I’ve fallen prey to FOMO a couple times over the years and purchased isolation feet without really knowing what I was doing. First was a set of Stack feet. I mounted them to a 2” slab of walnut and rotated it through my simple system. I didn’t really perceive any difference on my tube amps. I’ll pretend I noticed an improvement on my DAC/Streamer, modest at best, but possibly there.

I watched a Jays Iyagi video explaining the science of testing some different feet, ultimately deliberating Tough Nuts to be most effective. I reluctantly bought a set and rotated another slab through my system with the same results. Possibly slightly improved on my streamer, yet modest at best.

I was recently organizing my audio parts boxes and found a set of cheap spring damper feet that came with a garage sale turntable that has long since come and gone. What the heck, I put them under my amp. I immediately noticed a huge improvement in low-mid articulation. Almost unbelievably, I tried this back and forth, in and out, as well as swapping back for the Tough Nuts and Stack platforms. Same results, the cheap springs made a noticeable difference, only with the tube amp.

I went to AI to discuss this, and AI described exactly what i experienced. Damping feet like the expensive ones I purchased may have very minor improvements on electronics and sources, no real effect on a class D like my sub amp, and my tube amps are far too heavy for the Tough Nut or Stack feet to effectively moderate vibrations back into the amp and tubes where it matters most. But the cheap spring feet are right in that sweet spot for weight and damping where the springs depress just enough to “float” the vibrations, like the suspension in your car, I guess.

Anyway, that’s my experience. Anyone else have a similar experience?

I've used all kinds of isolation feet over the years, I hear improvement, and differences. I really dislike the "spring" feet--resulting sound is smeary and artificial sounding for me in my system. My favorites have been StackAudio AUVA EQ feet, not coupled to a granite or any other type of platform, but directly under the chassis of the component itself. If you have the right "weight" Stack feet things really come together for my tastes. Next favorites are VooDoo Cable Iso-Pods, which are more than 90 percent "there" for me and almost neck to neck with Stack, just a bit brighter, which for me is not a good thing. My other favorites are no longer made, they are Herbie's Audio Lab Iso-Cups with the moss green "balls."

I use isolation feet under all components and the speakers in my main system--makes a cumulative and very positive difference for me. I also use PS Audio PowerBase platforms, and all components are off the floor on a Mapleshade Audio Version 3 audio rack, my digital components are also on maple platforms.

Another observation on the Stack AUVA footers. They come with a thin circle of material that can be placed on top of the footer between the component. Try with and without the thin circle. Some components I didn't notice a difference, others I did.

I gave up on the spring feet long before I got the SEWE300B and tried them on the small amps and preamps. Just don't like their presentation AT ALL. So much depends on so many factors--having components on the floor might yield very different results for instance. I have everything on racks and also platforms. I think a rack and a platform and then isolation feet is a different situation than some above. My home is a pier and beam expanded cottage originally built in 1918, hard wood floors, no carpet. For me the spring feet just are not the right fit. It may depend on what one listens to as well--I am mostly an acoustic instrument jazz listener. And cabling and electrical treatment differences can affect presentation.

My floor is brick on sand and the cabinet is solid teak on some Herbies things I got way back to put under the heavy legs. Can't recall what they were called, but I guess some sort of heavy weight fat dots with a sandwiched makeup. I recall I did not love them, not hearing much from them, but heard some minor improvements in resolution that seemed relatively even, so left them in place. But this cabinet is heavy! so would take mush out of about any compliant foot I suppose.

I have never tried a foot where I could not hear pretty notable differences, but my system/room has always been tuned to various levels of fast and resolving, in part because I use feet tuned by sound under everything. Many I have tried appear to sound differently based in part on one of the areas GS pointed to... how evenly or unevenly the foot tunes the frequency response and speeds of the component. Associated, I am really sensitive to differences based on the foot design being more "compliant" in design or less. And especially with feet using some, or a lot of compliant material, the weight of, or on, the component, can make a big difference. So far, I have never liked feet that are all compliant material, no matter how dense. But with some partially compliant feet, I have been able to mitigate imbalances, helping feet that were a little mushy sound more balanced.

