Suspension vs. non-suspension turntables???

Both types have their adherents, obviously, and there've been some interesting threads on the topic before. Search the archives and you'll find them.

When I chose my TT I was also unable to audition. I chose by following this (admittedly deductive) "logic":

- making a good suspension is both difficult and expensive (I had an inexpensive, suspended deck as a negative example)

- assume a price point (let's say < $10K)

- consider a table of each type at that price point

- the maker of the suspended table must dedicate a significant portion of his costs to designing, engineering, sourcing and building the suspension

- the maker of the non-suspended table dedicates virtually none of his costs to the suspension (just three cones or whatever)

- therefore, the maker of the non-suspended table has more resources available to optimize other critical elements like the bearing, motor, plinth and platter design and materials, etc.

Therefore, this hypothetical non-suspended table "should" outperform its similarly priced hypothetical rival, and will certainly be easier to set up and forget.

It seems likely that a non-suspended table should be more dynamic. The less the table moves laterally in response to energy from groove transients, the more of that energy will be transmitted to the cartridge generators. OTOH, a good suspension should isolate the stylus/groove interface from structure-borne and motor vibrations better. This would yield blacker backgrounds and a lower level of detail retrieval. Nonsuspended tables rely on higher mass and a mix of materials to meet this goal.

This is all I had to go on when I made my decision. I'm happy with the results on my Teres, but so are most Basis owners!

Gee, you waited until the very last line to works "Teres" into your post, Doug? I'm impressed! :-)

Just kidding, yours is a reasonable summation...

What do you have or plan for a TT stand? Is the floor concrete or framing?

As Dougdeacon said in so many words, both approaches have their good and not so good points. But, for instance, if you have an extreme case of the "house shakes" then that might lead one to think in terms of a suspended table.

I have both, an MMF 7 with a V15VxMR and a Basis 2001 with a Vector\Glider. (It's not really fair to compare them against each other.) Either design will work for me as my listening room is in a finished basement with a concrete floor and almost no traffic, unless you count the farmer's cows plodding around in the field behind my house. The Basis is setting on a reclaimed sewing machine cabinet, light but very sturdy. The MMF 7 will soon be sitting on much more substantial, heavily damped table as I move my non-suspended TT towards a Teres. I can say that the Basis with the Vector is very dynamic to me, almost scary. I have yet to hear a Teres or any other well made non-suspension table so I won't offer an opinion as to how much more dynamic one is over the other.

I'm just offering an example here. But as with everything in this hobby, YMMV.

Dan,
Good point about the floors, though I suppose a trampoline would challenge any table. I have a fairly springy wood floor. My old (cheap) suspended table on a tallish wood cabinet would skip if you just walked across the room. My Teres on a Salamander Synergy Triple 20 wouldn't skip if you dribbled a bowling ball next to it. Of course the Salamander + gear weighs nearly 400 pounds and it's supported on eight heavy-duty sorbothane hemispheres. I guess I have a suspended, non-suspended table. IOW, alot of it has to do with execution.

It sounds like we should trade tables for a month, just for fun. (You can keep the cows.)