advertisement


isoacoustics isolators

I live in a modern house with solid floors, carpets and plasterboard walls. The teenage daughters bedroom is right above the room where the hifi lives. It must the only house in the world ever where the teenager rather than the parent complains the music is too loud. It does travel quite well into her room

At the Bristol hifi show last year (remember these events pre-Covid?) I did hear a demo of speakers with and without iso-acoustic isolators under the speakers and it clearly made a difference. No surprise there but the cost to do 2 floor standers on carpets will be almost £500.

I wonder if this would reduce the transmission and improve the sound though, or would changing speakers and boosting the budget by £500 give a better result.

Anyone have any positive or negative experience of IsoAcoustics GAIA-IIIs plus carpet spike receptacles

Start saving egg boxes ...
(the cardboard ones - not the nasty plastic type)
 
The problem is that most of you people evaulate your system by listening to it. It's not objective Data.

Why not? Asking someone if they can hear a difference creates objective data. Ditto asking to identify a difference. Ditto asking someone to grade sound quality. Ditto... There is no problem measuring the subjective in order to do science. This is happening in this thread.

There can of course be a problem with people being a bit concerned that gathering evidence may make them look a bit foolish given the audiophile beliefs they may have chosen to adopt.
 
There can of course be a problem with people being a bit concerned that gathering evidence may make them look a bit foolish given the audiophile beliefs they may have chosen to adopt.
There can, of course, be a problem with people who don't habitually measure their hifi not having access to, or the skills to use, the relevant measuring equipment. I'd certainly look foolish trying to measure my system, but that'd be because I wouldn't have the first idea what I'd be doing.
 
There can, of course, be a problem with people who don't habitually measure their hifi not having access to, or the skills to use, the relevant measuring equipment. I'd certainly look foolish trying to measure my system, but that'd be because I wouldn't have the first idea what I'd be doing.

You don't listen to your system to hear the effect of changes? You have no interest in the scientific and engineering knowledge of the technically competent? Or those a bit technically weaker gathering evidence by taking measurements to distinguish what is true from what is BS? Claiming one has to perform everything oneself is absurd. Avoiding having to do this is why mankind invented things like writing, science and similar good stuff.
 
Anyway, back on-topic. I may be getting a double-hit of benefit here, since clearly my speakers were not giving their best as I had them before (i.e. with the Tannoy-supplied feet sitting onto my carpeted floor).

I'm in the possibly unusual position of being someone who has spent a week or so listening to my speakers with the Gaias directly onto carpet, and then - just today - fitting the spiked feet (that go under the Gaias). I wasn't originally planning on using these - since I thought the Gaias would be enough - but I picked up a set in the Audio-T sale last weekend. I wasn't expecting much difference to the Gaias-on-carpet, but the difference has been surprising. It's mainly positive - I've gained a sense of air and articulation that I'd felt I was missing before - even with the Gaias - which I'd put down to the carpet, sofas and general construction of the room. Wrong. I don't know the physics, but clearly I'd been losing some HF energy due to how the speakers were 'floating' on the carpet. Now that they're decoupled from these spiked foot 'anchors', which in turn are coupled into the wooden floor (through the carpet and underlay) I have gained yet again. So much so I've had to dial back the +1.5dB energy to level, which I'd previously had to dial in to get a better HF:MID:LF balance. Now it is as it should be - pretty much bang on.

If there's a downside it's simply that now I have to recalibrate my ears to the sound. The 'liberated' HF detail and air, which very welcome, has also come at the expense of a slight reduction in perceived bass weight. Clearly my previous setup was not as optimal as I'd thought! Other than this slight reduction in bass weight - bear in mind I'm running with all bungs in place, which I can play with in due course - it's a huge upgrade. Everything is just as it should be - at least based upon the three albums I've listened to since fitting the feet.

My tale may not be representative of everyone, but it would explain why I was always just yearning for a soupçon more HF, or conversely why I had resorted to the bungs (maybe in an attempt to thin the lower end to bring it into balance). And, of course, maybe I now need to play a bit with listening seat position, speaker toe-in and suchlike - they may now be in the wrong place!

