Equipment support design concepts?

Posted by: Tony L on 14 November 2001

In Stallion's 'I've been FRAIMed - in the NAIM of music' thread Paul Darwin made some interesting comments about the latest QS Reference developments. I am reluctant to post on the original thread as it has largely degenerated into noise and bickering, so I thought I would start a new thread. Here is a slightly provocative quote from Paul that I have taken nicely out of context! -

quote:
I will not seek to enter the, QS is better than Fraim debate, although I do have my personal preferences !!

I do however find it interesting that the latest "improvement" to the QS involves the cutting of a hole in the shelf, which is well nigh a copy of the Fraim design. Perhaps, soon to be followed by a sophisticated decoupleing solution based around an extensively researched and engineered approach involving a ball bearing and a cup arrangement with a glass shelf to provide further isolation and energy disipation.


The thing that interests me is the indication that Naim hold some theories as to how and why their Fraim stand works. Mana also claim to know why their stand does what it does, though ain't telling anyone despite it being safely patented. Larry (the designer of the QS Reference) has some theories on why the QS Ref works, though a large part of that tables design appears to be the work of trial and error combined with really extensive listening tests at every stage. (I will let someone closer to the shop outline his theories - Dave C you out there?).

It is interesting that the four stands that have emerged at the top of the pile (QS Ref, Fraim, Mana, Hutter) all use radically different techniques to achieve what they do. At one end of the scale we have the ultra floppy QS Ref which noticeably wobbles, through multi level Mana that sort of sways, to Fraim which appears ultra rigid. Massive differences exist in design before we even start to think about the materials used and their effect on electronic components.

OK Naim, how and why does Fraim do what it does? What properties do you reckon are desirable in an equipment support? I am sure these questions could be answered without giving out any trade secrets.

Tony.

Posted on: 14 November 2001 by Jez Quigley
There is no mention on the QS site of the new, new QS, not even of the old, new QS.

Does anyone have photos and prices for the new, new QS? Will it be at Manchester at the weekend?

ps. Dave C, which day will you be there?

Posted on: 14 November 2001 by Tony L
quote:
So, if you see me at the show on Sunday, feel free to call me a heartless bastard!

I'm going there on Sunday too.

Tony.

Posted on: 14 November 2001 by John C
You must need very strong support to keep that huge weight up. The records that is.

Johnn

Posted on: 14 November 2001 by Craig B
I don't believe that the absence of "tubular elements or closed cavities" has as much to do with the sound of Mana, as does the flexible nature of the stand in the lateral plain, and the tuning method which primarily controls the resonance of the metal structure.

Discounting the effects of multiple layers for the moment, isn't Mana essentially a vertically rigid but laterally 'suspended' tuned space frame? Would this not account for its great success when used to support the LP12 in particular, which is effectively vertically suspended but somewhat laterally challenged, and therefore, still sensitive to, and affected by, the 'direction' of resonance that passes through its supporting structure?

If we were to consider moment of inertia and its affects upon objects in space, we would find that an object that is supported upon multiple points ie. the 3 or 4 legs of a stand, that are coupled to a flat surface ie. the floor, will be set into rotational moments of inertia, rather than linear moments, due to resonant waves travelling through the flat surface impacting the legs at different times.

If a single point support structure could be practically employed, then this would circumvent such rotational inertial moments and allow the object to oscillate in a vertically linear fashion (which the LP12 is tuned to filter best).

Barring that impracticality, would not a structure that remains mostly rigid in the vertical direction, yet has its own built in lateral suspension, be better able to damp rotational moment of inertia?

If we were to improve the isolation of such a structure, by, lets just say for the sake of argument, adding multiple short, vertically and laterally stiff sub-layers, then would this addition not preserve the primary support structures lateral suspension's Q, while at the same time further reducing its suseptablity to substructure effects? Taking it to the next "Phase" so to speak.

Just speculating out loud,

Craig
bah, bah

[This message was edited by Craig Best on WEDNESDAY 14 November 2001 at 19:20.]

Posted on: 14 November 2001 by Ken Lyon
Craig,
Your Mana *speculation* also allows for the performance nodes at phase 4,etc. as increased lateral modal freedom is accomodated by the addition of phases/soundstages.

Best,
Ken Lyon
GreaterRanges/Neuance


quote:
Originally posted by Craig Best:
I don't believe that the absence of "tubular elements or closed cavities" has as much to do with the sound of Mana, as does the flexible nature of the stand in the lateral plain, _and_ the tuning method which primarily controls the resonance of the metal structure.

