depth or area covered? - Gearslutz.com

Gearslutz.com

All Advertisers
Go Back   Gearslutz.com > The Forums > Studio building / acoustics > Bass traps, acoustic panels, foam etc


depth or area covered?

New Reply New Reply Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 19th April 2010   #1
Lives for gear
 
Pier's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Mexico city
Posts: 1,177

Thread Starter
depth or area covered?

So, what does absorb low frequencies better?

For the same number of acoustic panels, for example roxul rw60:

It's better having a trap of 8'' of acoustic material and 2'' gap of 2 feet width x 4 feet high? (less area but deeper)

Or having a trap of 4'' of acoustic material and 2'' gap of 2 feet width x 8 feet high? (more area but )
Pier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2010   #2
Lives for gear
 
avare's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2004
Location: Hamilton, On Canada
Posts: 3,697

Your examples are not practical alternatives acoustically. The low end absorption is controlled the most by the depth of the absorber overall. For 4" to 12" deep traps, use 4" RW60, with the balance of the trap being a gap.

Andre
__________________
Good studio building is 90% design and 10% construction.
avare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2010   #3
Lives for gear
 
Pier's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Mexico city
Posts: 1,177

Thread Starter
mmm Ok

So let's say I'm using 4'' of rw60, then making the gap of 4'' instead of 2'' would make a difference?
Pier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2010   #4
Gear addict
 
Mulmany's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2008
Location: Delaware
Posts: 305

Yes.

It has to do with the acoustic energy being greater the farther away from the wall you get (lows). Acoustic energy is at a minimum at a boundary (not good for a panel absorber placed on the wall) while the pressure is at a maximum at a boundary (good for a resonator).

PS. There are a lot of good threads on the topic.
__________________
Make it safe to do something unusual cause it might sound amazing.

Insanity Recordings - Facebook Profile - Mobile Recording, Mixing, Voice Overs, and Audio Post Production.

HTAV PROS - Entertainment Simplified - Custom Home Theater, Audio, Video, and Networking. http://www.htavpros.com
Mulmany is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2010   #5
Lives for gear
 
Pier's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Mexico city
Posts: 1,177

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulmany View Post
Yes.

It has to do with the acoustic energy being greater the farther away from the wall you get (lows). Acoustic energy is at a minimum at a boundary (not good for a panel absorber placed on the wall) while the pressure is at a maximum at a boundary (good for a resonator).

PS. There are a lot of good threads on the topic.
Thanks I will research that.

But isn't acoustic energy the same as pressure?
Pier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th April 2010   #6
SAC
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,622

Velocity is at its greatest at a distance of 1/4 wavelength (note that this position is not constant as it is relative to frequency).

Velocity is zero at a boundary surface, but pressure is greatest.

Porous absorption works by dissipating particle velocity as heat, and is thus most effective when located in regions of highest velocity..

Resonant absorbers work by dissipating pressure as heat.Thus resonant absorbers function most effectively in regions of highest pressure.

...hope that simplifies the relationships just a bit...
SAC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th April 2010   #7
Gear addict
 
Mulmany's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2008
Location: Delaware
Posts: 305

I always forget that the term is velocity. Its in my head it just does not always come out right.

Thanks SAC!
Mulmany is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th April 2010   #8
Lives for gear
 
Pier's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Mexico city
Posts: 1,177

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAC View Post
Velocity is at its greatest at a distance of 1/4 wavelength (note that this position is not constant as it is relative to frequency).

Velocity is zero at a boundary surface, but pressure is greatest.

Porous absorption works by dissipating particle velocity as heat, and is thus most effective when located in regions of highest velocity..

Resonant absorbers work by dissipating pressure as heat.Thus resonant absorbers function most effectively in regions of highest pressure.

...hope that simplifies the relationships just a bit...
1/4 of the wavelength? I'd say it's 1/2 as maximum velocity happens when pressure is 0.

If you say the wave starts when pressure is maximim/minimum, then maximum velocity happens at 1/4 and 3/4.

But, what happens when a wave hits a wall and bounces back?
Does it reset it's phase?
Or does it simply bounce with no phase distortion?
Pier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th April 2010   #9
SAC
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,622

Generally speaking, in a bounded space:

The velocity of a sound wave is greatest at odd ¼ (pi/2) wavelength multiples. Conversely the pressure is at a minimum at these points.

The velocity of a sound wave is at a minimum (0) at the boundary and at even multiples of ½ wavelength (pi). Conversely, the pressure is a maximum at these points.


For sound transmitted through a medium that encounters a boundary medium exhibiting a greater acoustical impedance, the wave reflection has no change in phase.

If the encountered boundary medium exhibits a lower acoustical impedance than the medium of transmission, the wave is reflected and the phase is reversed.
SAC is offline   Reply With Quote
New Reply New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread Thread starter Forum Replies Last Post
So i covered a song what now? drethe5th Music Business 20 9th January 2012 03:11 AM
R my bases covered ? Phatsax Low End Theory 3 7th January 2010 05:19 AM
audio driver bit depth vs. recording bit depth musaee So much gear, so little time! 2 31st December 2009 03:15 AM
If the Beatles covered Zeppelin zboy2854 So much gear, so little time! 2 8th May 2008 02:49 PM
I don't know what to say. YES gets covered. cajonezzz The Good News Channel 1 23rd July 2006 04:12 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:02 AM.

Home - Search Forum - Contact Us - Terms Of Use - Advertise on Gearslutz - All Advertisers - Archive - Top
 
 
Powered by vBulletin®
Gearslutz.com LTD - UK Company Number 7597610.
Registered Office - 35 Ballards Lane, London, N3 1XW.
Hosted by Nimbus Hosting.

SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.