I’ve been very pleased with the Dynamic Sound Associates Phono II that I’ve been trying out through the kindness of a friend. Enough so that I’m thinking of buying it from him. But, right now they have nothing feet on them which I would like to replace with something better. The bottom of the Phono II chassis is actually threaded with 4 10-32 holes just for the attachment of aftermarket feet. I have a bunch of non-threaded feet, but in this case I think I’d like to try something that will screw into the chassis.
I have and have used threaded Stillpoints in past years and found them to diminish some of the harmonic overtones in cases where they were used, so I’m not inclined to try them again. I don’t want something bloomy and round sounding, but I also don’t want anything like the Stillpoints which (to may ears anyway) were a little too “surgical”. If the AUVA EQ was threaded I’d just order those and be done with it, but alas they are not. What say you all?
In my experience anyway, non-threaded feet work better for equipment. Just placing the feet under the body of equipment instead of replacing stock feet is better because threaded feet could damp the dynamic of SQ for components too much. However, for speakers the threaded feet usually work better, and are more stable for sure.
There are a few exceptions. For example, the aftermarket feet worked better under the feet of PowerZone better than placing under the body. But PZ’s feet are designed for noise isolation already, many are not.
I really have no good answer other than - they’re there, the designer put them there, and his recommendation was to use them with Critical Mass feet. Unfortunately I ain’t got no Critical Mass feet handy, and they’ve gotten pretty spendy. I’ll try my Isopods while I’m examing possible alternatives.
I’ve used a few different footers under my preamp, DAC, and transport over the years; none of them were threaded. At the moment I have a set of AUVA EQs Under my BHK preamp and like them. So I’d say don’t worry too much about the threading.
I am partial to threaded feet that have some sort of point that allows them to be placed on a disc or some other sort of receiving base.
The combination of the two can be very effective addressing vibrations that can travel in two different directions.
You might check out MapleShade and Herbie’s for inspiration:
Whether screwing something into the component chassis is better than placing/resting the OEM feet or chassis on footers is dependent on the chassis and footer design of the kit you are working with.
If you want to try something that won’t break the bank (but does not screw into a chassis), check out these:
I use them under my Magnum Dynalab tuner and PS Audio AirLens and they “seem nice”.
Well, so far it sounds pretty nice on my IsoPods. I suppose I’ll try my Finite Cerapucs or my Daedalus DiDs next, once I find them! I just moved an entire room’s worth of stuff (including a lot of my unused audio gear) into another room to get ready for some major renovation to that space. I should have pulled all the feet’s out when I saw them. May as well try out what I have before going to look for something with threaded posts. I even may be able to find my old BDRCs!
I agree with Ron. . . the Auvas replaced my previous favorites the IsoPods in my main system and I really like the results. I stuck a fork in isolation feet. . . with the Stack Audio I’m done. (I still have IsoPods in my other systems and under my speakers–they work great under my speakers).
Hey, when did you sneak in and grab some of my IsoPods?
It’s not a huge difference to be honest, but I found that the Stack feet gave just a bit darker and denser presentation, but just a bit. . . and that’s welcome overall in my system. Replacing them one by one (which I did over the course of a few months) the incremental differences were quite pleasant. I found that the weight ranges were helpful and beneficial as well.
May as well try out what I have before going to look for something with threaded posts. I even may be able to find my old BDRCs!
