Acoustic wall panels - air gap or thicker panel?...
#31
17th December 2012
Old 17th December 2012
  #31
Gear maniac
 
CurseesConnect's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Location: NB, Canada
Posts: 220

Quote:
Originally Posted by avare View Post
The AFB is acsoutically equivalent to 703. Call the 800 numbers that Owens-Corning, Roxul and otheres have on their websites and ask for the dealers in your area witht he rpoducts you are interested in.

Andre
So the AFB is fine?

These ratings are getting more and more confusing. On the Roxul website, the AFB is 2.8lbs/cf and Safe 'n Sound is 4.5lbs/cf. So which one is better? Is the AFB really the acoustic equivalent to 703, even though it is wool instead of fiberglass? Is Safe 'n Sound better since it has higher density? Should I be looking at coefficients instead?
#32
19th December 2012
Old 19th December 2012
  #32
Gear maniac
 
CurseesConnect's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Location: NB, Canada
Posts: 220

Anyone?
Gadget13769
Thread Starter
#33
21st December 2012
Old 21st December 2012
  #33
Gear Head
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Location: West Midlands, UK
Posts: 33

Thread Starter
#34
21st December 2012
Old 21st December 2012
  #34
Lives for gear
 
avare's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2004
Location: Hamilton, On Canada
Posts: 4,863

Quote:
Originally Posted by solarplexus311 View Post
So the AFB is fine?

These ratings are getting more and more confusing. On the Roxul website, the AFB is 2.8lbs/cf and Safe 'n Sound is 4.5lbs/cf. So which one is better? Is the AFB really the acoustic equivalent to 703, even though it is wool instead of fiberglass? Is Safe 'n Sound better since it has higher density? Should I be looking at coefficients instead?
Answering your first question, yes AFB is fine.

The rest of post indcates that you confusing yourself. You have the answer in my previous paragraph.

Andre
#35
21st December 2012
Old 21st December 2012
  #35
Gear maniac
 
CurseesConnect's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Location: NB, Canada
Posts: 220

Quote:
Originally Posted by avare View Post
Answering your first question, yes AFB is fine.

The rest of post indcates that you confusing yourself. You have the answer in my previous paragraph.

Andre
Thanks Andre. I do have a tendency to confuse myself. Will get the AFB and get started on superchunks and traps.
#36
12th January 2013
Old 12th January 2013
  #36
Gear addict
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 465

I understand that bass absorption is better if the panel has space behind it. How do you know which panels to put against the wall and which to leave a space behind? If you need maximum bass control, is it beneficial to leave all panels with a rear gap?
#37
13th January 2013
Old 13th January 2013
  #37
Gear addict
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Location: Norwich, UK
Posts: 439

Quote:
Originally Posted by Louderock View Post
I understand that bass absorption is better if the panel has space behind it. How do you know which panels to put against the wall and which to leave a space behind? If you need maximum bass control, is it beneficial to leave all panels with a rear gap?
If we are talking porous material ie mineral wool/fibreglass then basically for extending the effectiveness of any specific type at lower frequencies an air gap will be beneficial for ratios of 1:1 up to 5:1 (air:material). However, the properties (gas flow resistivity) of the material itself will determine how much benefit is achieved. (of course one could use greater air:material ratios but it becomes a story of diminishing returns for the space lost)
#38
15th January 2013
Old 15th January 2013
  #38
Creative Edge Music
 
qvplite's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 127

Both.

Leaving the air gap always helps, and having thicker panels will control down to lower frequencies. For example, 4" foam will control down near the 100-125 hz range, whereas 2" foam drops off around 250-350 hz. Unless you have good bass traps installed, most average users will benefit from thicker foam, more of it, AND the air gap.

There are a lot of good products out there and I've personally had luck with ATS Acoustics.
#39
18th January 2013
Old 18th January 2013
  #39
Gear interested
 
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1

#40
19th January 2013
Old 19th January 2013
  #40
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,310

Quote:
Originally Posted by qvplite View Post
Both.

Leaving the air gap always helps, and having thicker panels will control down to lower frequencies. For example, 4" foam will control down near the 100-125 hz range,
when discussing this range you still need to be factoring in absorber size with respect to wavelength.
#41
12th April 2013
Old 12th April 2013
  #41
Gear interested
 
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1

I would say air gap will help you in getting better performance. Choice is all yours.
_______________________
acoustical panel systems
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Topic:
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
clusterchord / So much gear, so little time!
17
Dxsound / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
2
Switchcraft / So much gear, so little time!
17
mrbowes / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
2
amino / So much gear, so little time!
13

Forum Jump
 
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.