Well, I recall a post about wheel suspension in oil vs. the spring in there needed along with it, so maybe you are referring to that ? But no single way I could take that as offending or anything. But point (still) is : you’d need to know what EXACTLY is going on, and your proposed solutions don’t provide that. And oh, mine may neither, but *then* it is only about using the inappropriate suspension material. But for example : silicon would not do it because it being too “stiff”. It will pass on the lower frequencies easily (not the high ones !).
Rubber band solution ? now the lower frequencies hammering ON to the device won’t be suspended in the device at all. It will (virtually) start to swing/bounce when the resonance is right (ferquency vs. possible moved mass). Not so when the device is suspended sufficiently and this is (in my “solution”) a combination of of upward force and moving mass (see your own “floating n the top” example wich also would not “work”).
If you take my given (forum) example here : http://www.vibratechtvd.com/innovation&technology.html of the crackshaft and how that for sure works, it is a. sort of proving that this thus works but b. tells totally nothing when the forces are not involved. And here (crackshaft) the forces are enourmous of course). And notice that these applications are applied under complete tower buildings ... (which also “proves” but again with (to me) unrelated forces.
 
What – on a side note – you may have missed is that this can be applied in neat format to make an ... aquarium. Just a cm or two larger than the NOS1, including a nice cover. No harm.
Still it must be in olive oil at least to make it not dangerous as such (is not indictive) and all I don’t know is how it will work out. So, water as such seemed a nice compromis to me for trialling because it will behave less “passing on” than olive oil up to concrete material (I mean like iron and such) which would not work at all. Investigate how sound waves travel to fluids vs concrete material and see how different that is ...
 
Even floating on air will not work because it will pass on at least LF waves directly. Why ? because of how much the air will be compressed. It goes towards “concrete” again. Only if the column of air is very large, then it can work.
Btw, you can only “see” how water works in my situation by means of pressing on the NOS1. Of course this is the other way around, but still not much difference. So, you will be able to press it but it needs a few Kg of pressure first before it starts to move. Moving mass that is ...
 
What remains for understandings are these :
- How enourmously these environmental forces impact on electronics (we all know that, but now combined with the below);
- How a floor at your best tip-toeing shows frequencies sky high in the ultra low frequencies (way under 20 Hz in my case);
- How ONLY a speaker I have here is influenced by that. How ? well, because it stupidly can show these lower frequencies.
Of course this is all related to my “Ambience” topic and how ambience can be way false because it is just my floor doing it. This, because of the LF the speaker exhibits in the first place which makes the floor move which influences at least the DAC (was my idea).
That in the mean time it theoreetically is so that just the higher frequencies influence electronics even more is ... well ... even more difficult because they will be hammering from “above” (on to the DAC) and now our precious footers come into play. They crazily “help”, right ? But how ? NOT because the DAC is detached from the floor because the HF’s don’t pring from there. So it must work the other way around : the HF’s let bounce the DAC on the backbouncing material (floor) and it isn’t damped. And the water does again ... It allows for pressing the DAC (in miniscule fashion of course) to let dive the DAC and the energy goes into the water (or footers !) while otherwise it would reflect the electronics (energy has to go somewhere and it stays in the internals).
 
Anyway ... I hope you now see that I see that there’s more to it, and that this solution can bring other things than existing ones which all work very differently.
Do notice that I “see” that a magnetic floating plate could bring the very same, but it would be far less tunable. But like with water, it could work anyway. But with magnets (holding the same poles opposite) you can “feel” what this needs. Air will never do this.
No matter what you exactly posted, I hope you can see that it will be hard to feel offended or anything unless you directly proove this is stupid and than *still* I would not be offended (why – a debunk could be useful). It would merely be the case that what you (all) write can be debunked fairly easily, like me asking for Leo’s solution which didn’t even exist. Understand ?
 
Best regards,
Peter
PS: You drive on elastic bands too : it may start to swing (which is bad for the drive) but it will lose it’svibrating energy in free air with the result of it sounding more silent. There’s no resonator anymore (like PC chassis or table). Same with speakers : they should be detached from the floor so their energy (of producing sound) won’t go into the floor as the huge resonator. This while half of the world will say that it is bad that the speaker catches its own “noise” from the floor and it will distort from that. But where does it begin ? right. The speaker itself. So for that reason it should be detached and the whole problem (from each direction) is solved. Still not, because the sound itself hammers upon the floor.
What did I say ? it is not so easy ?
:-)