Stinger Sound Dampener.

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Dats y eye use both... along wit egg foam behind the door speakers...

Closed cell egg foam, I hope.

I dont think it was ever in question that using a combo of products is a superior install method to simply using one product carte-blanche.

 

[subzero 5,000+ posts]

Acoustic foam. I got it from work (satelite-acoustic chamber) they use for testing.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Acoustic foam. I got it from work (satelite-acoustic chamber) they use for testing.

'Acoustic foam' could be either, since that's an incredibly generic term to use. But that makes it more likely to be closed cell, as almost all egg crate foam used for packaging is open cell, because its cheaper to produce than closed cell. And most egg crate foam is produces for packaging. You should make sure before you mount the stuff to your doors. If its closed cell, you're fine. But if its open cell, you are just asking for your doors to rust.

 

[Rudy 10+ year member]

If it's designed for acoustical applications it is very likely open cell since closed cell is a terrible absorber. Be a big problem inside doors.

 

[Skittles619 10+ year member]

Lemme know how the stinger deadender works out for ya, I have some sonic store credit laying around was thinking about picking some up.

 

[Anthony Collova 10+ year member]

Spray-ons do not have a constraining layer, for example.

Nor do they need one.

The viscosity and specific gravity of coatings CAN outperform a constraint layer damper depending on the strength of the foil on the CLD.

Another example of of this is the butyl that is used in most dampers. If you drop the temperature of the buty to about 40 degrees f. below zero, the foil will make absolutely no difference in damping, yet the vibration reduction will be the same as if trhe foil were there at room temperature (with the same amount of vibrational stress obviously)

So if you compare the hardness and elastomeric value of the butyl at -40 it is pretty close to the hardness of the acrylic coatings, at room temperature, killing the need for foil.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Nor do they need one.The viscosity and specific gravity of coatings CAN outperform a constraint layer damper depending on the strength of the foil on the CLD.

Another example of of this is the butyl that is used in most dampers. If you drop the temperature of the buty to about 40 degrees f. below zero, the foil will make absolutely no difference in damping, yet the vibration reduction will be the same as if trhe foil were there at room temperature (with the same amount of vibrational stress obviously)

So if you compare the hardness and elastomeric value of the butyl at -40 it is pretty close to the hardness of the acrylic coatings, at room temperature, killing the need for foil.

So, if we like sitting in our car and listening to music at a sustained -40 degrees, you are saying either type works equally well. Great to know.

And sure, with the ideal coating, and an extremely poor constraining layer on the mat, the coating "CAN" outperform the mat. Also great to know.

In the real world, where we aren't comparing the ideal coating to the worst possible mat, and we aren't using our stereo at -40 degrees, my comments still stand.

 

[Anthony Collova 10+ year member]

And your comments will still be wrong..

I am not saying that you should stick your car in a -40 degree garage. Anyone with half a brain could see that.

I am also not comparing the best coatings with the worst cld mats.

Apples to apples here when it comes to performance though.

Here are the facts

-40 degreee butyl will perform the same without a foil layer as room temperature butyl with a solid constraining layer do to the temperatures effect on the the hardness of the butyl.

Vibration coatings have the same hardness and elastomeric value at room temperature as -40 degree butyl does (w/o foil)

Therfore, vibration coatings at room termpature, will perform very close to constraint layer dampers, with foil at room temperature

Your idea that coatings work better as barrier is flawed as well. Sure, the will help since coatings and MLV are sol similar in formulation and weight (when applied thick enough) but without a decoupler, you don't get nearly as much airborne noise reduction, you will however get more than CLD mats since the complosition is so much different. This is where coatings have the edge over CLD Mats. Great vibration damping, plus the added benifit of some airborne noise reduction.

Before making your mind up, Go buy some noise coating and test it out for yourself

See how it compares to what you have used in the past

ANT

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

And your comments will still be wrong..
I am not saying that you should stick your car in a -40 degree garage. Anyone with half a brain could see that.

I am also not comparing the best coatings with the worst cld mats.

Apples to apples here when it comes to performance though.

Here are the facts

-40 degreee butyl will perform the same without a foil layer as room temperature butyl with a solid constraining layer do to the temperatures effect on the the hardness of the butyl.

Vibration coatings have the same hardness and elastomeric value at room temperature as -40 degree butyl does (w/o foil)

Therfore, vibration coatings at room termpature, will perform very close to constraint layer dampers, with foil at room temperature

Your idea that coatings work better as barrier is flawed as well. Sure, the will help since coatings and MLV are sol similar in formulation and weight (when applied thick enough) but without a decoupler, you don't get nearly as much airborne noise reduction, you will however get more than CLD mats since the complosition is so much different. This is where coatings have the edge over CLD Mats. Great vibration damping, plus the added benifit of some airborne noise reduction.

Before making your mind up, Go buy some noise coating and test it out for yourself

See how it compares to what you have used in the past

ANT

I was using spray-on coatings 15 years ago, I dont need to go buy them today to gain experience in their use. Maybe you've forgotten that you and I talked about a concrete mixture I was using a few years ago.
The problem is, how does the average guy tell a difference in the performance of deadener types in regards to viscoelastic energy transfer, air born noise reduction, etc... and then objectively compare that to a similar mat-type installation? The only real way to compare these products is in a laboratory, and you know it, which is another reason your insistence on me trying it myself is a hollow gesture. It also makes me curious where you get your facts for this discussion.

And maybe Im way off base here, but the coatings Ive used in the past (primarily Stinger and RF, but others including Spectrum) have dried to a solid state, virtually eliminating any elastic portion of the vicoelastic formula. Ive always understood spray-on coatings as using a stiffening property to alter panel resonances, not a viscoelastic action to combat air born noise.

