's still groovin'.

Regards

Philip

naimniac for life