Mike, Are you saying that if an LP is really noisy, you first try the Audio Desk and then if that does not work, you rely on the Loricraft to get the job done? I thought users were reporting that the Audio Desk does a superior job on dirty LPs.

I recently took an LP that was cleaned with my PRC 4 to a friend's house. We listened and then cleaned it with his Audio Desk. It sounded just as clean, but we heard some faint crackling sounds during the quiet passages after the Audio Desk cleaning and not with the Loricraft. I now want to reclean with my Loricraft to see if I can hear a difference.

peterayer July 15, 2013 01:28

one more thing on the Camera.

I use the default settings for the D600 from Ken Rockwell for my D600 and that has also seemed to help a lot as I was clueless as to how to set up the D600.

I used his links to purchase my camera and contributed to his website too to compensate him.

mikelavigne July 14, 2013 23:23

hi John,

yes, I did get a new camera about 6 months ago.....the Nikon D600. but my improved picture taking really came from when I got the Nikon AF-S f/1.4 50mm lens 4 months ago which makes the camera much better for most shots I take. I had been using an expensive Nikon f/2.8 24-70 which I could never get to look quite right. the pics today were hand held since I was in a hurry to throw some pics up. I used the flash in daylight. the last pic likely needed a tripod and not the flash.

as far as combining the different RCM's it might be interesting. for really dirty and challenging Lp's the Loricraft with it's multi-stage chemical approach likely can solve the truely problem pressings. then finish with the KL.

and that is how I use the Loricraft now, as the fall back approach for noisy pressings after I've already tried the Audio Desk.

so we will see how this goes as I switch back and forth.

mikelavigne July 14, 2013 23:02

This machine seems much more promising than the Audio Desk if only because of the brushes and squeegee that don't seem to work that well or completely dry the LP, at least in my experience. I love my PRC 4 Delux, but it is very time consuming. I like the idea of cleaning with an ultrasonic machine and then a final pure water rinse on the Loricraft, but alas, I can't afford two expensive RCMs.

Mike, please keep us informed of your longer time use with this machine.

peterayer July 14, 2013 22:46

Wow i have never heard about this RCM. Plus your pics are just killer...didn't you get a new camera recently? Tripod or hand held? I kinda wonder if the KL and the ultrasonic + a final clean by your Loricraft might be a match made in vinyl heaven?

Thinking the ultrasonic get's everything possible dislodged from the grooves and the Loricraft (or something like my Monks) sucks everything else up...

Also have to wonder if some cleaning agent (AVS, MoFi, Monks Fluid, etc etc) in the ultrasonic...then the Loricraft for a pure rinse...

Just thoughts...I bet you may already be thinking of these options (and frowning on the time to experiment!)

jfrech July 14, 2013 21:35

a new guy in town.

I am trying out a new RCM. the KL Audio Ultrasonic Record Cleaner.

it's a one-button machine like the Audio Desk. actually, it's a 'no' button machine. you place the Lp in the slot and it automatically cleans and dries it. you can walk away and come back later. it 'beeps' when it's done. you can vary the minutes of cleaning and drying. it uses about 1/2 gallon of distilled water per 50-100 Lps depending. I used a funnel to pour in the water, there is a window on the front that shows 'min' and max' for water level as you fill it. very easy to use and intuitive for dummies like me.

it only uses distilled water and ultrasonic cleaning, there is no cleaning fluid of any kind and no brushes. nothing touches the Lp but water and the ultrasonic bubble action.

it uses a 200 watt ultrasonic unit, my understanding is that the Audio Desk uses approximately a 10 watt ultrasonic unit. so the KL Audio has 20x the ultrasonic cleaning action of the Audio Desk.

how well does it work? so far, I've only cleaned a couple of Lps; but they came out 100% dry and clean and sound wonderful. maybe a touch more pristine sounding than the Audio Desk, but it's too soon to draw any conclusions. there are fewer moving parts than the Audio Desk since there are no brushes to spin, but it does still spin the Lp. it's built really well, and my understanding is that it's stainless steel inside for durability.

it's relatively quiet but it does emit a raspy sort of noise (like 'pink' noise) during the ultrasonic cycle.....so you might not want it in the same room as you are listening in. in my situation it's with the other RCM's right outside my room, and I don't hear it in my room with the door closed and the music playing, but I did hear the 'beep' when it was done.

works for me!

i'm into easy. this is easy.

here it is next to the current best RCM's on the market....the Audio Desk and the Loricraft PRC4 Delux. we will see how it does.