Discounting the effects of multiple layers for the moment, isn't Mana essentially a vertically rigid but laterally 'suspended' tuned space frame? Would this not account for its great success when used to support the LP12 in particular, which is effectively vertically suspended but somewhat laterally challenged, and therefore, still sensitive to, and affected by, the 'direction' of resonance that passes through its supporting structure?

Craig
_bah, bah_

[This message was edited by Craig Best on WEDNESDAY 14 November 2001 at 19:20.]


[This message was edited by Ken Lyon on WEDNESDAY 14 November 2001 at 22:25.]

Posted on: 14 November 2001 by Steve Toy
I hope to see you guys on Sunday.

As for the QS Ref modification, I have this awful feeling that it won't be a case of swapping the shelves for ones with holes cut in them - at a tenner a shelf plus the old shelf, but I shall have to send all my shelves back to QS for them to perform the modification, and return them to me some weeks later...
This will possibly mean that I'll have to spend several weeks without music! frown
I hope this is not the case...
Could someone please clarify this situation.

It's always a nice day for it wink Have a good one! smile
Steve.
It's good to get back to normal. wink

Posted on: 14 November 2001 by Ken Lyon
Stephen,
You could do the job yourself. It isn't rocket science and isn't even particulary new or unique unlike certain statements made elsewhere.
My own product originated from mass relief experiments in 1986 and for a time('89-92)it was sold with a mass relief cutout as an option.
Vuk's "Holy Triangle" support is a variation based on the same concepts also well preceeding Fraim and QS Ref.
I'm sure others have done similarly.
The principle is simple in that the hole removes unsupported mass not essential to the support of the component or for structural integrity.
This unsupported mass has the tendency to store energy and re-release it back into the system(ie- it "waffles" and drones), resulting in time-related smearing, obscuration of low level information and corruption of note shapes.
Removing mass speeds the recovery of the shelf (& thus the component) from both internal and externally sourced vibration.
I've been recommending this mod for years at various internet fora for owners of mdf shelved stands such as Target, Standesign, etc.

All you need do is to purchase a largish (approx 120-140mm dia) hole saw, mark your centerpoint and clamp the shelving in a drill press, cutting the hole halfway thru ,flipping it over and completing the hole from the opposite side.Touch up the hole with some light sandpaper to finish and reassemble your QS.

Regards,
Ken Lyon
GreaterRanges/Neuance

quote:
Originally posted by Steven Toy:
"...but I shall have to send all my shelves back to QS for them to perform the modification, and return them to me some weeks later...
This will possibly mean that I'll have to spend several weeks without music! frown

Posted on: 14 November 2001 by Steve Toy
I'm not even going to go down the route of the DIY, botch job...
I'd rather be without my music for a wee while, so that it can be done professionally, and so the areas cut away can be recoated in the same satin black finish.

It's always a nice day for it wink Have a good one! smile
Steve.
It's good to get back to normal. wink

PS: I'm Steven, and not Stephen - my mother's decision, not mine! wink

Posted on: 14 November 2001 by Steve Toy
It started out that way I know...

What possessed you to take the risk with your own QS Ref. shelves in the first place?

I'm glad you did it though! smile

It's always a nice day for it wink Have a good one! smile
Steve.
It's good to get back to normal. wink

Posted on: 15 November 2001 by bam
Craig's stiffy post keeps reminding me of air hockey. What a great game.
Posted on: 15 November 2001 by Steve Toy
Fear not, for I'm a poor taxi driver - the poorer for having spent so much of my very hard-earned on hi-fi - notably on those bloody shelves!

I read something in your profile about perennial under-achievers...
Hey, I'm one of those guys! smile

It's always a nice day for it wink Have a good one! smile
Steve.
It's good to get back to normal. wink

Posted on: 15 November 2001 by Craig B
quote:
Craig's stiffy post keeps reminding me of air hockey. What a great game.
Ah, Air Hockey, the fastest pub sport on the planet.

If one has the reflexes to keep pace with the action, then it is all just a matter of timing. With practice two players can achieve a certain rhythm. One must take care, however, as one's opponent will shoot one right up yer 'ole. wink

Posted on: 15 November 2001 by David Dever
quote:
OK Naim, how and why does Fraim do what it does? What properties do you reckon are desirable in an equipment support? I am sure these questions could be answered without giving out any trade secrets.

Could it be that the "trade secrets" are not found in the answers, but in the actual questions themselves?!

