///M5

Either I move fast, or don't have that far to go.

I am at work :D

I am at home

I am at work

That didn;t quite work

We should have a double chin smiley )

I am at home

Wow. Useful build there.

I usually drink while I work and when I have too much of a buzz to continue I relax. Forces me to quit otherwise I might go all night as I have a hard time stopping once I get going.

Have a few beers and then feel the motivation come

Nice.

I'd be you'd wager a lot.

delayaTOP

Your questions are good. I think the real answer is all of the above, but it makes it one step harder. Mass, area, thickness, geographical application, and cost are all variables that you could compare between. For me though the most important would be cost perhaps with some application thrown in. The harder portion of the setup is to insure that the excitation and response measurements are fair. Even getting consistent metal pieces that have the same modal and bending response isn't trivial. Once that portion is conquered the next is to insure that we equally excite every sample. There are three main ways to excite the sample: acoustic excitation, using a shaker, and striking it with a modal hammer. To do this acoustically I would really like to have a reverb chamber with equal sound levels throughout accross a certain frequency band and a window that the sample sits in. The downfall of acoustic excitation is that we can't measure the input force, this we can get around by using a shaker or modal hammer as it is possible to connect a force transducer to the tip of either device. It then becomes possible to calculate response out versus force in at all frequencies and give us the real affect of the dampening layers. I do know someone with a lab and potentially could have their company see it as a benefit to let me do the comparisons there; however, the cost and time involved if I had to rent the lab time would be really prohibitive. The modal hammer/shaker I have access to but would like to spend more time processing exactly how to do the tests before going down that road. I am also in a state of flux as my house is for sale and I know the W will freak if I attempt to start a project that leaves all sorts of things laying around in the house.

I should point out that I mean e-tards, if you are actually mentally challenged my comments do not apply.

God I hate retards!!!

Lets see it pull 2-4hz numbers and watch it make everyone puke. That is the only use I have for something like that, crowd control.

You missed the point completely. I wasn't ripping on your amp and you won't see me EVER use SQ to describe amps. My point was with that much power it is completely pointless to use the term SQ. Let me put it this way, with that much sub power you will have no SQ no matter what as your front stage will not seamlessly blend with your sub. By definition SQ is for a system, not a component and they cannot be separated and in your case you are going to have overpowering bass no matter what.

Lots of worse choices than that.

Personally I'd rather have an 8 and the NS-3 then a 7" driver and a tweet. The sparkle I can live without, but the midbass I cannot. Looking great!

Don't worry about the tweeters, worry about the mids. You can always turn your gains down.

Beings I dont have access to a Termlab "sigh" yes the enclosure specs came from Kicker, so ok I know where your going with this Jim heh Optimum enclosure specs from Kicker and from SI are two completely different beasts. I blame your box.

*cringes* Well, at least we know where you stand on the SQ/SPL thing. That's totally box dependent. I've seen both Mags and SX's do well in pure SPL installs, one may work better for your specific situation but that's something you'll have to see for yourself. To the OP, you are not looking for SQ at all. Stop pretending. As for your question, the one thing is for sure and that is you will have much better support from SI. RE is pretty much done in my book.

I'd look into following advice when you are given it.

I definitely wasn't trying to attack you, as not everyone in the world has access to a $350k scanning laser vibrometer. I happen to and thought once and for all we could actually compare the effectiveness of how the different materials work. In fact, I'd like to thank you for what you have done as by far it is the most useful piece of help for the enthusiast on the web when it comes to deadening. Regrettably while I can definitely test the damping characteristics, I can't test the adhesion. Leaving that out of the equation wouldn't be fair. I'd actually like to see some of the more standard humidity & temperature cycling tests the big 3 use on other parts but that would require a lab that I don't have at my disposal.