Okay I watched it. A few things:
1. What he says (the physics) is correct. Applying it to a specific set of drums, based on something he read 40 years ago, gives him plenty of time to form his argument. Sounding better is personal opinion, not physics.
2. If Steve Smith recorded his drums in a carpeted room the size of a closet and shaped like a cone they would sound like the southbound end of a northbound anything. The room matters.
An explination of something I feel he did poorly:
The vibrations dont bleed off to the thin walled shell and cause them to vibrate, thus robbing the head of power. That is a horrible explination.
The stick inputs 100% energy into the drum upon striking. That energy must be distributed amongst everything that moves. If only the head moves, it gets 100% of that energy. If the shell moves also, some of the energy of the head is transferred to the shell, thus lowering the amount of energy the head uses but increasing the amount of energy the shell uses. It might be something like 70/30% (made up for arguments sake), but the output is still 100%. Yes I know there will be residual losses, but let's not overly complicate an already overly complicated idea.
Now that's out of the way...
My early 70s heavy ass Pearl 16/18 floor toms are the best sounding floors I've ever had. They "sustain" for days and are loud. They also have fiberglass lined insides.
My 10" tom sounds better in a snare stand than on its suspension mount. I think it's too small/light for the mount to actually do anything but choke it.