Puck problem sorted . . . ?

[CJSF]

My fiddling’s of earlier in the week bugged me, I was convinced the weighted puck should have worked? . . . So I sat and enjoyed my music, but the mind kept turning over. Back to the days of mass loaded speaker stands and loads of '??????' . . .

The original puck weighted 8.7ozs, reduce the weight, too much mass . . . ? Reduced it to 6.3ozs, helped but I was still not happy. :? Then it struck me, I have used the broken bell principal in almost all of my hifi hardware . . . :bounce:

Breakfast over, a revisit to the shed, a hacksaw appropriately applied . . .

IT WORKS!!!

Lighter weight and broken bell, the new puck if anything has an even airier sound . . . it certainly does not have the slightly sat on sound of the earlier heavier version. More listening required . . . just to enjoy the music.

CJSF

 

[CJSF]

It may not look pretty, but it works:

 

[gbhsi1]

what a pucking result!

 

[Frank Harvey]

Puck yeah!

 

[gbhsi1]

Puck yeah!

ha ha!

 

[Lost Angeles]

This thread has the possibility of someone getting a slap on the wrist.

I think it's JUST ugly. Nothing else to say.

 

[CJSF]

This thread has the possibility of someone getting a slap on the wrist.

I think it's JUST ugly. Nothing else to say.

Most 'developments' LA look very agricultural at this stage. As I'm not going to go into production, it dose not bother me, in fact it has a roughness I quite like. The important point is, it works . . . Perhaps I'm better off not sharing my ideas, they will never be for any ones use but mine.

The idea was proving the concept with items I had to hand, less mass, broken bell, it works. I wonder what thought and testing went into the commercial puck's? Seen it many times in the speaker stand business, little or no development, plenty of copying mind . . . but if you dont understand the principals, all that shines is not 'gold' . . . :?

CJSF