Dave Dever, NANA

Posted on: 15 November 2001 by bam
Right Dave,
Let's start with this trade secret question:
"Why is the Fraim so expensive?"
BAM
big grin
Posted on: 15 November 2001 by graphoman
I have not yet hear the Fraim (only seen one level piece of it) but I take your words granted that it sounds great. Now, what grasped me in its design is the embarrassing combination of the steel(iron) rod with the aluminium pillar—I think that may be the winning factor. Any design I have tried up till now had its ironish/aluminiumish sound according of the material of the design and they all seemed to have merits and limitations as well.
Of course, it is nothing more than speculation.
graphoman
Posted on: 15 November 2001 by Martin Payne
quote:
Originally posted by David Dever:
Could it be that the "trade secrets" are not found in the answers, but in the actual questions themselves?!


It seems plain from the differences of approach of the major players that they can't all have started out with the same understanding of the problem to be solved.

Having thought about how to do stands 'on the cheap' it's plain that the problem is I don't know what the hell I'm trying to achieve. Ask the right questions and I reckon the answers would become reasonably apparent.

I'm not surprised that we don't have an answer, but I am dissapointed.

cheers, Martin

Posted on: 15 November 2001 by Craig B
The answer is vertical rigidity.

What is the question?

Craig
What is Jeopardy, Alex?

Posted on: 15 November 2001 by dave simpson
"What is desirable supporting a hung-suspension device?"


(can we have a dominatrix whip us out if we're the weakest link?)

Posted on: 15 November 2001 by Martin Payne
Mr Pig,

agreed!

cheers, Martin

Posted on: 15 November 2001 by Steve Toy
Seconded!

Quite simply, I let my ears decide! smile

IMHO, the whies and wherefores are of secondary imporance, which is *why* you won't be geting any from me - I just couldn't be bothered to do the research. wink

It's always a nice day for it wink Have a good one! smile
Steve.
It's good to get back to normal. wink

Posted on: 15 November 2001 by Craig B
quote:
(can we have a dominatrix whip us out if we're the weakest link?)
Well that is up to you Dave. I would just like to add that I for one would really prefer that it not be Anne Robinson. Nor would I personally feel it fair to see any of the candidates displaying any Mana tattoo bias, or deadly spike modifications on or about their person. Well maybe just one little tattoo. And, I do suppose that a nice pair of spiked stiletto pumps wouldn't hurt...too much. Oh, and I'd rather it not be one of VV's female sockpuppets that he cons into teasing the self appointed pretender to the bog seat thrown with. NO...SORRY...I take that back, I nominate Samantha as official dominatrix of 'The Weakest Jeopardy Link'. Would anyone care to second that nomination?

She will of course have to change her last name to Trebec and grow a moustache (on second thought maybe she already has one).

Well if we are all in agreement on that score...shall i get the game started and then hand off to our official Dominatrix?...Yes?...alright then...

Are we ready to plaaayy weaKEST JeoPARDY LINK!!

BUZZ!!

in proper English now...

DAVE! Time for your first whipping I'm affraid!Insufficient answer!...Your biological parents weren't siblings by any chance were they?

Ok Samantha, its over to you...you go girl...

Psst...remember, 'The answer is vertical rigidity.' (mouthing the words for her from slightly off stage now) 'WHAT IS THE QUESTION?

[This message was edited by Craig Best on FRIDAY 16 November 2001 at 06:30.]

Posted on: 15 November 2001 by dave simpson
Samantha....Trebec?...moustache?.... I just had dinner....


feeling septic,

dave


(not his mother's uncle)

Posted on: 15 November 2001 by Craig B
But Dave, assuming that the dominatrix' suggestion as to your pedigree were true, wouldn't that make you your mother's nephew? confused
Posted on: 16 November 2001 by Craig B
Well I suppose that I deserve that one Samantha, for doubting your existence.

No hard feelings I hope?

Craig

Posted on: 16 November 2001 by Craig B
Well I still do believe that the Jeopardy aspect could very well lead us to the holy grail of question(s) about life, the universe, and equipment support design concept truth.

Leaving the Weakest Link dominatrix bit by the wayside for now, does anyone object to me continuing on as interim show host in Alex Trebec's absence?...No?...well ok then...

The answer is vertical rigidity.

What is the question?

Note that all questions are considered valid and will not be met with any discrimination on the part of the game's host, however, said host cannot be held responsible for comments, negative or otherwise of the game participants nor those of the audience. Also the role of show host can be assumed by anyone at anytime during the life of the thread...er...show. Let's keep it clean and enjoy playing the all new Equipment Support Design Jeopardy.