"batt's" for bass trap?

[LSP]

I'm already using some insulation rolls (stacked) for corner bass traps. Anything wrong with using some of the "batts" that I see in Lowes?

They are roughly the same dimensions as stacking 3 or so rolls together(4' or so high).

Thanks

[tINY]

Which "batts"???

I haven't seen anything at HD that's suitable for acoustic absorbtion - except compressed rolls of pink flufly as bass traps.




-tINY

[LSP]

Originally Posted by tINY

Which "batts"???

I haven't seen anything at HD that's suitable for acoustic absorbtion - except compressed rolls of pink flufly as bass traps.




-tINY

That sounds like what I'm talking about. They appear to be a number of "batts" all wrapped up in plastic. Very similar in size to a few of the rolls stacked one on top of another.

[theothermonomer]

I believe if you take their dimensions and weigh them you'll find that they are less than half the density of the compressed rolls. Mine were just under 2-lbs/cu-ft if I remember right, compared to ~4.7-lbs/cu-ft for the rolls I also used. Though those folded batts can be easier to use for the wall-ceiling junctions, I'd suggest sticking with the compressed rolls if possible. I personally strive for something around 4-lbs/cu-ft in density... kraft faced.

[SAC]

For stacked of rolled up rolls in the corner you are fine.

But if interested in trying to compress unrolled rolls/batts for panels, I would suggest against it. (And if I am misunderstanding your intent, just ignore this...)

For general panels I might suggest the extra work isn't generally worth the effort.

The plastic encased insulation at HD/Lowes is not compressed. Oh, it may be a bit compressed in the packaging roll, but it is NOT compressed by the plastic casing - as when unrolled it is NOT designed to be compressed for thermal insulation! Quite the opposite. It is intentionally designed for maximum loft and the plastic covering does not constrain that.

You can try compressing it, but in a panel application you will be hard pressed (sorry for the pun) to compress it suitably with chicken wire, hardware cloth or cloth considering the additional stress that will be placed upon the frame. And you will have a heck of a time avoiding the panel looking like its pregnant as the compression will not be evenly distributed.

So, while you are welcome to try to compress it suitably - as you also try to calculate the amount of compression suitable for optimal use - before its over my guess is that you will wish you simply bought the semi-rigid format that is manufactured for precisely the type of use required by panelized use.

Sometimes the extra 'sweat equity ' is worth the effort, but in this case I would suggest that the semi-rigid format is not only MUCH easier to work with, but it will look a million percent better as well. And you can not the panels out very quickly as well - unlike the hassle you will encounter with the form designed for maximum loft.

[LSP]

Originally Posted by theothermonomer

I believe if you take their dimensions and weigh them you'll find that they are less than half the density of the compressed rolls. Mine were just under 2-lbs/cu-ft if I remember right, compared to ~4.7-lbs/cu-ft for the rolls. Though those folded batts can be easier to use for the wall-ceiling junctions, I'd suggest sticking with the compressed rolls if possible. I personally strive for something around 4-lbs/cu-ft in density... kraft faced.

Well, I've already purchased 6 more of the batts wrapped in plastic. I use 2 per corner, stacked on top of each other. They have a larger diameter, but, as you suggested, I can see that they aren't as tightly compressed as the rolls are.

Depot and Lowes don't carry the owens corning rolls anymore, and the brand they do carry doesn't appear to be as tightly rolled, and more importantly for me, they are each shorter in height, yet larger in circumference. This would mean I would have to purchase more of them to reach my 8' ceiling height.

I like to wrap my corner traps in muslin cloth for aesthetic purposes, and the owens corning rolls are so tightly rolled, that they make a nice looking trap.

So, I could always take back all the batts I purchased from Lowes, IF I can find a dealer that carries the rolls at a reasonable price.

I currenlty have one corner with the stacked owens corning rolls, and the rest are now the batts. I wonder just how much difference the rolls would make in the corners, compared to the batts I'm now using?

Thanks for your input,
Marc

[LSP]

Originally Posted by SAC

For stacked of rolled up rolls in the corner you are fine.

But if interested in trying to compress unrolled rolls/batts for panels, I would suggest against it. (And if I am misunderstanding your intent, just ignore this...)

For general panels I might suggest the extra work isn't generally worth the effort.

The plastic encased insulation at HD/Lowes is not compressed. Oh, it may be a bit compressed in the packaging roll, but it is NOT compressed by the plastic casing - as when unrolled it is NOT designed to be compressed for thermal insulation! Quite the opposite. It is intentionally designed for maximum loft and the plastic covering does not constrain that.

