That's good to hear Rob. Do you have the boards veneered as do WT or left au naturelle? Any plans to offer them commercially? I can see some baulking at the cost of the WT even though John saved the day regarding its suggested retail price though it would be nice to have a plan B. Maybe even for me should I be tempted by the 400
Of course what many may not be aware of is the complexity of the 400 table's design. Having now built one I can appreciate why it's not Quadraspire money. In a future post I will show some images of it dismantled.
In a nutshell it's a compression design whereby it has 4 full length rods travelling through the entire structure. Threaded into the inserts on the top and the same at the bottom where it is tightened to squeeze the whole assembly together. On the bottom are added the 4 black machined from ali feet assemblies each threaded to allow levelling and each having 3 ceramic ball bearings to act as decouplers. Smaller version on which resides under the 400 instead of the squash balls. Under 50kg of load, squashed would be apt.
On the subjunctive of balls and feet, I've replaced mine with Sorbothene spheres from the Internet. Google said product and the first hit is the one. They are made for Gerrard 401 users. They come in 3 different hardnesses, 30, 50 & 70 dura. 50 is the ones you want, just £20 a set so worth a try.
For me, they really tighten up the bass and make the whole presentation more engaging, far more so than the Auditorium A23 Homage mat which imho killed the deck. (I'll try it on the 400 but I doubt it'll be different) Tighter yes but no flow and the spacial info stripped. The spheres don't suffer the same, just remove some bloom and give real grip. And before anyone asks, I tied them in the shootout too but alas the 400 prevailed
I read somewhere a comment that suggested Bill liked the A23 but that's not what I've heard, I'll say no more but would be interested to know the source of that one.