The use of whole body vibration (WBV) is increasing with little attention given to the type of platform used. We have explored the differences in muscular and biodynamic responses during vertical (VV) and rotational (RV) WBV to determine the effect of different vibration directions and magnitudes. Twelve healthy males (mean±SEM: 32±2y, 177±2cm, 81±4kg) completed three 30s bouts of WBV (20, 25 and 30Hz; 3mm amplitude; interspersed with 2min seated rest) while performing isometric squats (30deg knee flexion) on a VV (Fitvibe) or RV (Galileo) platform with ethical approval. Triaxial accelerations were simultaneously recorded from the platform and 4 anatomical landmarks (Fig. 1). Surface electromyography (EMG) was recorded unilaterally from tibialis anterior (TA), lateral gastrocnemius (LG), peroneus longus (PL), vastus lateralis (VL), rectus femoris (RF), biceps femoris (BF) and gluteus maximus (GM). EMG root mean square amplitude, compared to squatting without WBV, and acceleration magnitude and transmission ratios (segment:platform) along vertical, medial-lateral (ML) and anterior-posterior (AP) axes were assessed for each condition. Data were analysed by 2 way repeated measures ANOVA. Acceleration magnitude along all axes and segments (except TT) was dependent on vibration type and frequency (Fig. 1, all p<0.05). Significant acceleration augmentation occurred at MM on both platforms (except for VV at 20Hz). Vertical accelerations were significantly attenuated at and above the TT on both platforms (except for RV at 20Hz). Significantly higher ML (except TT) and AP (except platform, ME and L5) accelerations were registered during RV (Fig. 1). ML accelerations were significantly attenuated above the TT during RV only. Attenuation of AP accelerations occurred above the ME on both platforms. Vibration increased EMG activity in all muscles (p<0.05) except TA and PL, with significant difference between RV and VV only in LG (388±94% & 200±34% respectively, p=0.048) and a strong tendency in RF (p=0.064). VL activity increased with vibration frequency to a greater degree during RV vs VV (156±8% vs 132±6% respectively, interaction effect, p=0.004). The general pattern of acceleration amplification in the foot and the gradual damping above this level was similar for both platforms. The large differences in accelerations between segments and across vibration frequency and type were not matched by changes in muscle activity, which was increased to a similar extent during RV and VV. Passive musculoskeletal mechanisms such as joint compliance may account for the different levels of damping observed across the range studied.