You can try compressing it, but in a panel application you will be hard pressed (sorry for the pun) to compress it suitably with chicken wire, hardware cloth or cloth considering the additional stress that will be placed upon the frame. And you will have a heck of a time avoiding the panel looking like its pregnant as the compression will not be evenly distributed.

So, while you are welcome to try to compress it suitably - as you also try to calculate the amount of compression suitable for optimal use - before its over my guess is that you will wish you simply bought the semi-rigid format that is manufactured for precisely the type of use required by panelized use.

Sometimes the extra 'sweat equity ' is worth the effort, but in this case I would suggest that the semi-rigid format is not only MUCH easier to work with, but it will look a million percent better as well. And you can not the panels out very quickly as well - unlike the hassle you will encounter with the form designed for maximum loft.

I see your point, however, I am only using the rolls and/or batts for corner bass trapping. I already have a huge amount of duct board (close to the same as 703) on the walls behind and beside the mix position.

[theothermonomer]

Originally Posted by LSP

Well, I've already purchased 6 more of the batts wrapped in plastic. I use 2 per corner, stacked on top of each other. They have a larger diameter, but, as you suggested, I can see that they aren't as tightly compressed as the rolls are.

Depot and Lowes don't carry the owens corning rolls anymore, and the brand they do carry doesn't appear to be as tightly rolled, and more importantly for me, they are each shorter in height, yet larger in circumference. This would mean I would have to purchase more of them to reach my 8' ceiling height.

I like to wrap my corner traps in muslin cloth for aesthetic purposes, and the owens corning rolls are so tightly rolled, that they make a nice looking trap.

So, I could always take back all the batts I purchased from Lowes, IF I can find a dealer that carries the rolls at a reasonable price.

I currenlty have one corner with the stacked owens corning rolls, and the rest are now the batts. I wonder just how much difference the rolls would make in the corners, compared to the batts I'm now using?

Thanks for your input,
Marc

I think that "which is going to be better?" is best answered by knowing what it is you are trying to accomplish. Since I was looking for greater absorption down to 80Hz and below without trying to kill too much of the upper freqs, I chose large rolls (24" diameter) and was looking for densities in the 4-lbs/cu-ft range (similar to the rigid batts I've used in some of my broadband flat-panel absorbers) and with one-sided kraft-facing to hopefully keep from thinning out too much of the energy in the upper freqs (by reflecting it). Stacking the rolls in corners and draping some black cloth over the whole stack is fast, simple, and relatively cheap if you find you can tolerate that hillbilly look but more importantly it can be quite effective as my REW measurements have shown me... still you have to have a goal in mind when selecting the type, densities, dimensions, facing options, etc of the fiberglass insulation that might work best in your situation. Without taking appropriate measurements (freq resp and reverbation times) of the room at several locations first and then carefully analysing to determine what it is you are trying to do with the room acoustics, its not going to be easy for anyone to advise you on the exact specifics of your selection for absorption.

[LSP]

Originally Posted by theothermonomer

I think that "which is going to be better?" is best answered by knowing what it is you are trying to accomplish. Since I was looking for greater absorption down to 80Hz and below without trying to kill too much of the upper freqs, I chose large rolls (24" diameter) and was looking for densities in the 4-lbs/cu-ft range (similar to the rigid batts I've used in some of my broadband flat-panel absorbers) and with one-sided kraft-facing to hopefully keep from thinning out too much of the energy in the upper freqs (by reflecting it). Stacking the rolls in corners and draping some black cloth over the whole stack is fast, simple, and relatively cheap if you find you can tolerate that hillbilly look but more importantly it can be quite effective as my REW measurements have shown me... still you have to have a goal in mind when selecting the type, densities, dimensions, facing options, etc of the fiberglass insulation that might work best in your situation. Without taking appropriate measurements (freq resp and reverbation times) of the room at several locations first and then carefully analysing to determine what it is you are trying to do with the room acoustics, its not going to be easy for anyone to advise you on the exact specifics of your selection for absorption.

As much as I would like to take measurements, analyze, etc., I simply do not have the time, seriously. I know it sounds like a lazy way out, but I'm being realistic,... I'm an older guy, younger wife, 2 young children = very limited time in the studio! lol

So to answer your question, I am simply trying to figure out which would be the quickest, most effective method of bass trapping the corners. I have a very small room, approx. 12x15, complete with a drum kit, an a good bit of gear. I have reflective surfaces on one side, and duct board (similar to 703) on the walls behind and beside mix position.

