General Asylum: REVIEW: Grand Prix Audio Monaco Base Unit with Apex feet Rack by David Aiken

Model:	Monaco Base Unit with Apex feet
Category:	Rack
Suggested Retail Price:	Unknown
Description:	Modular rack system with optional footers
Manufacturer URL:	Grand Prix Audio
Manufacturer URL:	Grand Prix Audio

Review by David Aiken ( A ) on February 21, 2005 at 19:42:03
IP Address: 211.26.70.6

Add Your Review
for the Monaco Base Unit with Apex feet

Well, after writing enough comments about DIY isolation including about my own rack and isolation platform designs, here I am writing a review of a commercial product which I bought. That's a big step and the purchase decision deserves some explanation.

When I originally built/designed my isolation platforms and rack, I was living in a house with a suspended wooden floor. A bit under 3 years ago, we moved to a low set house built on a cement slab and quite a bit changed as a result. Then last year I bought a down-firing REL Storm III subwoofer and things changed again. Over much of the last 12 months I've been back to tweaking on isolation, especially due to the sub, and coming to the conclusion that I was doing a fair bit of 'tuning' but not actually getting to the point I wanted to be at. Also I was starting to contemplate a new amp with a bit more power. 2 factors drove the decision to buy the Monaco: first, the fact that I was going to have to get a new rack anyway if I replaced the amp because a new amp was most likely going to be a bit taller than my current one and therefore wouldn't fit in my rack, and secondly because each time I achieved a bit more with vibration control, I felt the need for a new amp a little less. The niggling problem was more a dynamics problem with a slight lack of transient repsponse rather than an outright lack of power to achieve suitable listening levels, and I was starting to seriously wonder whether solving the vibration issue would resolve the amp problem without the need to replace the existing amp which I was otherwise quite satisfied with.

So I decided to seriously revisit the vibration issue and the first thing I decided was that I didn't have the manual skills or the engineering knowledge to really be able to guarantee that I could do significantly better on my own than I had already done. At that point I started seriously considering Grand Prix Audio and the Monaco because I was impressed by the description of their engineering approach on their website, because it never seemed to get any less than superb reviews,and also because I liked the look of the finished product. There is no local dealer here in my city in Australia so I contacted the distributor somewhere at the other end of the continent, took a leap of faith, and ordered the Monaco base unit - 2 shelves only to accommodate my CDP and integrated amp. The tuner has been removed from my system for the time being, since it never got much use. The distributor also talked me into purchasing the Apex feet.

Because I ordered the 'short wheel base' version with a shallower shelf, my unit had to be ordered from the US so I ended up waiting for a few weeks. It duly arrived, was set up and the vertical columns filled with steel fill as a compromise in deference to Alvin Lloyd's comment that lead was more effective than sand and my own unwillingness to use lead because of the health issues associated with it. The CDP and amp were placed on it, a disc loaded, and 'play' pressed.

My first impressions, admittedly while the amp was still starting to warm up, were of a quite subtle drop in overall noise and a slight gain in clarity. Around about 3 tracks into Patricia Barber's 'Companion', the drummer did a hefty slam on the kick drum and I did a surprise take on the attack. I cycled back a few seconds to reply that bit and, yes, the attack and slam of the drum was better than I remembered. From there on in I became increasingly impressed with a gain in slam and transient response. A few other things also started becoming apparent - gains in clarity across the whole frequency spectrum, a bit more bass extension at one end and a bit more air at the other, improved definition and greater tonal differentiation of instruments and the players'/singers' inflections, a larger soundstage with more precise and solid imaging. Lots of noticeable improvements - quite a few more, and larger, improvements than I'd expected in fact, since I thought I'd done a reasonable job previously with my own approach. I finished up that night after playing quite a few discs feeling very impressed. I hadn't done my usual of playing selected tracks on a number of discs. I'd put on something, started to listen, and ended up listening to the whole disc each time. Always a very good sign.

The next afternoon I sat down to do some reading and listen to a bit of background music and put on the Jones girls - Norah and Rickie Lee - at low volume. Bad move. I kept getting distracted by them and the reading session was not as successful as I hoped. Listening at low volume to the right music was simply too damn seductive. I actually think I'm tending to listen to a lot of stuff a little more softly than I used to, simply because it's not necessary to turn the volume up as much in order to get things sounding great. When I do turn the volume up, however, and there are some discs which do demand 'a little volume' the music also sounds better at volume than it did before.

I listened to a few more discs after dinner that night and the experience changed again. I was listening at normal volume levels, a bit louder than during the afternoon, but I was no longer focussing on gains in different areas as I had the previous day. I was simply noticing that everything fitted together a lot better than previously and that the whole presentation simply sounded not only more cohesive, but just 'right' in some way that I'd never experienced before. The whole had become a bit more than the sum of the parts. I never got distracted by the system - it just disappeared with every disc - and I was left with the music. A friend who is quite familiar with my system who visited the next night got the same impression. That's the sort of result you really can't argue with, or say all that much about. It's easy to pick out particular aspects and go into depth about them, but it's hard to describe what's going on when things simply scream at you "this is right - this IS how it sounds".

