Was I just spanked or something? LOL
just a few months ago you were as enthusiastic about moleskin as you are now about mililskin, MM. Whatever.
Whatever? That's a lazy response. No answer to my direct question either. My response was / is meant to be an eye opener, and a reminder that norrowly based determinations should be expressed as being inconclusive, not all encompassing and definitive. Also, any comparison made by disparingly different materials / colors is ineffectual as far as being of any value beyond showing a gross difference.
smokarz comment at least owned up to the fact that there is more testing that needs to be done, and that the results therein will be the determining factor....not mere supposition and guesswork.
But somehow, for some it seems that things cannot change? Several months ago Milliskin wasn't even an option discussed. Since then, with my having personally observed and dealt with both varieties, and having seen the the difference, I am expressing not a guess or supposition, but a direct determination of Milliskin's visual improvement over Moleskin. And, by virtue of Milliskin's obvious reduction in density, when that is added it it's visual improvement, it would seem more that obvious that there should be a marked improvement over Moleskin as far as having better acoustical properties. However in that respect I have not made a single definitive statement about Milliskin being absolutely better, just that such would seem to be indicative as being so die to it's difference in density and weave.
What's happened as of late is that those who do testing have deigned to dismiss the Spandex option as being inferior to a Mfg AT "OR"
Non-AT option. Well bluntly stated...take that over to Screens. This is a Forum that focuses on true DIY options...not trying to make a concerted effort to dismiss them in favor of Mfg options.Absolutely, if such was the case that any aspect of performance of any DIY option was so abysmally poor that it was painful to watch / hear, it would be both a obligation and favor to everyone to make such known. But that is hardly the case here.
I cannot speak for everyone, but certainly I am not entrenched enough in any given DIY option to just sit back and accept it as being the only version...or option around. I constantly search for something better. be it paint or cloth, makes no difference. Of all the recent and not-so recent DIY screen apps, Spandex is among the easiest and most affordable routes to take, especially for those with higher Lumen PJs and who want Screens between 100" and 135". So I moved on...and away from suggesting Moleskin. The change amounted to a "Duh" moment at the instant I actually saw the difference. Audibly speaking, as I sated previously, that should have also improved, but I also stated that a determination of such still needed to be made.IF
a person wanted to use a Screen for AT, from the beginning it was also obvious that the performance envelop of even the Moleskin was sufficiently good enough to fill that need in a DIY 'er instance. Then a few actual tests were made, determinations provided as to the degree of it's relatively modest failings as far as AT performance, and a few...that is a relative "few" complained about loss of image brightness...even a degree of sharpness. Others...most all others noted the attenuation, and/or the loss of sharpness, corrected for such, and went on to be quite satisfied. Hmmmm....DIY'ers happy with a true DIY solution.
But still the less than optimal aspects became the primary focus of a few individuals, and the direction turned to making not just comparisons to Mfg options, but directly pointed references to, and recommendations to those said Mfg options. That's pure BS on this Forum, against the Rules, and at best amounts to a myopic viewpoint that is slanted toward Mfg Screens and/or materials.
Get with the DIY Ideal or don't....but don't work specifically against it on this Forum. How can that be more plainly put? And how can anyone beliving in DIY Screen making take offense in being told such?
Instead of taking a single instance of use or testing of a single variety of material, and then judging all such material's potential therein, I took it to another level, and the choice not only made good sense, at least visually speaking, it paid off handsomely. Acoustically, the same few who have done accurate, effective testing should also test Milliskin, or hold back any continuing condemnation of Spandex as a whole by only using the obviously thicker, less AT-oriented Moleskin as the only criteria for judgement.
If someone is happier with spending for a Mfg AT material or a Conventional Non-AT Mfg Screen, then fine....just take your commentary and judgements over to the Screens Forum where such belong.
But if anyone has any true interest in real, honest to goodness, DIY ideals, then continue testing...and using materials that represent those ideals.