Finally, if Im reading your reply correctly, you are telling us all to stop buying your mat products, and just buy Spectrum. So I must be misunderstanding your over all point, because I know you would never want to give that impression.

 

[Anthony Collova 10+ year member]

Ah.. I see the misunderstanding.. Even though they dry very hard, they are still elastomeric.

Hard to tell in some cases but even the hardest of elastmeric resins, is in fact elastomeric whether your or I can tell or not.

I am not suggesting than anyone buy one, or the other. The determining factor limited only by the installers preferred application method.

Well, than and the area of the car you want to put it on.

Most people would not reccomend using a foil backed mat on the underside of the car, whereas most elastomeric coatings will hold up just fine.

If I understand your logic, you say that you are not willing to compare a coating to a cld in person because:

1. you have used coatings before (15 years ago) and assume they have not changed

2. with out labaroatory test gear, the human ability to detect such differences would be negligable?

If that is the case, then it seems like testing in person would go one of two ways:

Either the comparison would be so close to tell that the user would not be able to determine a difference, in which case, MY statement of equal performance between the two type of materials stands (since most of use don't base our perception of noise reduction on the lab gear sitting next to us in the passenger seat.

Or, the difference would be so great that the obvious conclusion would be that one is better than the other, thus negating the requirement of the lab equipment all together.

One or the other, but in either case the issue is resolved.

I happen to have some Spectrum left over from the sale of the company if you want me to send it to you.

You can try it out, and get back to us with your findings.

Just PM me with a shipping address and I'll even pick up the freight!

ANT

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Ah.. I see the misunderstanding.. Even though they dry very hard, they are still elastomeric.Hard to tell in some cases but even the hardest of elastmeric resins, is in fact elastomeric whether your or I can tell or not.

I am not suggesting than anyone buy one, or the other. The determining factor limited only by the installers preferred application method.

Well, than and the area of the car you want to put it on.

Most people would not reccomend using a foil backed mat on the underside of the car, whereas most elastomeric coatings will hold up just fine.

If I understand your logic, you say that you are not willing to compare a coating to a cld in person because:

1. you have used coatings before (15 years ago) and assume they have not changed

2. with out labaroatory test gear, the human ability to detect such differences would be negligable?

If that is the case, then it seems like testing in person would go one of two ways:

Either the comparison would be so close to tell that the user would not be able to determine a difference, in which case, MY statement of equal performance between the two type of materials stands (since most of use don't base our perception of noise reduction on the lab gear sitting next to us in the passenger seat.

Or, the difference would be so great that the obvious conclusion would be that one is better than the other, thus negating the requirement of the lab equipment all together.

One or the other, but in either case the issue is resolved.

I happen to have some Spectrum left over from the sale of the company if you want me to send it to you.

You can try it out, and get back to us with your findings.

Just PM me with a shipping address and I'll even pick up the freight!

ANT

Im sure there is some elastic properties to a cured spray-on deadener, the question is how much. Your comments here suggest that a more rigid product works better, yet you fail to address that this is in direct conflict with the idea of these products using their elastomeric properties to absorb/reflect sound waves. I agree, its obvious that using a stiffening technique is a much more efficient means of altering panel resonances than relying on the elatomeric process to transfer sound waves into heat, but my original reply that started this debate discussed mass loading, not stiffening. Ive recommended many times that people, instead of using mat or even a spray-on deadener to get their roof to stop flexing, use fiberglass instead. High stiffening factor, relatively low mass (less than either product we are discussing here). My point is I understand about the difference between raising a panel's rez freq, and lowering it. I was discussing one, you are discussing the other. I believe this is a large source of our confusion and many of our differences of opinion here.

"If I understand your logic, you say that you are not willing to compare a coating to a cld in person because:

1. you have used coatings before (15 years ago) and assume they have not changed

2. with out labaroatory test gear, the human ability to detect such differences would be negligable?"

You understand me incorrectly. I said I was using spray-ons 15 years ago, I did not say I haven't used one since and assume they are still the same. Not only did I not say that, I explained that I have used Spectrum (were you making it 15 years ago? no) and even refreshed your memory to the fact I have my own coating recipe. So again, you acting as if I need to go out and buy one of these products before I have the experience worthy of discussing them, is a hollow attack on your part.

Where did I say differences would be negligible? I said testing it, and making an accurate comparison, for the average guy is virtually impossible. Say you go out and buy a few gallons of Spectrum and coat your car with it. Awesome. But what does that tell you about what would be different if you had used mat instead? Or maybe you suggest we coat half our cars with spectrum, and the other half with damplifier? Even if you found someone willing to do that, how would this average joe then go about measuring the differences in noise levels, while isolating the results to one side or the other of his vehicle? That really only leaves the rich stay-at-home dad who owns two identical cars, and is so curious that he is willing to use one product on one vehicle, and the other on the other. And he'd obviously then own some fairly sophisticated measuring equipment to accurately detail the results. Right Anthony? Come on, you are smarter than this, and we've debated back and forth for too many years for you to be pulling this 'try it for yourself' routine on me.

"One or the other, but in either case the issue is resolved."

See comments above.

"I happen to have some Spectrum left over from the sale of the company if you want me to send it to you.

You can try it out, and get back to us with your findings.

Just PM me with a shipping address and I'll even pick up the freight!"

That is a very generous offer, and is but one of the reasons I can debate you on a topic, even disagree with you, but still respect you. Not just that you'd give me some spectrum, but that you will back up your opinions to such an extreme. But, I still have some spectrum here myself (well not here, in my storage unit a few towns over). I think I have a gallon. Thank you for the offer anyway.

Cheers.