KL Audio RCM with Audio Desk and Loricraft PRC4 Dlx

KL Audio RCM

closeup of control panel

mikelavigne July 14, 2013 19:21

Idos,

your point is well taken, it's always possible for different pieces of gear to have negative performance affects on each other and then as you move them that changes. in this case i've used the dart pre and the Playback Designs together for almost 7 years now. at various times i've removed one or the other and never seen any effect from that. so that fact is where we start when considering your perspective.

prior to moving the gear to being stacked on top of the Herzan, the Playback Designs was on the bottom shelf, with the dart pre on the shelf above. this shelf that was between the two units, was a very heavy thick granite-wood sandwich which likely prevented much interaction. and the distance between the two units was greater then. now they are just separated by only the A10 U8 footers....there is now no shelf between them.

there was zero percieved noise before, and there is now zero percieved noise.

my expereince with noise between pieces of gear is mostly when i've had phono stages and power supplies for phono stages. the incoming cartridge signal is so low, and the amplification within the phono is so high, that picking up hum and noise is much more likely when you are messing with multiple phono sections.

anyway; while i agree with you that you have to open to all kinds of reasons for changes, in this case i am pretty confident that changes in the proximity of the gear is not part of it.

thank you for bringing up an important thing to consider when moving stuff around.

mikelavigne July 03, 2013 18:37

Mike,
Is it possible that the effects you are hearing might have something to do with getting your digital device further from the sensitive electronics of your pre-amp?

idos July 03, 2013 12:38

Tom,

reading thru your website, audiopoints.com, did help me to understand some of your perspectives. thanks. it did give me a context for what you are saying.

i'm no engineer who can understand the technical reasons for what happens, i'm simply an observer trying to navigate thru my observational experiences and make sense of it as best I can.

i'm not wedded to any approach, be it isolation or coupling. however; I have observed that done to the highest form, isolation seems to take me further. particularly when you start to have a true full range system where you are getting very low bass and lots of very dynamic music energy.....and especially when you are spinning discs in one way or another.

I did notice that on your Energy Room description that there was a testimonial from our AudiogoN member Agear, who posted above. reading thru that description, many of the attributes that are described in that process I have going on in my room too. I certainly respect that comprehensive approach to the room challenge.

mikelavigne July 03, 2013 01:56

Tboooe

We refer to our designs as coupling devices rather than isolation devices. With the addition of endpins for cello, bass and bass clarinet we are able to clarify our design basis with real acoustic instruments. Now we can take a real instrument that is direct coupled within it's environment record that instrument using our technology and play it back with the implementation of our coupling devices. The playback can best be heard in our Energy Room. Star Sound Technologies. Tom

theaudiotweak July 03, 2013 00:42

@Theaudiotweak,care to elaborate on the product design you are referring to? I am in the market for isolation devices so this is of great interest to me.

tboooe July 02, 2013 21:45

Hello Mike,

Both active and passive 'isolation' devices typically deal with energy that extends or flows up from ground. These so called isolation systems because of their high impedance materials restrict and slow energy that is either generated internal by the amp or speaker or thru the air. Everything has motion or it would not exist and everything will travel the path of least resistance. This suggests that energy should not and cannot be contained or damped. A more efficient path is to provide low impedance materials aided by geometric shapes and a certain degree of mechanical stress all coupled to ground.

Devices that are suspended are still self animated ..all that self generated and modulated air energy is still contained with in the chassis. Granted energy from down below will not travel upward but all the other stated energy has no way out. The internal pollution unless directed to ground {and the sooner the better} is left to modulate along with the signal you have tried faithfully to procure and reproduce. The concepts that I have written here,are the basis of our product design.

Beautiful room and system up there. Tom

theaudiotweak July 02, 2013 15:59

And the airborne energy and the self generated energy of the component itself is trapped inside caused by the high impedance of the so called "isolation" method. All this energy with no where to go but around and round all to be modulated along with the preferred signal. All makes perfect sense. Tom

hi Tom,

trying to get my brain around your thought.

so what you are saying is that somehow the passive is helping the active release energy that is otherwise 'held'?

that makes sense I guess.

did I get that right?

sorry if I'm a little dense.

mikelavigne July 02, 2013 13:31

Using 3 axis accelerometers to measure the results can put an end to this debate.

personally, I prefer my ears as the arbiter. especially since the performance of the gear is a subjective question. not all gear reacts equally to the same environment.

I've read that others using the active isolation shelves found that it was not synergistic with some gear. I suspect that by adding passive to the active that most gear can be optimized.

of course, it's possible that your '3-axis accelerometer' might also tell us the same thing that our ears do. in any case, i'll follow my ears.

mikelavigne July 02, 2013 13:26

Marc,

I agreed completely with your perspective about the Wave Kinetics A10 U8 footers not likely being compatible with the active isolation. but since the top of the dart pre did not allow for the use of the built in footers on the Playback Designs MPS-5 I was forced to select some sort of interface to be able to stack those units.

so whether I expected a good result or not I had to try it.

when the result exceeded my expectations, it then got me thinking that somehow using the A10 U8's above the active isolation caused the benefits of both approaches to be added together. hummmmmmm.

and it also opens up the potential to 'tune' the active isolation for any piece of gear. double hummmmm.

