What are the 2024 options for the 10 best AV cabinets?

In 2024, finding the 10 best AV cabinet options for audio racks, end tables, and nightstands involves comprehensive exploration. Begin by researching renowned home furniture and electronics retailers, including Best Buy, IKEA, or Wayfair, where a diverse array is typically available. Delve into customer reviews for insights on functionality and aesthetics. Explore specialized audio and furniture stores for unique, high-quality selections. Online platforms such as Amazon or dedicated AV equipment websites can provide additional choices. Prioritize features that align with your storage and style preferences. By consolidating information from various sources, you can pinpoint top AV cabinet options that seamlessly integrate with your audio and furniture setup, ensuring a well-informed decision in 2024.

1. Grand Prix Audio Monza equipment.

Best AV cabinet for solid oak table

What is the reason for this?

Many people would wonder about the latest Grand Prix Monza equipment rack, which starts at $19,000 for a four-tier,

PROS

CONS

42″-tall rack and goes up to $29,500 for my review sample,

which includes a double-width, four-tier, 42″-tall rack (two side-by-side stacks of four shelves each)

and two matchings Monza amp stands.

Why spend so much money on a solid oak table, built-in shelving, or Great Aunt Tillie’s antique cabinet when a solid oak table,

TOP 5 PAINT WALL COLORS THAT WOULD COMPLEMENT AUDIO RACKS CABINETS COLOR SCHEME

Paint Color	Brand	Price Range (per gallon)	Amazon Link	Sample Option (from Samplize.com)
Polaris Blue	Benjamin Moore	$45 – $70	Checkout Now!	Checkout Now!
Blue Dusk	Benjamin Moore	$45 – $70	Checkout Now!	Checkout Now!
Grenada Villa	Benjamin Moore	$45 – $70	Checkout Now!	Checkout Now!
Soulful Blue	Sherwin-Williams	$30 – $50	Checkout Now!	Checkout Now!
Capri	Sherwin-Williams	$30 – $50	Checkout Now!	Checkout Now!

built-in shelving or Great Aunt Tillie’s antique cabinet would suffice?

2. phono cartridge Miyajima Saboten L

Young people eager to see the Beatles on The Ed Sullivan Show in the early 1960s had to suffer through what seemed like an eternity of bad comedians,

bad puppet shows, and acrobats spinning dinner plates to the tune of Khachaturian’s Sabre Dance.

So here it is: Before I get into the Miyajima Saboten L phono cartridge, there’s something I forgot to mention in my April 2018 column about Zu Audio’s modification of the classic Denon DL-103 cartridge.

And, since this is knowledge I’ve had for almost a year, I’m guessing I left it out of my August 2017 column, which was dedicated to MusiKraft Audio’s own Denon DL-103 modification.

3. Turntable stand Archidee TNX.

The DL-103 is famous for having a spherical stylus, which is named after its round tip and circular footprint in the groove.

(This stylus profile is often referred to as conical.) In reality, all styli were spherical until the early 1960s, when the phono-cartridge industry invented the elliptical stylus,

a more costly and theoretically higher-performance alternative whose footprint approximates an ellipse and is oriented with its smallest radius points facing the groove sides.

The elliptical and other, more extreme style shapes that followed, such as the Line Touch, Super Fine Line, Vital, Replicant, Shibata, van den Hul, and Gyger, are all believed to more closely resemble the shape of a record-mastering lathe’s cutting stylus than the spherical. Many phonophiles embrace the lo

gic that the ideal stylus shape must be the most similar to that of the mastering deck’s cutting stylus—that is, the stylus used to slice away excess lacquer when making the groove—and therefore must be deemed superior to styli that are less similar.

That makes sense in some ways, but not in others.

On the one side, a chisel-like cutting stylus can carve a groove with modulations as small as its own smallest radius points—which are thought to be extremely small—while a playback stylus that is not equally tiny would find it difficult, if not impossible, to faithfully follow those minute bumps and wiggles.

As a result, the listener would miss out on overtones, ambiance, and all other high-frequency, low-amplitude data cut into the groove.