All this said, I think the improvements might well have been smaller if my room had a concrete floor or even was just uncarpeted.

Anyway, that's all for now - I'm a very happy bunny :)
 
Why not? Asking someone if they can hear a difference creates objective data. Ditto asking to identify a difference. Ditto asking someone to grade sound quality. Ditto... There is no problem measuring the subjective in order to do science. This is happening in this thread.

There can of course be a problem with people being a bit concerned that gathering evidence may make them look a bit foolish given the audiophile beliefs they may have chosen to adopt.

I see the problem as when someone makes a change to their system, the system they know extremely well and are familiar with, and are certain that a change is "better" or "worse" and someone else challenges it by insisting that their observations are bogus because they haven't observed it in a measurement.

How many times does do experienced designers need to tell the world that measurements only get them so far before they themselves rely on their ears to tell them how something is performing??

How many times do we have to learn that the set of measurements we have available to us may NOT tell the whole story?

Round and round we go. We listen to our hifi's. Nobody questions a home theatre owner when he says the new projector is way better, without measurements. Nobody questions the car owner that the new one drives "way better" than the last. But put it through a loudspeaker and all of a sudden .1% THD can't possibly be worse than .00001% THD, and a flatter in-room frequency response is always better, and cables cannot possibly be different because the outcomes can't be measured.

You've got JTC here saying he hears a tremendous difference in the ISOacoustics, but no, has to be measured.

Were you one of the guys comparing boner sizes in the locker room with a tape measure in grade 6? I remember those guys.
 
I posted this before from a Tannoy manual when you were saying you were lacking HF with your Ardens. Maybe all you needed to do was to replace the footers supplied with the Ardens and substitute pointed spikes to get through to the surface below the carpet.

mrsy0MF.jpg
 
You don't listen to your system to hear the effect of changes? You have no interest in the scientific and engineering knowledge of the technically competent? Or those a bit technically weaker gathering evidence by taking measurements to distinguish what is true from what is BS? Claiming one has to perform everything oneself is absurd. Avoiding having to do this is why mankind invented things like writing, science and similar good stuff.
I really, genuinely, don't know how you inferred that from what I wrote.

But anyhow, upthread, various people have been advocating that those of us who perceive these subjective changes provide supporting measurements, or recommend we take measurements to verify our observations. So I'm glad to have you on side telling me I can avoid having to do this for myself.
 
Totally agreed that the isoacoustic Gaias if used on carpet need to have the carpet spike shoes, and I can see why you’ve heard an improvement.. The way these work is by absorbing energy - if they aren’t locked in position themselves they are pointless.

Once your used to the sound try without bungs and start with your whole speaker positioning again using the master setup procedure.. I can’t recommend this enough and am yet to do this with my Impulse speakers and can’t wait.

https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=60819.0
 
Anyway, back on-topic. I may be getting a double-hit of benefit here... Anyway, that's all for now - I'm a very happy bunny :)

Great to hear the Gaias are working a treat for you, John. And it sounds like there's still some potential to be achieved - a bit like discovering a stairway towards heaven you never knew existed! I'm a wee bit disappointed I missed out on the Audio T offer. I hadn't been looking into isolation until very recently and so I hadn't worked out where I was going with my Eatons in terms of getting on top of the overwhelming bass I was getting; I'm probably going to buy some GIK bass traps instead now and see how I get on from there. Anyway, I'm delighted the Gaias are doing what they say on the tin as you and your speakers deserve good listening times together :)
 
I see the problem as when someone makes a change to their system, the system they know extremely well and are familiar with, and are certain that a change is "better" or "worse" and someone else challenges it by insisting that their observations are bogus because they haven't observed it in a measurement.

How many times does do experienced designers need to tell the world that measurements only get them so far before they themselves rely on their ears to tell them how something is performing??

How many times do we have to learn that the set of measurements we have available to us may NOT tell the whole story?