There are two things I do want to pick out in a bit of detail, however. The first is that I noticed on pretty well everything that I played that here and there were notes where the volume and tonality of the singer or instrumentalist seemed different from what I was used to. In each case what was removed was a stress or slight increase in volume and, in each case, the new result was something that fitted quite perfectly into the overall flow of the music and the performer's interpretation. I came to realise that what was involved was the removal of a resonance at a particular frequency that was colouring just that note and providing a slight additional emphasis to it. At the same time the music as a whole seemed to be more rhythmically precise. My feeling is that the stress of those occasional resonant notes was being subconsciously interpreted by me as a rhythmic stress, after all one way a performer accentuates the beat is to put a bit more volume into the notes that fall on that beat. My feeling is that removal of the resonance restored the actual intended rhythmic flow which was no longer being pulled slightly off by these occasional resonances, though there may be something else involved. Whatever, pretty well everything I play has been rhythmically improved by the Monaco. Toe tapping music really gets your toes tapping with things sitting on the Monaco.

The second thing was that when you order a GPA rack, you specify the weights of your components and the sorbothane shelf dampers that are placed between the shelf and the carbon fibre frame are then supplied to suit those equipment weights. I got my weights wrong and the supplied dampers did not depress sufficiently to indicate correct loading. I ordered new dampers which duly arrived and replaced the initial set. I didn't know quite what to expect from the damper change since the masses were only wrong by a few pounds, but the insertion of the correct dampers tightened overall resolution and picked up on everything by a small but noticeable amount. While using dampers for gear weighing slightly more than mine gave extremely good results, the use of the correct dampers does definitely give a better result. I think that indicates a couple of things. Sorbothane definitely works better when loaded correctly and I suspect that many of the negative comments I've seen about sorbothane simply indicate that the sorbothane was not optimally loaded. Secondly, I think it shows that while the other aspects of the rack's design - the choice of materials and the way the rack is assembled - do an extremely good job of dealing with vibration on their own and yield a very impressive result if the wrong dampers are used, each aspect of the Monaco's design does seem intended to work with and complement the rest of the design. Getting the weights right and the correct loading on the sorbothane is important if you are going to extract the ultimate that this rack is capable of delivering.

My only other comment is on appearance which is pretty much classic modernist styling. I've seen a lot of people call it 'gorgeous' but I think I'd call it 'elegant'. It won't suit every room and it will definitely look out of place in some surroundings but it will fit right in and complement the right surroundings. It does so superbly well in my room.

Have a read of the design and engineering info on GPA's web site and you will come away convinced that Alvin Lloyd and his team are fanatics. I think they're extremely effective fanatics who have come up with a superbly successful product that really does do what it claims to do. I exchanged a few emails with Alvin about what to load the columns with and about a couple of other points and I also found him to be the consummate gentleman who was not only willing to be helpful and to provide information about his product, but who also was concerned to ensure that his customers do get the full benefit of the product he is selling. If the Monaco gets my 'seal of approval', Alvin also gets a personal one for himself as well, as does Steve Eleftheriadis of Reference Audio Visual, the Australian distributor. Great products are nice, but it's also extremely nice to deal with friendly and helpful people as well.

And after several weeks of listening now, I do think that the Monaco made more than a big enough contribution to the dynamics of my system to alleve my concerns about my amp's dynamic shortcomings. While the Monaco may be expensive, it's also extremely cost effective. I can't think of any way of demonstrating to someone that vibration does have quite pronounced adverse affects on the sound of their system, or that their existing choice of components is capable of delivering performance significantly better than they realise, than by simply shifting their gear from whatever it's currently sitting on to a Monaco unit. The results aren't in the least subtle, and they do make a huge difference to your listening enjoyment.

David Aiken

Product Weakness: Addictive
Product Strengths: Really does provide broad band isolation

Associated Equipment for this Review:
Amplifier:	ME 240 integrated amp
Preamplifier (or None if Integrated):	None
Sources (CDP/Turntable):	Arcam FMJ 33
Speakers:	Dynaudio Contour 1.3 SE, REL Storm III subwoofer
Cables/Interconnects:	Kimber KS 1011 interconnect, Kimber Monocle XL speaker cable
Music Used (Genre/Selections):	jazz, classical, world, various popular
Room Comments/Treatments:	See my system details
Time Period/Length of Audition:	3 weeks
Other (Power Conditioner etc.):	See my system details
Type of Audition/Review:	Product Owner

Product Weakness:	Addictive
Product Strengths:	Really does provide broad band isolation