Coupling or isolating floorstan. to the floor?

Best thing to do with heavy floostanding loudspeakers on the tile floor? Spikes vs Rubber feet. Whereis best place to buy spikes?
Assuming that you want to avoid damaging the tile floor, you would not want to use spikes, unless they are resting on top of the type of footers intended to go underneath spikes/cones (such as the ones made by Mitchell or Quadrapsire, sold by AudioAdvisor), or coins (pennies work OK, although quarters give you a bit more surface area to work with).

You could make a platform from MDF that sits on top of Vibrapods, or a similar isolator, and then place the speaker on top of the platform. Another alternative, which Vandersteen does with speaker stands from SoundAnchors, is to use round-headed machine bolts that screw into the holes provided for the spikes. About 12 years ago, I had a set of Vandy 2Ci's that were used on a tile floor, and I used the machine bolt method -- which seemed to work pretty well.

There is one other factor which may apply: is the tile floor laid on top of a suspended wood floor, or is it on top of a concrete slab floor? If you have a suspended wood floor (as I do in my house), the way you couple/isolate your speakers may change to overall tonal character of your system. You may want to experiment a bit and see which method, either isolation or coupling, yields the kind of overall tonal quality you want.
Thanks Sd, so the best thing is to buy both and experiment? This kind of trial can be quite expensive but will probably ensure more satisfiying results. Thanks again, and i'll check into AudioAdvisor and Vibrapods.
cs- vibrapods are pretty cheap (about $6/each x 3 x 2 spkrs). Using machine bolts instead of the spikes that typically come w/stands couldn't cost more $5 total.
Because a speaker cone is coupled to the cabinet, the cabinet will always vibrate to some extent with the cone. This causes a dissipation of energy which can result in loss of efficiency as well as phasing inaccuracy. So the idea is to hold the cabinet as rigid as possible so (ideally) all the work is done by the cone and none by the cabinet. Now it seems that vibrapods may hold a cabinet more rigidly than if it were standing unrestrained on the floor, but they cannot hold it as rigidly as spikes can. Am I missing something here?
Thanks for the comments. Do you have any insights into how & why Aurio MIB's are able to work under speakers? Because I (like you) believed that mechanically coupling the spkr cabinet to floor was of utmost importance.

I saw MIB's used (3 per spkr. seated between a 2" marble slab & the spkr. cabinet) Verity - Parcifals.

Sound was good - bass too. Room was a tiled (2nd floor. with a carpeted listening area). ...Not sure if the slabs were plain marble or had something under them - would've been thin if anything.
Awdeeofyle...interesting. I approached Verity with ideas for modifying their excellent adjustable huge spikes, and they warned me to NOT change the distance between the woofer and the floor, as bass response is tuned with that fixed 1/2 wavelength distance frequency in mind.
I use the stock spikes with great success, btw.
awdeeofyle: ya got me how the aurio's work (or even IF they work). I'm actually a skeptic of many of the tweaks on the market, including most isolation devices. Of course, I can respect someone's differing opinion. Having said that, I certainly do believe in SPIKING speakers for the reasons said. I can also imagine a theory as to how the Aurio's work although I cannot believe they work as well as spikes, particularly when efficiency is at issue.

Here's my theory: when speakers are flush on the floor, the cabinets move slightly in reaction to the cones moving. If the friction coefficient is not exactly the same for each speaker, each speaker will be affected slightly differently, causing a slight phase shift. Because the Aurio's are ultra low friction, and because they are machined with such low tolerances, any two speakers are more likely to vibrate in phase with eachother. How's that?
With the speakers on top of the Vibrapods, instead of the speakers moving in reaction to the cones, that energy is transfered to the Vibrapods which then dissipate that energy.
How's this for a theory on why bearings might work? Speaker cabinets flex, which is a bad thing. A cabinet might flex more if speaker excursions make it want to move but one of its surfaces is tied down than if the whole speaker is floating and free to move as a whole. In the latter case, you may be trading some inefficient movement of the speaker for lower cabinet distortion.

That is strictly for-fun armchair theorizing, but I think it's probably worth as much as all the other generalizations of why spikes, cones, V-pods, bladders, etc. work that I've heard. I think there are complex tradeoffs involved no matter what method you try, so you just have to see what works with your particular piece of equipment. Trying to decide which theory to believe in just ignores the reality of numerous interacting factors, and therefore doesn't seem productive -- that's the only conclusion I've been able to arrive at. I myself haven't tried bearings but would be happy to when time and $ allow.
Stuff the theory. Having tried spikes, cones, roller-bearings, Vibrapods extensively, the best answer IMO is to use brass spikes. With a hard floor you can use brass cups under the spikes. Steel spikes into brass cups is OK.

There have been times when I have thought Vibrapods were potentially beneficial, but eventually concluded that they were unmusical over a period of time, and usually created a narrow resonant peak depending on the weight of speaker and grade/no. of Vibrapod.

Vibrapods can sound beneficial if your system is otherwise tending to the harsh and shrill. Roller bearings can sound beneficial if your system is sounding muddy.

Just my experience and my ears.