I like the AUVA 100’s for the FR20’s as well. It’s not a load match, as with the CSA’s, but a best performance issue.
Oh, all the Stack stuff is making its way to new owners. Isolation all around 
3 Likes
Well, I ended up ordered a set CSA1 from Josh. I don’t know if I will get tariffs charge here.
1 Like
I’d second that comment about being a must for FR30s!
1 Like
Donald, keep us informed as to how the tariff process/amount, if any, pans out. Looking at a Muon Pro this year but not if an extra $450-$500 tariff is attached by whomever. Thanks man.
1 Like
Josh got back to me on the tariff’s situation, and this is what he said:
"All orders shipped to the U.S. are now subject to a 10% import fee upon clearance. Additionally, any orders valued over $800 (previously $2,000) now require a CBP Form 5106 to be completed. This includes basic information such as: Entity Type – e.g., Individual or Corporation, Importer ID – typically your EIN (for businesses) or passport number (for individuals) & Contact details.
We’ve been exploring various options to simplify the process for our U.S. clients. However, even when we ship under DDP (Delivered Duties Paid) or DTP (Duties & Taxes Paid) terms, the recipient is still classified as the “importer of record.” This means the 5106 form is still required regardless of how the shipment is handled. We are investigating other avenues accordingly to try and make the process as seamless as possible for you guys whilst all of this is going on."
My order was in a small amount, and Josh has given me a bit of discount since my early review of AUVA100 generated a large interest from members here. However, for ordering expensive items aboard this will be what one expects to deal with from now on. I hope there will be agreements to reach with Europe before the “25% or more tariffs” kick in. This is a crazy time.
I will not order anything from China anytime soon with the 145% surcharging tax that the buyers here will be paying. But as you know half of the most items we buy in the USA probably have some components that made in China.
5 Likes
The process and documentation required as you described is exactly how I got my Stack product for the Axpona show from Josh. The extra customs form was not difficult. I anticipate the same great service from these guys, even in this new tariff-ridden world.
5 Likes
I guess for the moment I’ll stick with my IsoPods.
The 10% tariff isn’t bad, more annoying. 145% … YIKES! What scared me about getting Stack or Network Audio (Muon Pro) equipment from England is the chance the exporter prepays the tariff and then the shipper (I’m talking to you FedEx) won’t release the shipment until the importer (me/you/us) gets the tariff (again). I know this type of thing shouldn’t happen, but it does (based on non-tariff experience). And good luck getting a double payment refunded … I am so glad that I found a good deal on some pre-landed in the US 100’s (wink, wink). Now if anyone is selling a low-mileage Muon Pro that your Grandma only used on Sundays …
3 Likes
Six minutes into this video our very own @RonP makes a cameo appearance!
2 Likes
I knew I should have worn a disguise. 
4 Likes
I hope you’re getting residuals.
2 Likes
Poor Mark is tortured (in my opinion) with thinking that test instruments are more reliable than his auditory system.
3 Likes
If nothing else, good on him for being open-minded and willing to challenge his own biases.
With your good looks it’s hard for you not to stand out.
3 Likes
From the video, it appears that Mark is significantly frustrated by ABX testing. I happen to agree that ABX methods are torture, despite the fact that I do support the use of blind testing under the right conditions.
To do blind testing correctly, it is better to not include any deception to try to fool the listener and to also avoid rapid switching that contributes to listener confusion and anxiety. Instead, the listener should start (IMO) by listening to whatever is being tested (cables, footers, amps, etc.) under open (unblinded) conditions to establish several aspects of sound quality that serve to clearly differentiate the gear being tested.
The goal of subsequent blind testing is then to hear the gear in randomly ordered A-B pairs and to have the listener decide which gear in each 2-way comparison is A and which gear is B. These pairwise comparisons can then be repeated several times to confirm statistical significance. This kind of “match-to-sample” test is much more fun to do and avoids many of the problems associated with ABX testing.
I apologize for getting off on this tangent, but I hate when people use ABX testing as the “gold standard” for evaluating audible differences in music reproduction. (Check out Milind Kunchur’s published research in the AES Journal for a detailed criticism of ABX testing in relation to hearing differences between cables.)
4 Likes
You should change your name to Handsome RonP.
Meant that as a reply to RonP. The PS Audio forum app has been changed and it is AWFUL!
4 Likes
You have a large audiophile circle nearby from what it looks like and that’s very cool!
4 Likes
I would never join a club that would accept me as a member. Channeling Groucho here.
6 Likes
Ron mentioned the Stack Audio isolators, but those weren’t part of the test? Should have been! I do think his comments on the dead speaker stands has a lot to do with the results.
That VPI table was interesting, had a plinth made of what looked like end grain butcher block. Was that a limited run item? I’ve lost touch with VPI since they seem to be fading into obscurity …
1 Like
My thinking on this is: The speaker manufacturer makes the cabinet as rigid as possible. So the drivers do what they do as perfectly as they can without influence. And then we put footers under them that allow the speakers to move–even microscopically. Doesn’t make sense to me. Seems we should make the footers as rigid as possible.
2 Likes