While on the one hand, I do not disagree with anything Ralph (Atma-sphere) wrote on this subject, I wonder why there are so many vinylphiles who swear by one or another metal mat, most typically copper ones. I own an SAEC SS300 metal mat, which I think is made of aluminum, and it too sounds great to my ears on any of 3 turntables where I have used it. But other than the SAEC, my own favorite mats are the Boston Audio Mat1 and Mat2, which do conform to the concept of maximizing energy transfer between the LP and the mat/platter. Just lately I have been messing with a comparison of the SAEC vs BA Mat2 on my Victor TT101 turntable, and I am surprised to discover that the SAEC may be my preference. Whereas, on my Technics SP10 Mk3, I prefer the Mat2. These are both high end vintage DD turntables, but one (the TT101) uses a coreless motor and a rather light platter, while the other (the Mk3) uses an iron core motor and a very heavy platter. It could be that the SAEC mat is acting as a shield against EMI from the TT101 motor, and that's the main reason why it may sound best. (The orientation of the magnet structure in the typical coreless turntable motor is such that EMI fields will radiate in the vertical direction; whereas in iron core tt motors, the radiation is more in the horizontal.) Perhaps that is also why so many other DD lovers prefer copper mats. So, mats are a complex issue. It may not be all about mechanical energy dissipation.