Hi @mulveling It is no secret on the Gon that I have spent a lot of time over the years producing structures to support equipment and speakers.
It was my loaning to a friend the AT616 Footers I continually utilise so they could experience suspended speakers, that made such an impression that they were prompted to try out an easier to acquire design, which become Townsend Bases and are now advocates of these. I am more very confident in suggesting them to be tried as I have first hand experiences of Townsend Bases in use and the benefits they create.
We will have shared similar ambitions and intent, but our environments used for setting up the System are quite different to the one in your report. I started out on Concrete Floors and Concrete Ceilings with Brick and Plaster Finished walls.
I am now using my Structures in an environment where there are Concrete Floors, Dry Wall Board Ceilings with Brick and Plaster finished walls.
I also share the confidence you have expressed in the use of a foam, I use it as a Tier Material in a range of densities and even have one that has proven over the past seven years to be chosen over other options for materials that have a similar structural property. This foam is a product that is substantially compressed and weighs in at approx' 700Kg a Cubic mtr. As an up to date outlook, It does look like from now on Densified Wood is likely to supersede this Compressed Foam material in the positions it has been used.
Many years ago I tried affordable footers, inclusive of Squash Balls, Spent Squash Balls collected from Sports Centres and Hockey Pucks (some will claim a Hockey Puck should be spent as well when used as a footer material). One other affordabe footer that might offer a further improvement is a Astronomers Tripod Footer, they are like a Hockey Puck but absorb energy that would cause the resolution of the Scopes reflections to be less sharp, due to energy transferral through the Tripod.
I have really enjoyed the learning to be had over many years of creating structures, there is most likely a off the shelf short cut, but it will most likely come with quite a few 0000's in the price tag. Such a short cut will not allow for such investigations into how certain materials interfaced in certain ways can change a perception of how the audible qualities are effected. There is also the strong possibility the structures produced are performing as a close match or share parity with the off the shelf product.
I will also mention Solid Tech 'Feet of Silence', used as a footer in direct contact with the Plinth of the TT in use, this footer has shown to be quite an attractive option in place of the AT 616. I am yet to discover a footer that has made the same impression as this one. There are designs of footer available that are variant of the FOS, and are much more affordable. One forum member who has contributed regularly to the Analog Section, has made it known in a previous post they use a variant design and are quite impressed with how they perform.
a