Round and round we go. We listen to our hifi's. Nobody questions a home theatre owner when he says the new projector is way better, without measurements. Nobody questions the car owner that the new one drives "way better" than the last. But put it through a loudspeaker and all of a sudden .1% THD can't possibly be worse than .00001% THD, and a flatter in-room frequency response is always better, and cables cannot possibly be different because the outcomes can't be measured.

You've got JTC here saying he hears a tremendous difference in the ISOacoustics, but no, has to be measured.

Were you one of the guys comparing boner sizes in the locker room with a tape measure in grade 6? I remember those guys.
This is partially why I rarely post on things, or start posts. It is almost like why open oneself up to the drubbing you might(no, make that WILL )get, just rarely is worth it. So thanks to all of you out there that take it on the chin!
 
The 'liberated' HF detail and air, which very welcome, has also come at the expense of a slight reduction in perceived bass weight. Clearly my previous setup was not as optimal as I'd thought! Other than this slight reduction in bass weight - bear in mind I'm running with all bungs in place, which I can play with in due course - it's a huge upgrade.

The increased bass response of the previous setup can be colouration due to the room, speaker setup and/or placement. The reduced bass output may be a more accurate bass reproduction or representation of the system after the optimisation. Focus on the quality of the bass such as the detailing and layering. You should hear more detail in the bass where it will sound more defined and layered, basically a cleaner sounding bass. A clean sounding bass will usually give you a perception of reduced bass output and it's perfectly normal when what you were experiencing previously was colouration, a bloated or smeared bass. With some experimentation with the bungs and acclimatisation to the "new sound" you will then be able to make a more accurate judgement whether the new sound presentation is better or superior.
 
The increased bass response of the previous setup can be colouration due to the room, speaker setup and/or placement. The reduced bass output may be a more accurate bass reproduction or representation of the system after the optimisation. Focus on the quality of the bass such as the detailing and layering. You should hear more detail in the bass where it will sound more defined and layered, basically a cleaner sounding bass. A clean sounding bass will usually give you a perception of reduced bass output and it's perfectly normal when what you were experiencing previously was colouration, a bloated or smeared bass. With some experimentation with the bungs and acclimatisation to the "new sound" you will then be able to make a more accurate judgement whether the new sound presentation is better or superior.
I really don't think the sound was at all 'bloated' or distorted before. It sounds much the same, it's just that the levels are a touch lower. It's odd, but I will need to acclimatise.
 
I really don't think the sound was at all 'bloated' or distorted before. It sounds much the same, it's just that the levels are a touch lower. It's odd, but I will need to acclimatise.
Right. Sorry about that. I was thinking about the speaker cable comparison in my system when I made the comment.
 
Really not sure what Keith has against this product or how he still fails to understand how they work. There are at least two Gaia threads on HFWW where he also spouted his "can't measure it, didn't happen" mantra. He was provided the same information and links to measurements in those threads as well. Either he has some form of short term memory loss or he's trolling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JTC
I have nothing against this particular product,I just haven’t seen any data, including my own that shows the efficacy of isolating loudspeakers, perhaps under specific circumstances, bass heavy music played really loudly, engineered/interlocking flooring, but then there is the airborne transmission to consider.
Keith
 
Keith,

Why not get in a set (whatever recommended by the distributor) and setting them up with some of your "Hedd" floorstanders? Can't hurt, right? If you hear a difference on a system you know well, can't hurt, right? You can even perhaps figure out how to measure the differences you're hearing, if you really want to, to verify what you hear? (presuming you hear something. If you don't, I don't think measurements will be particularly important.)

Why not?
 
Also if you want a listening test, there is one online from ISOACOUSTICS from before they made the Gaia's, and rather made small desktop stands. There are two identical powered standmounts side by side, and they A/B immediately back n' forth from one pair to the other. If you want to compare measurements, you could stream the digital out from the provided track, overlay one on top of the other and note the differences between the waveforms. They sound *radically* different. If the measurements don't say they do, then I would question the value of those measurements and posit that some other piece of measuring equipment (be it invented yet or not), would be required to accurately capture the differences the platforms make.

Because you can CLEARLY hear the differences in the demo. It's not subtle.
 


advertisement


Back
Top