I love it when I get surprised in a good way.

over time i'm sure others will try it and we'll collectively go to another level. we all have passive footers in our collection of stuff. while I do think that the A10 U8's are possibly the best device for this, who knows what might work as good?

the A10 U8's have the flat bottom with a bit of felt so they won't harm the surface of the Herzan, or the top of the gear they are resting on. the silicone tops of the A10 U8's are soft and a bit grippy and won't harm the bottoms, and they are not so tall that gear becomes unstable, yet tall enough to clear built-in footers. so they do the job well. and you can use fewer for light gear, and more for heavy gear, so they are tunable in that way.

when I consider other footers such as ball and cup types, or even the Stillpoints, and how they work, I do think the A10 U8's are ideally suited for this practically and functionally.

mikelavigne July 02, 2013 13:15

And the airborne energy and the self generated energy of the component itself is trapped inside caused by the high impedance of the so called "isolation" method. All this energy with no where to go but around and round all to be modulated along with the preferred signal. All makes perfect sense. Tom

theaudiotweak July 02, 2013 13:12

Using 3 axis accelerometers to measure the results can put an end to this debate.

booboobaer July 02, 2013 13:11

Mike, I know we've batted comments back and forth robustly on another forum re active isolation (like a bad game at Wimbledon! Ps c'mon Andy!), and I've declared my overarching need to be convinced by the attributes of active.
I fully bow to your initial comments that active takes your system into new realms of enjoyment. Can hardly disagree, since I'm not privy to your system. I'm intrigued enough that I'm about to hear an active shelf under my tt (to be sited on the floor since I run a Symposium Isis).
However, I'm really struggling to accept that an uber engineering device like Herzan, or Halcyonics, is going to perform to yet another level with passive footers in series with it.
This just defies logic - the active shelf is purported by it's makers to isolate so comprehensively in 6 axes, to sub-Hertz levels, that it surely can't be augmented any further by passive means.
This is taking the whole subjective v. objective audio paradox to unbelievable territory.
This is not meant to be a criticism, more a comment that my head really can't get around this particular peeling of the audio onion to reveal yet hitherto unknown depths of performance.
Of all the upgrades to audio, active isolation sticks most to objective scientific principles, there seems to be little scope, if any, for subjective experience to be so dramatically counter to it.
Part of me feels like the wave Kinetics footers still have to be talked up even though you've found a total engineering solution well in excess of their potential positives.

spiritofmusic July 02, 2013 09:21

hi Steve,

nice to hear from you again.

you are not alone in liking what wood does as rack material. like a speaker cabinet, wood's natural properties do typically do musically friendly things when properly applied. I use the Box Furniture (all wood) amplifier stands. I know lots of people like using maple butcher blocks for rack and shelf materials. it does not hurt that it can be made to be very attractive too.

wood can add tonal color or warmth, but it does not have to.

I know a few audiophiles that tune each piece of gear with blocks of wood of various hardwoods.

I like your idea of suspending the gear from strings, it has to improve isolation. i'd enjoy seeing pictures of how you've done it.

there is more than one way to skin the cat.

there is much to like with the A90, and the Anna starts with all the great things the A90 does and then simply takes it all to another level, adds more dynamic life, more body and harmonic substance, and so much texture and nuance. and the speed and ease is wonderful.

best regards,

mikelavigne July 02, 2013 05:05

Andrew,

I actually tried the Halcyonics Micro 40 back in 2006. Norm/Tbg did have a couple of the Micro 40's, but as I recall due to the small footprint of the Micro 40 (16" x 17.6") Norm never tried it under his Rockport tt that I ever read about. and Norm had a decoupling rack and suspended wood floors, so the Micro 40 was never fully optimized in his system. none-the-less, I know he was very impressed with the units.....but moved on to the Stillpoints.

after my experience of how the Wave Kinetics A10 U8 footers seem to work synergistically with the Herzan active isolation, I wonder how the Stillpoints might work with it too.

and I wonder how many Halcyonics users have ever tried decoupling footers in combination (on top of the active shelf) with their active isolation. I've not heard of it myself.

it now seems an obvious thing to try, but my strong opinion before I tried it was that is was not the correct approach.....that it would somehow compromise the active unit. quite the contrary, the active unit allows the passive device to be optimized since it does noise attenuation that the passive unit is not capable of.

the whole subject of gear isolation and how much influence it can have on ultimate sonic performance is very interesting to me. for myself, it seems that my system has been suddenly unleashed and I've broken through to another level.

let's see how this plays out.

mikelavigne July 02, 2013 04:45

Hi Mike,

Your Herzan posts have made fascinating reading. I guess this is the ultimate isolation solution.

