Gobo - thickness & density - diminishing returns at what point

coyotekells · 22nd September 2009

I'm going to build a few Gobo's for tracking purposes.

They will be used in an already treated room (super chunk corners and about 14 panels 6" deep on walls and ceiling)

The gobos are further tighten sound when tracking acoustic instruments, either alone, or for seperate between two players. Usually just the former though...

Acoustic guitar will be the most tracked instrument, but also things like strings and woodwinds.

Should I make my movable gobo panels 6" thick, or is 3" basically just as good?

Should I use 6lb density, or is 3lb just as good?

Glenn Kuras · 22nd September 2009

I would go with the 6" if you can. Either density is fine.

coyotekells · 22nd September 2009

Thanks.

I'll use the 3lb then, just to keep them a fraction lighter if there's no real difference.

SaSi_SiDi · 23rd September 2009

IIRC, there is a comparison chart for porous absorbers and absorbption by density. The lighter material (fluffy or foam) absorbs much less than denser material. And even denser material seems to absorb less than less dense material.

It has to do with open pores and airflow across them. Too loose and the viscous energy loss effect is minimal. Too dense and the pores start to diminish or become closed.

Or so I understand.

It appears that in every paper, book and discussion, the 3lb (or thereabouts) seems to be the preffered one.

22nd September 2009	#1
coyotekells Lives for gear Joined: Feb 2007 Location: Canada Posts: 1,351 Thread Starter	Gobo - thickness & density - diminishing returns at what point I'm going to build a few Gobo's for tracking purposes. They will be used in an already treated room (super chunk corners and about 14 panels 6" deep on walls and ceiling) The gobos are further tighten sound when tracking acoustic instruments, either alone, or for seperate between two players. Usually just the former though... Acoustic guitar will be the most tracked instrument, but also things like strings and woodwinds. Should I make my movable gobo panels 6" thick, or is 3" basically just as good? Should I use 6lb density, or is 3lb just as good? __________________ http://www.facebook.com/colakells

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Converters, Pres, Mics, & Diminishing Returns	jbone1313	So much gear, so little time!	13	17th May 2008 07:49 PM
Diminishing returns from very thick traps?	Implicit	Bass traps, acoustic panels, foam etc	13	10th March 2008 12:11 AM
diminishing returns on pre/comp	ardy77	High end	2	21st January 2006 07:16 PM
diminishing returns and buying your #1 go to eq.	Jonk	So much gear, so little time!	1	13th June 2005 07:20 PM
Point of diminishing returns (Speck vs. Focusrite)	Klaseed	So much gear, so little time!	4	9th May 2003 06:41 PM

22nd September 2009	#2
Glenn Kuras Gear Guru Joined: Jul 2005 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 11,995	I would go with the 6" if you can. Either density is fine.

23rd September 2009	#4
SaSi_SiDi Gear maniac Joined: Mar 2009 Location: Athens, Greece Posts: 172	IIRC, there is a comparison chart for porous absorbers and absorbption by density. The lighter material (fluffy or foam) absorbs much less than denser material. And even denser material seems to absorb less than less dense material. It has to do with open pores and airflow across them. Too loose and the viscous energy loss effect is minimal. Too dense and the pores start to diminish or become closed. Or so I understand. It appears that in every paper, book and discussion, the 3lb (or thereabouts) seems to be the preffered one.