PWD feet


#1

Has anybody tried to remove/unscrew the feets from the chassis?

I have some pucks w/spikes that are special made for glass shelves, however the height of the open shelve is too low to accomodate my DAC and my multiplayer on top of it when using those. I am currently checking if the EMP3 feets can be removed as an alternative.



Edit:

The decision is that I am going to remove the feet on my EMP3 and then I can use the Taoc’s.


#2

Very easy to remove and I have done so (I use Herbie’s Audio Lab Iso-Cups under the PWD and PWT).


#3

@ionson,

Did you ever try the Tenderfeet vs. Isocups under PWD and PWT? I use Tenderfeet but have always wondered about Isocups.

Thanks,

Steve B-)


#4

Yes. I prefer Iso-Cups. The mid-range opens up as do the two frequency extremes.


#5

I use three Finite Elemente Ceraballs under the PWD: http://www.finite-elemente.de/en/accessories/cerafamily/ceraball


#6

Have you guys noticed any improvement, or is it really just a fashion statement?


#7

Cuteness counts.



I find devices which transform movement into heat, such as Aurios, make a positive improvement. I have yet to find coupling with spikes, cones, blocks to have much impact.


#8
vincelab said: Have you guys noticed any improvement

Yes, absolutely.

#9

used tender-feet for a while until i got a good rack (steve blinn extra wide). they made a fairly easy to detect difference imho. the blinn rack makes the tender-feet way less noticeable to my ears. have trouble telling the difference now, so i go back and fourth from time to time. right now i have both my pwd2 and pwt on the tender-feet but went months without them. maybe i’ll be able to decide someday. :-/



if you don’t have a high quality rack…tender-feet do a great job for the price. lots of good choices depending on how much you want to spend.


#10

I tried Aurios once, and I find I prefer the Iso-Cups for the price, which don’t work totally differently. I agree that Tenderfeet make a difference without a good rack; I find far more than cosmetic benefit with the Iso-Cups. Very happy with them; have been using them for more than seven years.


#11

The Iso-Cups are a great deal more rational price-wise, albeit less sophisticated than Aurios. I expect they make an improvement. A comparison would be interesting.


#12

Interesting! All you guys say they make a difference for the better, but no one actually tells what audible differences they can hear with them. On my CD player, it makes the image a tad more focussed, but makes the highs a bit too “dominant”. I expect I’d see the same type of difference, which also means room will play a very important role, as one type of feet might do wonders in a room and make matters worse in another… what do you think?


#13

I find the Iso-Cups open up the midrange and allow detail without the music sounding “etched.” Ambient and room information are audible. Depth of soundstage is impressive (though both sets of my speakers include omni-directional drivers and do this well without the Iso-Cups, the Iso-Cups make this more focused and coherent.)



Even on top of the PowerBase I find the Iso-Cups improve the sound, moving the presentation a bit towards a more natural, realistic one.


#14
vincelab said: All you guys say they make a difference for the better, but no one actually tells what audible differences they can hear with them.

This is easy. The feet is about resonance control, right? So expect everything related to vibration and resonances: dynamics, resonances, "smearing", "sound mess", imaging, bass, sibilants, etc. Not always all these areas will be improved. E.g. in "my case", Cerafeet/Cerabases/Cerapucs improved dynamics, imaging, general clarity, reduced nasty resonances, but it was the rack what cured the sibilants issue.

Some spikes (for example, cheap Ixos) will make your system sound worse...

#15

tender-feet: cleaner midrange, wider/deeper soundstage and more precise/consistent imaging is what i noticed. thought they helped tighten the low end a bit too, but came across a few exceptions to this one.



new/better rack: all of the above plus improved dynamics (big/obvious improvements in my case).



i’d recommend a good rack for your entire set-up above just “feet” for specific components.


#16
vincelab said: All you guys say they make a difference for the better, but no one actually tells what audible differences they can hear with them.

This is easy. The feet is about resonance control, right? So expect everything related to vibration and resonances: dynamics, resonances, "smearing", "sound mess", imaging, bass, sibilants, etc. Not always all these areas will be improved. E.g. in "my case", Cerafeet/Cerabases/Cerapucs improved dynamics, imaging, general clarity, reduced nasty resonances, but it was the rack what cured the sibilants issue.

Some spikes (for example, cheap Ixos) will make your system sound worse...


Alekz and others, I have used the Cerabase and Cerapuc with good results under the PW DAC MK II, PW Transport and my Amps. However I have since had a chance to try the new Stillpoints Ultra Mini and Ultr SS and are blown away but the improvement to the sound. As great as the Ultra Mini are under the PW DAC the SS are that much better.

If you can NOT afford them DO NOT TRY THEM. You will not want to return them.
One thing, you must try them in various positions to get the most out of them.


#17


i'd recommend a good rack for your entire set-up above just "feet" for specific components.


I agree, I have two Mapleshade Samson racks an love what they do (and how they look).

#18
hifial said: I have since had a chance to try the new Stillpoints Ultra Mini and Ultr SS

I have been tempted. They appear beautifully designed.

#19

You guys have managed to convince me to start looking!


#20
You guys have managed to convince me to start looking!

convincelab? B-)