Super chunk or panel traps? Room layout/waterfalls inside

[JLiRD808]

So I need to start going floor to ceiling with bass traps. Right now my traps only reach to about the top of my monitors and aren't really doing much. The below layout is what I'm TRYING to build.



In one location, the skinny blue/white rectangule in the lower left corner, I can definitely super-chunk it or build some straddling panel traps.

If I build a superchunk I was thinking of doing R30 at 24"x17"x17". My ceiling is 10.5' feet high!!

If I build a panel trap it would be 6" of 705 and I would just stack it on top of the 5' foot panel traps that are already there.

Can anyone tell me which would be better...maybe based on these waterfall charts? It looks like the low-low end is pretty bad, one of the reasons (from what I've read) that I'd like to use the superchunk R30 idea.





Also, both options come in around the same price for me.

[DanDan]

SSCs are great. The bigger 34 inch wide ones rule but use a lot more fibre. The good news is that cheaper lighter fibre is better at this size. If you can spare the space build a frame and fill it with fluffy attic insulation. Bigger the better. Doesn't have to be triangular.
DD

[localhost127]

if you're using lighter (lower GFR) material in your corner traps, care needs to be taken in the design that the upper layers do not compress the lower layers (gravity). (eg, you can utilize horizontal supports ever few ft for vertical traps).

[JLiRD808]

Thanks!! So it sounds like some fluffy super-chunk setup is the way to go.

The only way I can put a wider face than 24" is if I build it like this...a rectangular triangle shape:



I am limited on the B-C side by space but I can go bigger on the A-B side. So instead of 24"x17"x17", I'm thinking it would be a 30"x22"x17" (not sure on the geometry, not at home at the moment). Would this even make a difference??? Again it's gonna be 10.5' tall so that could add up to quite a bit of fluffy added on.

I'll definitely add those supports every few feet, thx localhost. Theres some great build threads with pics here on GS....might even be kinda fun lol.

[jwl]

Remember bass trapping is as much about total coverage area in the room as it is individual trap performance.

Superchunks work very well obviously because they are large with a lot of absorption. However, I'd be curious to see how a 6" slab of 705 compares to a superchunk made with fluffy fiberglass.... probably depends on how full you stuff it and how much fiberglass you can get inside.

[JLiRD808]

Originally Posted by jwl

.... probably depends on how full you stuff it and how much fiberglass you can get inside.

From what I remember reading I dont want to stuff it too hard though right?

I was actually planning on just using these:

EcoTouch R-30 Unfaced 9 in. x 23 in. x 25 ft. Continuous Roll Insulation-RU71 at The Home Depot

...and cutting out triangles and stackin em up in the corner. I wasnt really planning on using the loose fluffy and "packing" it in. Should I consider doing it that way? This is just the way I came across in most DIY's...the only difference being that others used rockwool, 703, etc instead.

[jwl]

I can't really say on the ecotouch as I've never worked with it. In the past with fluffy fiberglass (as opposed to rigid) or acoustic cotton I've always packed it as full as I can; no matter how full you can pack it manually it will still be significantly less dense than rigid fiberglass.

[JLiRD808]

Originally Posted by jwl

...no matter how full you can pack it manually it will still be significantly less dense than rigid fiberglass.

Thats what I thought. But how come, when u cut and stack the fluffy triangles, ppl are so concerned about "squishing" the bottom ones? Is it about the "unevenness" of densities? I cant imagine "packing loose fluff" comes out super even either.

[localhost127]

Originally Posted by jwl

I can't really say on the ecotouch as I've never worked with it. In the past with fluffy fiberglass (as opposed to rigid) or acoustic cotton I've always packed it as full as I can; no matter how full you can pack it manually it will still be significantly less dense than rigid fiberglass.

if you design a porous trap based around a low GFR material, why would you want to increase the density of the material by "packing it as full as you can" - this makes zero sense.

[Moatl]

I've actually been asking myself the same question...

I'm building my new studio at the moment and if everything goes as planned I can start the acoustic treatment in a couple of weeks.

apparently the super chunks work better than panel traps?
but does anyone have more details?

I wonder if it's worth the extra cost...

[DanDan]

Squishing is easily prevented by a mid chunk 'shelf'.
Corner Traps finally finished! - Home Theater Forum and Systems - HomeTheaterShack.com
Better is a broad word.
We are talking bass here, bigger is better, especially if you have very low frequency problems. The 34 inch wide SSC is very very good.
They do not have to be triangular. See Glenns Soffit Traps.
The frame could be an arrangement of laths outside a fabric lining. This looks good and will reflect and scatter a little HF.

Andre has shown some problems with cotton. It doesn't work well in deep traps. It has a surprisingly high GFR I think.

DD