As far as the additional bass traps go, I would prefer to NOT absorb any more mids and highs, or as little as possible. I am trying to recreate, as it were, a horribly dead room that was originally intended to simply teach drums out of, and expanded in to a weekend recording studio.

So, that being said, since I just purchase the 6 batts from Lowe's, I am only trying to decide if should return them, and seek out the owens corning rolls I referred to earlier.

I have done some additional searches and read some more, but I'm still a little confused as to which, given my room, would absorb more low mids, and/or lows, the larger diameter batts, which have facing and wrapped in plastic, or the smaller in diameter, yet more tightly compressed rolls.

Thanks,
Marc

[SAC]

Originally Posted by LSP

I'm already using some insulation rolls (stacked) for corner bass traps. Anything wrong with using some of the "batts" that I see in Lowes?

They are roughly the same dimensions as stacking 3 or so rolls together(4' or so high).

Originally Posted by LSP

As much as I would like to take measurements, analyze, etc., I simply do not have the time, seriously. I know it sounds like a lazy way out, but I'm being realistic,... I'm an older guy, younger wife, 2 young children = very limited time in the studio! lol

So to answer your question, I am simply trying to figure out which would be the quickest, most effective method of bass trapping the corners. I have a very small room, approx. 12x15, complete with a drum kit, an a good bit of gear. I have reflective surfaces on one side, and duct board (similar to 703) on the walls behind and beside mix position.

As far as the additional bass traps go, I would prefer to NOT absorb any more mids and highs, or as little as possible. I am trying to recreate, as it were, a horribly dead room that was originally intended to simply teach drums out of, and expanded in to a weekend recording studio.

So, that being said, since I just purchase the 6 batts from Lowe's, I am only trying to decide if should return them, and seek out the owens corning rolls I referred to earlier.
I have done some additional searches and read some more, but I'm still a little confused as to which, given my room, would absorb more low mids, and/or lows, the larger diameter batts, which have facing and wrapped in plastic, or the smaller in diameter, yet more tightly compressed rolls.

A big suggestion. Better stating your actual question and goal would have gotten you a MUCH quicker answer!!!

And regarding the tangential suggestion for measurements: the irony is that they would have taken less time than the path this poorly formed question has taken! (As if we have have fewer obligations and demands upon our time to address others issues in addition to our own!)


So, all you really care about is whether you should stick with the X brand rolled insulation or go with the same density/R value OC branded rolls that are packaged in a slightly larger diameter shipping packaging ?????

All because one's shipping packaging is a slightly smaller diameter for the same material...

The difference is insignificant!

And which will reflect more highs is indeed that - a complete red herring.

And BTW, Home Depot is indeed an OC dealer - one of, if not the largest outlet in the US.

And the issue of optimal densities and equivalent performance of materials in bass traps and panels has been dealt with ad nauseum over the past 2 weeks on the forum. But I will admit, that the critical "shipping packaging diameter" variable for rolled insulation was not one directly addressed.

[LSP]

Originally Posted by SAC

A big suggestion. Better stating your actual question and goal would have gotten you a MUCH quicker answer!!!

And regarding the tangential suggestion for measurements: the irony is that they would have taken less time than the path this poorly formed question has taken! (As if we have have fewer obligations and demands upon our time to address others issues in addition to our own!)


So, all you really care about is whether you should stick with the X brand rolled insulation or go with the same density/R value OC branded rolls that are packaged in a slightly larger diameter shipping packaging ?????

All because one's shipping packaging is a slightly smaller diameter for the same material...

The difference is insignificant!

And which will reflect more highs is indeed that - a complete red herring.

And BTW, Home Depot is indeed an OC dealer - one of, if not the largest outlet in the US.

And the issue of optimal densities and equivalent performance of materials in bass traps and panels has been dealt with ad nauseum over the past 2 weeks on the forum. But I will admit, that the critical "shipping packaging diameter" variable for rolled insulation was not one directly addressed.

Ooooh,... I sure hope you feel better now.

[SAC]

After all of the issue over 'batts' versus 'rolls', compression factors and material densities, manufacturers, mid and high frequency reflectivity and the various other factors which all turned out to be insignificant and inconsequential when compared to simply:

"would a roll of the (whatever product you HAVE that you can actually look at and identify!) same type/density insulation when stacked vertically in a corner as a bass trap, exhibit a significant difference in LF performance if the packaged roll diameter were, say, 18 inches versus 21 inches?"