I have done a bit of isolation experimentation and found wood to be the best rack material. Marine Ply is wonderful as a shelf material with the layers running in opposite directions sandwiched together. I have my platforms suspended from the shelf above with nylon cords so they are virtually floating. Not as sophisticated solution but it works. Just shows how microphonic those components are.

Checking my notes I observed increase in depth, more three dimensional sound and reduced distortion when you upgrade the isolation.

For my next cartridge thinking I may love away from the Lyra family and try a A90 or the mighty Anna.

Regards from the UK.

Steve

cyclopse June 30, 2013 21:12

Good experimental data Mike. I know the active approach is not new. Norm/Tbg played with it before concerting to Stillpoints.

I do know mechanical grounding and isolation products make a substantial difference in my limited experience. It would be interesting to compare and contrast them. I have fiddled with Stillpoints, Sistrum and Equarack.

agear June 30, 2013 12:55

last night I did further experiment with the Herzan by adding A10 U8 footers underneath the darTZeel preamp, between the Herzan and the dart pre.

then I listened to both digital discs and the server dac. my impressions were of another added improvement to focus and naturalness over the dart pre sitting naked on the Herzan. I listened to lots of digital over a few hours and heard no drawbacks. the refinement and delicacy and presentation of fine detail is beyond what I've heard digital do before. energy and bass impact and definition is slightly improved, in any case not diminished. I need to simply listen more to really get the full measure of this next step for digital performance.

by the time I got around to seeing how the A10 U8 footers under the dart pre will affect the vinyl it was pretty late, so I had a hard time listening critically. so right now i'm listening to vinyl and so far it's a bit better also with the focus and flow, but too early to really get my bearings yet on it. but nothing has softened or been lost.

more updates later; but it seems that the Herzan is not an end point, but more the right kind of beginning to fine tuning gear for optimal performance.

mikelavigne June 29, 2013 12:50

Peter,

my earlier comments about stands were based upon reading the Herzan website regarding 'site optimization' where they explained what was ideal. but this information was about what 'WAS UNDER' the Herzan. these current comments from last night's experience was regarding the A10 U8 footers relate to what is used 'ON TOP' of the Herzan. so i still stand by my point that a mass loaded grounded stand is the best way to go to set the Herzan on.

but i now see that various types of isolation footers might work with gear on top of the Herzan. i say might becuase i've only observed one situation so far, but i was very impressed with what i heard.

when you think about it; the active isolation should optimize the effectiveness of these footers. it then becomes a matter to find the most synergistic footer for the gear. at least with the Herzan you have a predictable environment. obviously i'm just thinking out loud and until i spend some time trying different approaches i won't know how it will work.

as far as the NVS and it's dedicated shelf, unless i try it under the NVS and sitting on top of the Herzan and listen i will never know the result. i really have no idea how that might turn out. i'm only saying that my mind is open to it possibly, if unlikely, being better. i'm excited to learn going forward.

i have not yet tried the darTZeel preamp under the Playback Designs. the dart pre likely weighs around 55 pounds, whereas the Playback Designs is closer to 35 pounds. plus even though the Playback is very very solid, the dart pre is a very very dense solid brick of a preamp. nothing is built like a darTZeel. i think the stack is more stable with the dart on the bottom. and having lots of weight on top of the Playback might have some effect on the disc drive. finally the dart pre stays only slightly warm to the touch, the Playback gets very warm if not hot when i use it all day....so having it on top allows for the heat to escape easily without affecting other gear.

there is a separate power supply for the NVS, it's a small rectangle in an aluminum enclosure. i do have it on the floor, on A10 U8 footers and with Walker lead filled tuning pucks on top. there is no room for it on the Herzan.

mikelavigne June 28, 2013 20:44

Mike, that is all very interesting. I'm curious though about the addition of a second isolation, i.e. the A10 footers with the Herzan. You had previously posted that you felt that to optimize the Herzan, it should not be used with another isolating stand, so you have it on a "grounded" stand, the Adona rack.
Based on this, would not the isolation to the NVS be compromised by stacking isolation devices? Or perhaps active behaves differently that passive in this case. It seems experimentation and being open minded is indeed appropriate here.

Have you tried the Playback UNDER the Dartzeel? It seems that they might fit better that way and the weight of the Dart might dampen the Playback from above. Just a thought.

I've also been meaning to ask you if there is a separate power supply for the NVS. If there is one which I don't see in your photos, I contend that it too would benefit from being isolated. One of the main reasons I had a custom larger steel ballast plate cut for my Vibraplane/SME turntable is that I found very early on in the process that the SME motor controller sounds better if it too is isolated.

I really appreciate you sharing these experiments with the forum. Not many of us have experience with active isolation.

peterayer June 28, 2013 19:25