[Weasel9992]

Originally Posted by Brainchild

I'm a fan of the sublime elegance of resonant absorbers.

Something tells me that the o.p.'s room has not been evaluated to the necessary level of detail to warrant any kind of tuned absorption, however. At the very least, the room should be fully measured first. I'm positive a 50Hz null is not the only problem with the room.

It's a safe bet that numerous resonators tuned to a variety of frequencies would be needed, eating up a lot of real estate in the process. Then, once all the problem low frequencies are targeted, there is still bound to be a lot of unevenness between resonant frequencies (and higher up the spectrum). To say nothing of imaging issues, etc., at higher frequencies. Porous absorption would go a long way to alleviate those problems.

On top of those considerations, resonant absorbers require precise craftsmanship in order to be even marginally effective. I personally see them as either a last-resort method for mopping up major bass problems, or part of a no-holds-barred full-scale integrated studio build/design.

Panel absorbers may make more sense, but they have to cover a large amount of area in order to be effective. They may not protrude a full 6" into the room (though probably not much less than that), but they will shrink the room dimensions on all sides if they're going to be adequate for significant bass correction.

Porous absorption is always a good idea for every small environment. It's also necessary regardless of whether you use tuned traps or not.

Very well put.

Frank