Oops! Dogma demolition time!
"Adding a suspension beneath a non-suspended table" is exactly what devices like the Minus K do. Chris Brady and others have found that it provides major benefits beneath even the heaviest (unsuspended) tables and is markedly superior to the best 300+ lb. unsuspended stands. My poor man's equivalent (sorbothane hemispheres between our equipment rack and the floor) also add a suspension to a suspended table.
Yes, our Teres is ultimately sitting on a compliant suspension. So was your Galibier both times you brought it down. I trust you didn't hear any softening of dynamic impacts, murky bass or other effects attributed to lightly suspended tables. The trick is to do the suspending effectively, with awareness of certain unavoidable contradictions.
A. The main reason to suspend a TT is to isolate it from floorborne vibrations.
B. The main reason NOT to suspend a TT is to allow the table's mass to resist being displaced by big transients.
These goals are self contradictory, so we address each while trying to minimize impacts on the other.
In our setup the non-moving mass of an 80 lb. TT is pretty tightly coupled to the ~300 lb. mass of our equipment rack and other gear. Except for the tiny amount of movement allowed by the Stillpoints (which do slightly diminish dynamics, as you know), we effectively have a ~380 lb. plinth to resist transient-induced displacements. So far, so good.
To avoid floorborne vibrations, this entire mass is sitting on weight-specific compliant bits to create a tuned system. The compliant layer sees all ~380 lbs. as a single mass and has a resonance frequency of < 10 Hz. If I could afford a Minus-K large enough to suspend the entire rack I could get that down to around 2 Hz.
To get a ghostly low sound floor and big dynamics too, we must suspend, but not too much. The devil's in the details.
"Adding a suspension beneath a non-suspended table" is exactly what devices like the Minus K do. Chris Brady and others have found that it provides major benefits beneath even the heaviest (unsuspended) tables and is markedly superior to the best 300+ lb. unsuspended stands. My poor man's equivalent (sorbothane hemispheres between our equipment rack and the floor) also add a suspension to a suspended table.
Yes, our Teres is ultimately sitting on a compliant suspension. So was your Galibier both times you brought it down. I trust you didn't hear any softening of dynamic impacts, murky bass or other effects attributed to lightly suspended tables. The trick is to do the suspending effectively, with awareness of certain unavoidable contradictions.
A. The main reason to suspend a TT is to isolate it from floorborne vibrations.
B. The main reason NOT to suspend a TT is to allow the table's mass to resist being displaced by big transients.
These goals are self contradictory, so we address each while trying to minimize impacts on the other.
In our setup the non-moving mass of an 80 lb. TT is pretty tightly coupled to the ~300 lb. mass of our equipment rack and other gear. Except for the tiny amount of movement allowed by the Stillpoints (which do slightly diminish dynamics, as you know), we effectively have a ~380 lb. plinth to resist transient-induced displacements. So far, so good.
To avoid floorborne vibrations, this entire mass is sitting on weight-specific compliant bits to create a tuned system. The compliant layer sees all ~380 lbs. as a single mass and has a resonance frequency of < 10 Hz. If I could afford a Minus-K large enough to suspend the entire rack I could get that down to around 2 Hz.
To get a ghostly low sound floor and big dynamics too, we must suspend, but not too much. The devil's in the details.