Would there be any benefit to "lifting" a Devialet 200 from the rack by placing some higher footers underneath the unit for additional air flow?
I'm really not concerned about isolation but more for air flow in order to keep the unit running cooler.
Anyone try this?
Mine is at least 3in higher, and temperature is hovering around mid 30s. Not sure if this is the reason, though.
从我的 iPhone 发送，使用 Tapatalk
(22-Apr-2016, 16:25)samurai7595 Wrote: [ -> ]Would there be any benefit to "lifting" a Devialet 200 from the rack by placing some higher footers underneath the unit for additional air flow?
I'm really not concerned about isolation but more for air flow in order to keep the unit running cooler.
Anyone try this?
There is no reason not to. I found some fairly firm 1" rubber foam discs to put under mine. A little isolation and a little more air flow. $10
I have the units elevated on vibrapods with cones with a 1-2 degree difference on standby - maybe better SQ but hard to say . . we'll see!
IIRC, @
Manoet determined that airflow under his Devialet did not affect temperature. This was when he was performing his monumental "tweak" aimed at reducing temperature and increasing sound quality.
The only way to really provide sufficient cooling would probably be by constructing a rack/bench/shelf with built in liquid cooling, using a top metal surface (working as a heat sink absorbing heat from the amp) for the Devialet to sit on. There are plenty of good systems for cooling on the market today for use with DIY PCs.
It's unclear however, as pointed out earlier, if this would have any sonic benefits but with the D900 the Devialet team has invested a lot of effort to bring down operating temperatures so there should be SOME benefit to be had from this, hypothetically at least...
While I can't remember specifics I would've thought I might have found at least 'slight' improvements. However, it must be remembered that my 200 is convection-cooled with inlet/outlet airways which will necessarily be VASTLY more effective than an outta-the-box non-ventilated sealed enclosure! Also I remember specifically it cools dramatically better wall-mounted rather than surface mounted. I specifically remember that the wall-mounting plate responded significantly better temp-wise to having a significant (+ or - 100mm) tall swath of acrylic material removed left-to-right as well as having much of the acrylic that was covering my cold-air intakes 'unshrouded', ie; removed from the cold-air intake path. But all of this is remembered perfectly as written in the original temp-testing posts with pics.
(25-Apr-2016, 19:19)Manoet Wrote: [ -> ]While I can't remember specifics I would've thought I might have found at least 'slight' improvements. However, it must be remembered that my 200 is convection-cooled with inlet/outlet airways which will necessarily be VASTLY more effective than an outta-the-box non-ventilated sealed enclosure! Also I remember specifically it cools dramatically better wall-mounted rather than surface mounted. I specifically remember that the wall-mounting plate responded significantly better temp-wise to having a significant (+ or - 100mm) tall swath of acrylic material removed left-to-right as well as having much of the acrylic that was covering my cold-air intakes 'unshrouded', ie; removed from the cold-air intake path. But all of this is remembered perfectly as written in the original temp-testing posts with pics.
Thanks for the clarification.
I can confirm that wall mounting gives lower temperatures.
One of my Ds is wall mounted, the other on the rack, unelevated.
Wall mounted: A 53 D 43 Supply 47
Rack mounted: A 57 D 49 Supply 52
(26-Apr-2016, 15:59)Axel Wrote: [ -> ]I can confirm that wall mounting gives lower temperatures.
One of my Ds is wall mounted, the other on the rack, unelevated.
Wall mounted: A 53 D 43 Supply 47
Rack mounted: A 57 D 49 Supply 52
Interesting. I wonder if a slight tilt would provide most of the benefit, or put another way how vertical does it need to be for the temp to drop?