On the other hand, a cutting stylus is similar to a meat cleaver: it’s a great tool for turning sides of beef into steaks, but it’s not quite right for the dinner table.

In any case, contempt for the spherical stylus is popular in high-end audio, frequently allied with if not fuelled by a concern that it wears out grooves faster than other stylus types: another life-or-death debate.

The matter was all but settled for the late John Walton, a longtime employee of the Decca Record Company, Ltd., and a member in good standing of the Audio Engineering Society when he submitted a paper titled “Stylus Mass and Elliptical Points” to the AES in 1965.

(footnote 1). In it, he came to the following conclusion:

“At the moment, fitting an elliptical stylus to most pick-ups would cause more distortion, not less.”

He went on to say that “even where the [groove] modulation is lateral and the pinch distortion is then repeated by the stereo pick-up,” this is visible. These are fightin’ terms, as Yosemite Sam once wisely observed.

Walton’s observations were backed up by a mountain of data—as the British say, he could do the maths—and were preceded by his claim in a 1963 article (footnote 2

) that a stylus-tip radius of 0.0005″ was “best suited to the majority of average good pick-ups,” as well as his suggestion that,

in the same way that distortion rises as radius size shrinks to 0.0003″ and less, so does it begin to rise w when radius size

(Note that the above measurement equates to around 15 microns (15m, or 0.000015m)—the nominal stylus-tip spec for the EMT TSD 15, one of my reference cartridges.)

To be fair, Walton wrote in his 1965 paper that he claimed “there is an optimum relation between stylus radius and stylus mass,” implying that the elliptical tip—and, by extension, its descendants—were entirely devoid of merit.

Walton suggested that a smaller-radius stylus could provide low-distortion performance if its tip mass could be reduced below a certain point; data in both papers suggest 1mg as that threshold,

but Walton gave no indication if that was an effective (or inertial) tip mass modeled with the addition of other data—including the stiffness coefficient of the sprung cantilever, and possibly even a sprung cantilever stiffness coefficient.

(For reference, Ortofon CEO Leif Johannsen told me in a recent e-mail exchange that the actual mass of the stylus tips of current-production SPU cartridges with a nude spherical stylus is a low 0.1mg, and the stylus-tip mass for some of his high-end cartridge models is a very low 0.04mg!).

The Archie is set up using common sense.

The stainless-steel spikes are screwed into the frame as far as they can go, and the frame is then leveled by manipulating the four lower spikes.

(These have a hole in them, so the locking nut can be tightened with a wrench when they are kept in place.)

Once the frame is level and secure, the shelf is mounted on the top spikes, which are balanced to make it level while keeping as much of the spike’s threaded body in the bush as possible.

The turntable can now be mounted on the shelf after these spikes have been locked into place: it’s time to put on a song.

#93 Listening

Another term for disgruntled customers in every market who conflate praise for the latest with criticism of the old:

I always admire the best qualities of my Linn Sondek LP12 turntable (which isn’t the first LP12 I’ve owned) after 20 years.

I smile as I recall all of the albums I listened to during those two decades.

#66 Listening

Every now and then, the topic comes up: audio reviewers don’t write nearly enough negative reviews.

Since we give out a lot of As and Bs, one old attention-seeker on Audio Asylum referred to Stereophile and our would-be rivals as “happy face” magazines,

a joke in which he seemed to take great pride. Through that reasoning, our schools aren’t giving out nearly enough Fs,

believing that a certain proportion of underachievers is unavoidable in every community. (I have an idea for where they should start.)

4. Equipment rack Finite-Elemente Pagode Master Reference HD07

Every week or so, I hear about a new audio accessory accompanied by breathless reports of “you’ve got to hear for yourself” efficiency gains.

I dismiss the vast majority of these, and of those that I do notice, almost all of them wither when subjected to logical engineering study.

However, every now and then, one of these wonder widgets seems to find its way into my system.

The Master Reference includes all of the essentials, including proper structural geometry, suitable materials, and three layers of “mechanical diode” spikes.