Also, so far, finding the right placement by sound always makes a useful difference.

Along these lines, back in the day, Herbies isocups worked pretty well here compared to many, but still a little too "smoothing," I never loved them, the softening from the compliant cups feeling like smear to me. My favs for relative neutrality were the ones where the cup base looked like a translucent silicone sitting on a round steel piece, with a thin damping circle under the steel. I still use these under my older version Mac Mini, but the rest of my isocups are in a box somewhere. I never liked "tenderfeet" too soft and murky sounding for me even when careful to use the right density ones based on weight.

For low cost feet, I have had some luck with Chinese made spring feet under the right conditions (heavy power things), though I never loved them. But a platform version made by Archie (who used to be here on the forum) where he cut two pieces of MDF to fit the specific component (in my case the CSP3), drilled some seats near the outside edges to fit the springs he used, and sandwiched them between the MDF boards.... Along with a little tuning from feet I made for under the CSP3, and for under the platform, made from alternating layers of soundcoat and Herbies grungebuster pieces, I am still really impressed how "right" the CSP3 sounds.

Another low cost alternative, I find the feet with solid aluminum tops and bottoms separated by small balls that fit into slightly oversized depressions in the aluminum can be pretty transparent and neutral...that is, with some experimenting with removing or changing stock damping materials, in, under, or over the foot, and with different balls, ceramic, carbon steel, stainless steel, all sounding different. I imagine these, even well tuned, might seem "bright" to some folks, but I am not into what I think of as darkish and slowish "warmth" like many, to me warmth requiring a slight dark smooth richness without notable sacrifice to speed or resolution anywhere in the spectrum. To this end, tuned nicely, I have had pretty good luck with these low cost Chinese made feet, especially with lighter components getting pretty nice resolution and speed. That said, my PSAudio P5, which is heavy, sounds pretty good with these also, helping resolve and awaken some of the P5's design affectation of "smooth warmth," something I never seem to tolerate, no matter how skillful, designed in "analog" impressions so far always sounding unreal to me.

When I first tried Stack Auva EQs, which I grew to almost love using the "right" weight rating under my Torii, they were just a little too compliant for me. Even after extensive experimenting with placement, though close, they were too smooth and slow to a point of feeling smeared lower down, and nicely resolved, though maybe a little too clarifying up top by comparison. I liked a lot about them, they just did not quite fit within my pretty narrow tolerances these days. But quite good at fine detail mids up, I wanted to try mixing stiffer/less compliant Auva EQs with "correct" weight rated ones, and even try one correct, one for lighter things, and one for heavier, carefully placed under a component to see if I could get what I needed from a blend.

Not a "loom" type with cables, I prefer a mix of nicer resolving cables to tune the system over one dominant sound from a given designer's preferences. Finding this with caps and wires and other things also, mixing the right ones together sounding more complex and complete than any one of them to me, I thought the feet might work this way too with care of placement...placement in part based on how components tend to be uneven, largely due to transformer placement.

So I ordered several sets of Auva EQs designed for different weights. Finally, with mixing the different feet, and placement by weight and sound (for example, a three foot arrangement using a heavier rating for the single foot under the lighter side, and if appropriate, placing it so that the weight of the component or speaker is also being picked up a little more by the dual lighter rated feet under the heavier side), at first this still tended a little soft down lower to me, but quite close... Then, due to an order mixup, the Stack folks graciously sent me some extra 2s I think... so I had more room for mixing and matching, and ended up with a combination under my Torii, my DAC, and my speaker stands making the sound nicely balanced in speeds, resolution, space, and thus, musicality.

Anyway... I guess, as usual, narrowing down to decent things that are somewhat affordable, and experimenting always seems to work for me one way or another. And really, for me, as my cable making and component modification work has improved, feet are still important, but less than they once were. Starting with less vibration, balance and resolution issues, there is just less to solve!