And then, instead of clarifying the real purpose and meaning of the question, you then instead take issue with all of the responses by those who took more time to attempt to ascertain the various amorphous interpretations as they pursued the elusive snipe then was taken in the question or non-sequitur responses!

Not to mention having effectively posted this same issue twice on the forum and having it addressed in both places!
You're welcome.

Any more questions??????

[theothermonomer]

Originally Posted by LSP

As much as I would like to take measurements, analyze, etc., I simply do not have the time, seriously. I know it sounds like a lazy way out, but I'm being realistic,... I'm an older guy, younger wife, 2 young children = very limited time in the studio! lol

So to answer your question, I am simply trying to figure out which would be the quickest, most effective method of bass trapping the corners. I have a very small room, approx. 12x15, complete with a drum kit, an a good bit of gear. I have reflective surfaces on one side, and duct board (similar to 703) on the walls behind and beside mix position.

As far as the additional bass traps go, I would prefer to NOT absorb any more mids and highs, or as little as possible. I am trying to recreate, as it were, a horribly dead room that was originally intended to simply teach drums out of, and expanded in to a weekend recording studio.

So, that being said, since I just purchase the 6 batts from Lowe's, I am only trying to decide if should return them, and seek out the owens corning rolls I referred to earlier.

I have done some additional searches and read some more, but I'm still a little confused as to which, given my room, would absorb more low mids, and/or lows, the larger diameter batts, which have facing and wrapped in plastic, or the smaller in diameter, yet more tightly compressed rolls.

Thanks,
Marc

Though taking measurements requires almost no time at all, I will concede that there can be a steep learning curve involved if you've no experience with the software.

I'm certainly no expert in any of this and I'm coming from a home theater background (and perspective) but I think I can give you some generalized rules of thumb here. The further into the room you place the absorption material the more effective it will be at lower freqs... thus diameter of the roll does matter if your intent is to absorb freqs below 100Hz. example: 24" would be more effective than 15". Densities to a point appear to correlate with the energy dissipated at certain freqs with 2-6 lbs/cu-ft seeming to be a most effective range. Finally low freqs easily pass through thin paper while certain upper freq ranges can be reflected by such surfaces. Bearing these rules of thumb in mind, its best you decide for yourself... however, taking measurements are the only way to know for sure what effect any of this is having on your room's acoustic character. Good luck!

[LSP]

Originally Posted by SAC

After all of the issue over 'batts' versus 'rolls', compression factors and material densities, manufacturers, mid and high frequency reflectivity and the various other factors which all turned out to be insignificant and inconsequential when compared to simply:

"would a roll of the (whatever product you HAVE that you can actually look at and identify!) same type/density insulation when stacked vertically in a corner as a bass trap, exhibit a significant difference in LF performance if the packaged roll diameter were, say, 18 inches versus 21 inches?"

And then, instead of clarifying the real purpose and meaning of the question, you then instead take issue with all of the responses by those who took more time to attempt to ascertain the various amorphous interpretations as they pursued the elusive snipe then was taken in the question or non-sequitur responses!

Not to mention having effectively posted this same issue twice on the forum and having it addressed in both places!
You're welcome.

Any more questions??????

Look,... the fact is, I really do appreciate any who take there time to post a reply. Perhaps I wasn't as clear as I should have been in my original post as to what exactly I was asking. I posted again in another thread as I thought the original had ran it's course, and I was still unclear about the whole density topic.

I apologize if my question was to elementary for you, I was just trying to make sure my limited budget for some kind of bass trapping was going to yield me the best results, either way, my post(s) shouldn't have warranted such a condescending reply such as yours,...and THAT is what I took issue with.

Have a great day!

[SAC]

Quite a few folks tried politely to help you in two threads based on the amorphous information provided - only to have you debate each one based upon still more incomplete information not disclosed in the original question!

There are ALLOT of good people here willing to try to help, provided you do just a bit of due diligence in asking a reasonable question with sufficient information to enable those responding, without the benefit of being psychic, to ascertain just what exactly is needed - and then without being debated because the answer was not what you were looking for but failed to clearly ask.

Only AFTER all of that did you earn the accurate description regarding the snipe hunt of a question that WE had to figure out!

[tINY]

Don't worry about Sad SAC - he gets that way.

If you have limited time, you might consider going with the standard FRK style 4" 703. In the end, it doesn't cost that much more if you can find a good comercial HVAC supply locally.

Try this :

Service Center Directory for Specialty Products & Insulation Co.




-tINY