But it was the tuning-fork-like “resonators” found in each of the shelf supports that piqued my friends’ interest.

“Sure—you do a modal [vibrational] analysis, then use these to suck up energy at the resonant frequencies,” they said immediately.

That’s what Finite-Elemente is about.

The range of the rack’s resonances is then noted after each rack is characterized and filled with typical gear.

The combination of resonators that best dampens the worst resonances is installed in the frame for each shelf based on these results.

FE’s toolkit is changing, but at the time of publication, they were combining six different types of resonators, tuned to absorb energy at frequencies ranging from 220Hz to 882Hz.

FE cites test results showing that the right combination of resonators can convert 90% of self-generated kinetic energy and 70% of applied kinetic energy to heat.

4. Ceraball, Cerapuc, and Cerabase Finite-Elemente

They chose the range of resonant frequencies to be discussed once again and then designed the most efficient conduit possible.

Vibrations will be transmitted, reflected, and absorbed by a structure,

and the parameters of that response will be determined by the materials and geometries used, as well as the characteristics of any interfaces.

Like a mechanical transmission line, FE chooses a mix of simple shapes and materials that enable them to predict and tailor the overall response.

Is it true that they work?

At least with components that had an onboard power supply, the Pagode Master Reference HD07 rack worked.

From the smallest line stage to huge two-chassis CD players, anything I tried sounded better on the FE rack than on my Bright Star or Merrill stand.

Their concentration, resolution, and dynamic precision all improved marginally but steadily, with phrases like “faster, cleaner dynamics” and “sharper, more dimensional images” peppering my listening remarks.

The recording of Delibes’ Lakmé (LPs, Seraphim SIC-6082) by Alain Lombard and the Paris Opéra-Comique is a good example.

The picture of soprano Mady Mesplé became clearer and more solid as I transferred each part onto the HD07 rack in turn—the VTL TL-7.5 line stage, the Sutherland Ph.D. phono stage, and finally the VPI HR-X turntable and tonearm.

Her vocal nuances were more noticeable, and I could hear the trailing edges of her phrases better.

The soundstage’s back and sides also opened up a little, and the room around the performers seemed to be more translucent.

The results were identical when I repeated the experiment with two separate digital systems and Dire Straits’ “Private Investigations” from Love Over Gold (CD, Warner Bros. 23728-2), but what I really found was the increase in information resolution.

As each part was transferred to the HD07, the background began to reveal more low-level detail.

One great example was the emerging existence of many separate, distinct effects around Mark Knopfler’s speaking voice; another was distinguishing the various echoes around the scuffing shoes traversing the stage.

None of these changes were dramatic or unexpected, but they were consistent and repeatable.

In terms of magnitude, placing a part on the HD07 rack was similar to demagnetizing a cartridge or cleaning all of my connectors, but more than what I hear after carefully redressing my cables or orienting the polarity of my power cords by ear.

Installing a set of Ceraball or Cerapuc feet under a component, on the other hand, was a major, jaw-dropping move.

The improvements were similar in terms of focus, clarity, resolution, and dynamic accuracy, but the magnitude was much greater.

It wasn’t like demagnetizing a cartridge by slipping a trio of Ceraballs under the VTL TL-7.5; it was more like upgrading to a very nice moving-coil cartridge.

And what about cable management? Forget it—replacing all of my freebie and Home Depot wire with a decent collection of high-end cables was a huge change.

5. Audio/video racks from OSAR Selway and Magruder

There appears to be a popular progression among audiophiles: First, they find that there is a better sound available than they have ever heard before,

so they purchase (hopefully!) better-sounding equipment—but upgrading quickly becomes prohibitively costly, despite the relentless desire to upgrade the device. So, what are your options?

6. Gibraltar’s Bright Star Audio Rack 2 equipment rack

“Form often follows function,” as American architect Louis Henri Sullivan put it (footnote 1), referring to the shift from a 19th-

century aesthetic-driven approach to a radical new 20th-century approach of starting with a building’s functions and letting the design flow from there.

