Reading about some users’ frustrations with setting up their NAIM racks- balls falling out of cups and the like, got me thinking.
I experimented with a variety of extra supports under my boxes to see if "improvements’ could be found in SQ.
During the process I discovered that the design intention of the Isoblue racking in maximising SQ was to “ground” any vibration present in the equipment and so my blocking this functionality with isolating feet actually degraded the SQ.
The design of the NAIM support racking; glass, balls and cups and so on seems to me to follow the opposite design philosophy to Isoblue - it is trying to effect maximum isolation from the environment, am I right?
Has anybody ever done a direct performance comparison between the two racking systems? I’d be impressed to learn that the cheaper Isoblue and it’s alternative process was as effective as the NAIM, saving the user not just cash but also the patience-testing complications of it’s setup.
I might be misguided but I’m thinking that the likes of Roy George have probably employed more engineering expertise and technical knowledge than the designer of Isoblue…
Before that I had Sound Factory Tripods - actually my turntable stand still is. The Tripods did look a bit like Fraim does, but rather … simpler. Three legs, each adjustable, with each level sitting on the one below.
I think I read somewhere, that the design of Isoblue was derived from or influenced by the Tripods…? Not sure about that.
Though if you look into the company history you will see the surname Kennedy; and from there you will realise the family connections to both Naim and Chord cables.
this is a rather contentious area so i apologise in advance for a purely personal opinion. i have isoblue , but i have to admit that was based on aesthetic - i just find fraim too blingy - it draws attention to itself while isoblue disappears into the background in my listening room. as far as i am aware there is no real scientific basis for stand design (just rather vague ‘obvious’ principals) and no agreed measurement methodology - rather like speaker spikes which were apparently supposed to isolate but according to townsend achieve the exact opposite.
Have auditioned Fraim, Hutter, Isoblue and Fraim Lite. I also previously owned Sound Organisation Tripods. The risk is that you overthink it. The only questions to be answered are “what does the music sound like now and is it domestically acceptable?”
Your mileage may vary but, for me…
Hutter
Isoblue
Fraim Lite
Fraim
The differences were not huge but nevertheless they veered between “I like that. It is engaging.” and “I do not like that”.
Very simplistically stuff with glass in it sounds like stuff with glass in it whilst purely wooden stuff sounds as you’d expect also.
In my list Isoblue and Hutter were probably so close it didn’t matter. The Hutter was a tad more closed in but it was also more domestically acceptable. The Fraim Lite edges ahead of Fraim because I didn’t like the sound of either but the Lite is far less hassle to set up and maintain if you’ve a visual impairment or indeed one of many physical health issues and I want to listen to music not mess about with balls.
Still got our Sound Factory Tripods in the loft along with a Sound Organisation turntable rack. They both worked well, especially the Sound Org rack. We needed extra shelf space though and we wanted compact so went Atacama (which we think looks great & that matters). I expect Fraim is great but its side to side size is far too big for our living room.
Yes, your memory is clearly much better than mine.
Memory can obviously play tricks but I’m of the view that my Naim kit never sounded better than it did on those. I still have tow of the MDF shelves. The offspring was going to use one as a guitar pedal board. The other acts as nice buffer between the ancient Toshiba DVD and Sky Q which sit atop our fireplace.
I had my non Naim kit, then Uniti Qute and then 200 equipment on sturdy furniture, then on a marble slab on half squash balls. I then used an Audiophile BASE but the difference was not particularly significant.
When I put my 300 on the BASE rather than the furniture, the improvement was obvious. Later, moving it to Fraim was another improvement, but not by as much as from the furniture to the BASE. My CDS3 on Fraim was significantly better than on the BASE.
500 series is where I feel synergy with the design of Fraim really comes into its own. It didn’t sound nearly so good on the BASE (which is now used for Innuos Statement, PN and headphone amp).
In a nutshell, I would say Uniti and 200 kit is fine on any sturdy furniture, mid range kit rewards a decent quality support but doesn’t necessarily need Fraim money to be spent, and 300-500 (and possibly anything with a suspended sub chassis) is worth putting on a Fraim, or another good quality rack following similar design principles to Fraim. I think the more optimised your system is, the more you might notice what Fraim can provide…though I have never been enamoured with it aesthetically.
In my experience the sonic improvements/differences found among the different premier hifi racks and stands are largely overstated and exist in the realm of expectation bias. The Fraim is a good looking rack and if you have the space and don’t mind spending the extra $ it’s a no brainer for Naim kit. I moved my Fraim on mostly b/c I wanted something that takes up less space. I reverted to my trusty ole Sound Org rack I’ve owned since the 90s and prefer the understated looks compared to the Fraim. I’ve always liked the looks and simplicity of the Isoblue rack but could never source one here in the states.
Over my many years in hifi I’ve had quite a few different racks. Some work really well and some are just okay. I do agree with mikehughescq that anything involving glass tends to sound a bit zingy and anything involving wood tends to have a certain woody character. However, if you’ve ever tried a well setup Mana table I do find that it’s pretty characterless. I had a bamboo Quadraspire for quite a while and really liked what it did. Great midrange but a bit limited on the frequency extremes. Moving to a full 500 system and it started to show the cracks a bit more, so I tried a Fraim. In fact I tried a Fraim three times and still preferred the Quadraspire. That was until the shop sent one of the guys round to tighten my Fraim properly. Once that was done it was miles better that my Qudraspire and sounded very ‘Mana’ like, toneless and neutral. I do think I can still hear that glass ‘zing’ but Only when I turn the system up to absolutely ridiculous levels.
Until recently I had my source (NDX 2), my preamp (NAC252) and power amp (NAP250 DR) on an Isoblue rack, and I had my Naim power supplies (XPS DR, SuperCap DR) on a Quadraspire SVT Performance rack.
A used Naim Fraim became available, so I purchased it.
My current set-up has the Naim source, preamp and power amp on the Fraim and the Naim power supplies on the Isoblue rack. (I sold the Quadraspire.)
In my opinion the change was significant. The soundstage opened up, transience became faster and imaging became more precise.
Compared to the new set-up, my old set-up sounded restrained and boxed in.
My NAC252 definitely likes the top shelf of the Fraim.
I have a Sound Factory Tripod that I acquired in the early 90s. It’s set up in two stacks. It got good reviews at the time - the late Malcolm Steward was a fan. Its main appeal to me was (and is) its compactness, as well as its modularity.
To my ears, though it sounded decent, there was always a slightly crude quality to the presentation, and I’ve done multiple rounds of “upgrades” to it to try to address this. I added sheets of toughened glass to each level, sitting on the world’s smallest “ball nutters,” and I replaced the neoprene pads that the original boards sit on with equally tiny balls that rest in the pre-drilled screw holes. More recently, inspired by Xanthe’s thread from 2020, I upgraded the ball nutters to a combination of silicon carbide balls and dimpled brass discs. I also replaced the bottom levels’ spikes with Track Audio spikes, resting in Chord Silent Mount titanium shoes.
Each round of upgrades has improved the sound to a worthwhile degree, cleaning it up and improving engagement and detail without taking anything away, to the point where I no longer worry about the quality of support. That said, the compactness that I like so much is a problem for cable dressing, and had I been aware of the importance of that, I might have gone about the whole process differently. Or maybe not; most of us make real-word compromises, and my system is in the family living room, and none of us, myself included, want the hi-fi to be any more intrusive than it absolutely needs to be.
If I were starting over I would certainly be tempted by Fraim - most seem to regard it as state of the art - but the elegance and (yes) compactness of Isoblue would be hard to pass up, especially as many of the latter’s fans report it to be very close in SQ to the Fraim.
