@neonknight Footers are quite interesting as a subject, as not many do footer rolling or try out tiered footer permutations.
I have done the above and continue to buy footers to continue with what I have generated, very attractive successes from.
I am a naked chassis with Baked Bean Tins as a Footer person; not much is done up to a particular purchase value with footers that seem to offer what is wanted.
A TT Plinth supported on a footer, or supported on multi-sub plinth tiers/multi tiers of footers, is affecting how end sound is perceived.
Many know how a Platter Mat exchange can affect the perception of what is present in an end sound, but not too many know how an under-the-TT support is able to affect end sound.
Typically, a TT user who moves on from the TT's supplied footer is working on the basis that their new choice is the betterment of the previous one in use. Placebo effect comes to mind.
Typically, the subsequent action when a change of footer is used is to live with it as the ongoing permanent set up. Not even a return to the older used footer once a familiarisation period is over with the replacement.
Sub Plinths and Footer assemblies are unique to each, as the overall ambient energies within the listening space, support structure, and how the support structure is being used, will create unique results. Ubiquitous outcomes for the results are not available.
I know enough today with the go to Analogue Source currently in use and a few older models used, with a particular Plinth material, which are historically used in the same ambient space on a support structure that has been unchanging, to know how to create a discernible trait in an end sound that enhances the desirable sonics presence. Attack - Coherence - Dynamics - Micro Dynamics - Envelope - Timbre - Tone are all able to be identified with a form. I put this discernible sonic down to the removal of smearing.
I know how to create a sonic with discernible smearing, and I also know how to create a sonic where smearing has been perceived as being substantially diminished, not gone, as that would be too much to ask.
Audio produced end sound takes on the form of being perceived as three-dimensional. Individual instruments or voices occupy distinct spaces within the soundstage without unwanted muddiness or harshness; I refer to these attractive sonic traits as being moved closer to the sound engineer's design for the recording.
I really can't inform anybody on what is going to work for them in their unique environment, with their selected structure and usage of that structure to support the TT. In relation to a Vinyl Source and Stylus interfacing with the Groove Modulus, an Audio Rack is simply a Teetering Tower. T' Towers are producing kinetic energy, where conversion to Mechanical Energy is also a constant. Mechanical Energy is transferring through the Rack, and the Stylus will be exposed to energy transfer.
Energy not created by the Groove Modulus but is an ambient energy, which is influencing the Stylus, is an adulterating energy, which corrupts the produced signal being sent to undergo processes of adding gain. A corrupted signal is, for me, a presence detectable within the end sounds' sonic, that I refer to as smearing.
What I can strongly suggest is that the Placebo effect will need to be equivalent to the Lottery numbers being picked; to create the attractive sonics referred to that can be created for being discernible in an end sound.
Such a journey of investigation must start somewhere, and your Thread and research undertaken outside of the Thread is that "somewhere", or definitely a development to the "somewhere" already embarked.
I can easily 'spew out' a list of individuals loaned a selection of support materials and how their experience had created profound changes to their wants for the support for an Analogue Source to be replayed. I can offer something different and can be substantiated on this forum.
A forum member who is one of a few who is easily recognised for knowing their thing, regarding a Vinyl Source replay. Not too long past made a change to how they used the Support Structure for their TT. The change was simply an already recognised Support Structure that I will suggest is without question a good choice for supporting a TT. Was treated with a few new measures, with the intent to brace the Support Structure. I assume to achieve an improved rigidity, see their report from their created Thread in the following:
- Rack Bracing -- Pushed rack right up against the wall (stud / drywall) with a 2’x2’x2" Auralex foam panel tightly wedged in between the top half of rack & wall. This SIGNIFICANTLY cleaned up rack oscillation from footfalls. I see a LOT of folks with nice turntables atop tower-style audio racks, and they could benefit greatly from this "hack". It is cheap & free; the only downside is you may need to reposition your rack. I learned about this "hack" by a couple comments buried in "turntable isolation" threads searched via google. This really CANNOT be overstated.
As always, I encourage getting on the bus "somewhere"; discovering experiences where betterment is to be attained is worthwhile encouraging, but where one gets off the bus is their choice; it's their Journey after all.