7. Monaco Modular Component Isolation System by Grand Prix Audio

The fact that unregulated spurious vibration is one of the most serious risks to high-quality sound and video reproduction is no longer news.

Source components are difficult to separate from the omnipresent vibrations in the environment on their own.

The introduction of uncontrolled spuriae into the playback of LPs, CDs, SACDs, and DVDs has a negative and often catastrophic impact on the stylus’s or laser’s ability to do their almost-molecular-scale job accurately.

Microphonics and electronics are both vulnerable to vibration-induced headaches.

Guide to Purchasing

When remodeling your kitchen, choosing new cabinets can be a high cost, accounting for up to 40% of your total budget.

They set the tone for your kitchen’s design, and you’ll have them for a long time.

Isn’t there any pressure?

With so many demands on time and money, the new trend is to be more conservative. Cabinets in white are very common.

Cabinet models with clean lines and square corners, such as Shaker cabinetry, are less fussy and more streamlined.

Use this buying guide to aid your decision, but keep in mind that Consumer Reports does not currently test cabinets.

What’s in Store for You When It Comes to Shopping

Dovetail joints within the drawers used to be basically everything you wanted to tell high-end cabinets apart.

As more manufacturers offer premium features, including on low-end lines, the line between the two has blurred.

Consumer Reports’ previous cabinet tests demonstrated that you can have these and other once-exclusive features and still have shoddy construction.

You will save time and money by doing some preliminary research.

You’ll be able to tell the quality cabinets from the polished pretenders once you know where to look.

Research manufacturer and retail websites, then take a close look at store displays; once you know where to look, you’ll be able to tell the quality cabinets from the polished pretenders.

Trust your instincts.

Choose what you want for your kitchen to match the rest of your house.

Think about your budget.

Stock, semi-custom, and custom cabinets are the three styles of cabinets available.

(A side-by-side comparison can be found below.)

Stock cabinets are often sold pre-assembled at home centers, while Ikea and other stores offer unassembled models.

Colors and models are typically restricted in stock cabinets. Semi-custom cabinets include more design and configuration choices, allowing for a more precise fit in your kitchen.

Custom cabinets are the most costly choice, but they can have several additional features as well as your exact specifications.

Select a Look

Is it better to have a framed or a frameless picture? Framed cabinets consist of a box and a face frame to which the doors and drawers are attached. Frameless cabinets,

]also known as European-style cabinets, do away with the face frame and connect the doors and drawers to the cabinet box directly.

The style is more modern, and access to the interior is easier.

The lack of a face frame, on the other hand, can compromise rigidity.

Better manufacturers compensate by using a thicker box (for example, 3/4-inch plywood rather than 1/2-inch particleboard).

Choose a full-overlay door if you want the European look but still want a framed drawer.

It covers the entire face frame, or at least the majority of it.

Examine the Structure

Solid wood drawers with dovetail joinery, rather than stapled particleboard, full-extension drawer guides, rather than an integrated rail, and solid wood frames surrounding a solid wood or plywood panel,

rather than veneered particleboard or a medium-density fiberboard (MDF) panel, are all features of well-built cabinets.

Focus on Features

A pullout trash can and a built-in charging station are useful features that can raise the cost by more than 20%.

Simple access to your stand mixer or food processor is provided by a lift cabinet with a spring-loaded shelf that swings up and out.

Consider giving your old cabinets a new lease on life.

Consider repainting or refinishing your existing cabinets if they are plumb, square, and durable.

Remove doors and drawers, clean them with a degreasing agent and sandpaper, then prime and several top coats (or hire a pro for around $50 per door).

Refacing cabinets is also an option.

It includes removing the doors and drawers, as well as adding new veneers to the face frames and ends of framed units.

Each cabinet costs about $150.

Add pull-out racks, lazy Susans, and other affordable improvements to make old cabinets easier to use.

Install under-cabinet LED task lights as the finishing touch.

Save for Later

3Shares

10 Best av cabinet for audio racks