Quadraspire Reference tables

[Steve Toy]

These are what I use. They are a modular performance stand option with looks to taste but they certainly deliver on the musical front. They began as Quadraspire furniture but have been breathed on a few times by the guys at Audio Works.

The only drawbacks with them seem to be:

1) They are not fans of a particular Scottish turntable with the bouncy upgrade. The unbouncy option on this stand outperforms the bouncy one on ordinary furniture quite significantly.

2) This stand is constantly evolving meaning you just have to go out and buy the latest improvement.

First they changed the rods to be tapered and have decoupling rings to prevent each shelf coming in contact with the rod supporting the shelf above it. The 'Reference' version of Quadraspire wooden furniture was thus born in 2001. It was available in different wood veneer finishes or black or silver MDF. The MDF version sounded slightly better but wasn't as pretty.

Then Dave Cattlin discovered cutting holes in each shelf reduced mass and speeded up energy transfer across the shelves and down the rods to ground. Dynamics, timing (further reduction of time smear*) detail and soundstaging (if you like that sort of thing) were improved as a result. Fortunately Quadraspire offered a straight swap option plus £10 . I got my "bog seats" in early 2002.

In 2003 acrylic was discovered as an inert material that was just a no-brainer improvement. I bought just one shelf in acrylic for under my CD player.

Further minor modifications included shortening the decoupling rings.

In 2006 plastic spikes under mains block tables, top shelves and power amp tables were a subtle improvement in tunefulness and harmonic detail. They could not be placed under multi-tiered racks though.:scratch:

In 2006 and last year after messing about designing a block shelf for the Reflex mains block that they ultimately abandoned, it was discovered that guitar-shaped shelves sounded a lot better than the Quadraspire shaped ones. I now have two guitar-shaped shelves and two Quadraspire ones.

This year the supporting rods are now made from acrylic. This is still at prototype stage though. I'm sure Rick will keep us posted with the latest on that score.

*Another thread will attempt to explain this particular phenomenon. Larry?

[Filterlab]

Steve, how much of a difference did the guitar shape make?

[Steve Toy]

:piano: ¦<------------->¦

About that much.

[Filterlab]

:)

[Marco]

Seems reasonably significant then :)

Rob,

QS Ref acrylic is about reducing microphonic 'noise' from the partnering system and controlling resonance, thus achieving maximum possible resolution, so that music is communicated to the listener as realistically as possible. Part of the design principle is also to reduce mass wherever possible as this contributes to achieving the ultimate goal.

If I didn't have a shed load of non-magnetic stainless steel Mana that's bought and paid for QS Ref acrylic is what I'd use. I think if pushed I'd say that to my ears the ss Mana is better, but not many would be able to accommodate the somewhat imposing 'tower of power' that graces my listening room :eyebrows:

Marco.

[Rick O]

There is a good reason why guitars are made this shape. It is so that the box does not have a single resonant frequency (if a guitar did, it would mean that 1 frequency would be louder than all others). The tables work on the exact same principle.

[Filterlab]

There is a good reason why guitars are made this shape. It is so that the box does not have a single resonant frequency (if a guitar did, it would mean that 1 frequency would be louder than all others). The tables work on the exact same principle.

Would it not be beneficial to randomize the shape of the cut out, so that it still mimics a guitar shape, but has no set shape? Surely that would eliminate virtually all resonance?

Just a thought, based on me thinking about the B&W Nautilus speakers (the proper ones rather than the 'named' ones).

[jandl100]

The Quadraspire guys have been doing some good demos at Shows recently - comparing their (relatively) new top-of-the-line table with their previous (and cheaper) efforts. Improvements in 3D presence and image solidity seemed fairly obvious and worthwhile.

... you have to ignore the demonstrator's antics though - he's a Linn-style "toe-tapper" - jiggles along excitedly when the 'better' component is in use ... :doh:

[MartinT]

I saw their new Sunoko-Vent range at one of the shows, but the website only offers an early brochure and no pricing or other details. Has it yet come to market? I am interested in it since it offers the SV-2X double stack (so-called AV) whereas the Q4 range does not.

[Steve Toy]

I saw the new range too but unfortunately they didn't have a system playing on it including any facility for A/B dems that have been performed by Audio Works at shows in the past. I suspect that if you are prepared to accept a degree of flexing in the shelves under the weight of heavier kit, acrylic is still the way to go performance-wise.

[Marco]

Hi Martin,

I like the look of the Sunoko-Vent, and if looks are of primary concern then go for it, but if out-and-out performance is your top priority then without doubt the acrylic range is one to go for.

Marco.

[MartinT]

You're probably right, but acrylic just will not go in my new sitting room. It has to be wood so I'm currently looking at the S-V range or a Solid Tech rack.

[MartinT]

Interestingly, and to my surprise, the Quadraspire S-V range will cost up more expensive than the Solid Tech (£295 per shelf and I need 3). Now how do I get to compare two different system racks? An impossible task! This is where we have to rely on subjective reviews and perceived quality, very unreliable sources of information.

[Marco]

Hi Martin,

I presume you're referring to the Soild-Tech Radius range? Both are two different types of equipment supports in terms of appearance (of course) and, most importantly, design principles. Like Quadraspire with the Reference acrylic and S-V range, though, the best audio performance from Solid-Tech comes from their 'Rack of Silence', not the Radius. But I realise it's because of aesthetic considerations that you're going for the Radius!

The questions I would ask are what is most important to you - sonic performance or looks? And how do you like music to be presented?

Both supports will deal with resonance and the storing of mass/energy (or not) in different ways and operate under the principles of either coupling or decoupling, thus impacting on the performance of the equipment used, and ultimately its presentation of the music.

My vote would go to the QS S-V because of its (generally) lower mass and principles of decoupling, although this effect is only fully realised with the Reference acrylic.

Marco.

[Filterlab]

Of course some components like big heavy supports whilst others prefer a light open stand. You'll never know which until you try both.

[MartinT]

My current rack system is Russ Andrews Torlyte, so I guess I subscribe to the light, non-energy-absorbing school of equipment support. My priority is definitely sound quality but within an envelope of good looks, if you see what I mean. I do want the rack shelves to be made of wood and not metal, glass or acrylic.

Yes, I do mean the Solid Tech Radius range. Price-wise, the ST and Quadraspire S-V ranges are close enough that I don't care about price. My problem is, how do they sound and which would be closer in sound to the Torlyte, which I do like?

[Marco]

Martin,


I guess I subscribe to the light, non-energy-absorbing school of equipment support.


If that's the case, go for the QS S-V. Its design principles are nearer to the above ideals than the Solid-Tech. However, as Rob says, the only way you will know for sure what works best with your equipment in your system is to find a dealer (or dealers) who stock both supports, take your kit along, and audition the supports in that context.

Or even better, if you have a good rapport with a particular dealer who stocks either or both supports ask him if you can borrow some demo stock to take home and audition. This is what I done when choosing between QS Reference and Naim Fraim years ago. I eventually ended up with Mana, but that's a whole different story! :)

Marco.