Room treatments 'Art and Science'

[dadgad65]

A self admitted ‘guitarded’ newbie; I have been recently researching room treatments for my small home ‘studio’.

Essentially I have a 10’ x 13’ room which will be used for recording and mixing acoustic guitar. During my research into the quagmire that is ‘home recording’, I have realized the need for room treatment. The room:

http://share.shutterfly.com/action/w...AbuHDZu5Zs2Liw

My research has led me to three providers/manufacturers of room treatment materials and solutions. (The usual suspects I would imagine.) Many offer ‘kits’ which provide bass traps, diffusion, and absorptive products in one package.

After sending photos of the room along with my goals to the three sound treatment-ologists, I have been provided with three fairly different solutions.

While I have no doubt that room treatment is important, and I am heading down the road as I write, how is one to know what is the best way to go? Is this a science or an art? A combination of both?

Clearly one could contract professionals with professional measuring equipment to build a high end room, however, what does the home recording aficionado typically do? What have you done?

Thanks.

Rich

[nathanvacha]

well, they try the search function... just poking fun man, sorry...


check

ethan winer's real traps info

and

gik acoustics faq

[dadgad65]

Thanks for the feedback.

Have talked with Glenn and Ethan (both really nice guys), and was simply looking for some 'consumer feedback'.

Google spelled with a 'G'.... got it.

[No4PCs]

Originally Posted by dadgad65

A self admitted ‘guitarded’ newbie; I have been recently researching room treatments for my small home ‘studio’.

Essentially I have a 10’ x 13’ room which will be used for recording and mixing acoustic guitar. During my research into the quagmire that is ‘home recording’, I have realized the need for room treatment. The room:

http://share.shutterfly.com/action/w...AbuHDZu5Zs2Liw

My research has led me to three providers/manufacturers of room treatment materials and solutions. (The usual suspects I would imagine.) Many offer ‘kits’ which provide bass traps, diffusion, and absorptive products in one package.

After sending photos of the room along with my goals to the three sound treatment-ologists, I have been provided with three fairly different solutions.

While I have no doubt that room treatment is important, and I am heading down the road as I write, how is one to know what is the best way to go? Is this a science or an art? A combination of both?

Clearly one could contract professionals with professional measuring equipment to build a high end room, however, what does the home recording aficionado typically do? What have you done?

Thanks.

Rich

Hey Rich
Bass traps in corners is needed...
Your door is good,you can put other door in outside to avoyd external noise !
You can find some good carpenter and ask him to make a box type door...
( Doubled )you know?

The rest you can make a blend of absorsion rockwoll panels and buy some pro diffusors from them !

Art , science and hands !

[u b k]

Originally Posted by dadgad65

...what does the home recording aficionado typically do?

the home recording aficionado typically plasters his or her walls with foam, which is exactly what you don't want to do. for the reasons and why, and many more interesting and helpful facts, do as has been suggested and study ethan winer's site linked below.

long story short: 703, as much as you can afford, in as many corners as you can cover.


gregoire
del
ubk
.

[Sqye]

yes, the 703 definitely helps.


we just used a whole sh&tload of it to treat a large loft in downtown LA,

while we were rehearsing for a show.

worked like a charm.


unbelievable, taking that stuff down when the 3 weeks were done,

the room sounded like a f*ckin' canyon.

[GPl]

Do a search here also. You'll find some interesting topics/applications/room treatments with 703. One guy used a hemp substitute for 703 I found rather interesting

[Joel DuBay]

Hey Rich,

(If I am may throw our hat in the ring)

If you are interested, I can do a 3D sketch of your room showing you the optimal places for acoustic treatments in your particular space (no matter which company's treatment options you choose.

It's free, and incredibly cool.


We do this for many of our panel clients now...

Email me through the website and I'll send you some examples.. Again, you can use this treatment scheme for any manufacturer's panels you choose. In the end, I am just glad you are thinking of this now, rather than months down the road. THAT is smart.



Cheers,


Joel DuBay
Ready Acoustics LLC
www.readyacoustics.com
World's Best Acoustic Treatment Data Here

[dadgad65]

Everyone

Thanks for the advice. I am really appreciative of all of your input.

Joel: Just started to check out your site. Thank you for the generous offer! I will take you up on this.


Can anyone speak to the difference between OC 703 and SAFB?

To share, here is what I have found at ATSAcoustics.com :

"Q: What's the difference between rigid fiberglass board (like Owens Corning® 703) and Sound Attenuating Fire Batts (SAFB)?

A: There are no significant differences in acoustical properties (how they absorb sound). There are two significant differences in physical/mechanical properties.

1) Density. SAFB has a density (weight) of 2.5 pounds per cubic foot, which is the most cost-effective density for absorbing sound. Higher densities absorb sound only slightly better, so they are not worth the extra cost of material in most cases. 703 is the Owens Corning rigid fiberglass board product and is commonly used for sound absorption. It has a similar density at 3.0 pounds per cubic foot, and nearly identical acoustical properties to SAFB.

2) Rigidity. SAFB is a thick batt, like a heavier version of common household insulation batts. Rigid Fiberglass board is manufactured as a relatively rigid board that holds it's shape."

Thanks again for the feedback.

[bpape]

Rich.

When doing a dual purpose room (mixing and tracking), the design goals are kind of different - especially if you want to record guitar and not in the box.

A control room will be more damped whereas a tracking room should be more lively. I'd recommend planning for some movable/changable treatments that can be used or altered based on the usage of the room at that time.

I just don't want you to get into a situation where your room is good for mixing but too dead for the guitar work.

As for the SAFB or 703, they are slightly different in their absorbtion characteristics but not a great deal. It has to do with the gas permeability of the materials and how that reacts at different frequencies. You can get similar 'board' type mineral wool that's about the same properties as SAFB but more rigid (not quite as rigid as 703 though).

The times things like the permeabiltiy come into play are when using thicker treatments (6" and up) for bass control and also when considering their usage as reflection point treatment where you have very shallow angles of incidence. In the case of the 2 materials you're discussing, either will work fine for both situations I've described above.

In general, design goals for a room like yours are:

- Broadband bass control that will reach down into the 50's
- Reflection point control for the mix position
- General decay time control that is flexible to provide the appropriate solution for the different usages of the room.

Bryan

[Ethan Winer]

Rich,

> I have been provided with three fairly different solutions. <

Only three?

Acoustics is definitely a science, but there's also room for subjective opinion. Some people prefer their mix rooms to be on the dead side and others prefer more lively sounding rooms. In my opinion, small room ambience is bad ambience. So the size of the room is a big factor in how the room treatment should be approached. Also, as Bryan pointed out, a room that will be used for both mixing and tracking might be approached differently than a room meant for mixing only.

That doesn't mean that every company selling acoustic materials and products is equally qualified to offer competent advice. This is not meant as a slam against any particular company! I don't know all the companies you contacted. There are dozens of companies selling acoustic products! So it helps to read the various info type pages on each company's site, to get a feel for who seems to know what they're talking about.

--Ethan

[dadgad65]

I love this friggin' place! This is really an amazing community and I am happy to have found it.

It is really amazing, and humbling, to be able to solicit advice and feedback from people at all levels of the biz. Amateur and professionals alike.

Ethan: Thanks for the note and for taking the time to work with me. At this point I have learned enough to be really dangerous. I am more confused than when I was ignorant. Ignorance is bliss! Ha… Your points are well taken. By the way, the total has gone from 3 to 5 groups providing a solution.

Bryan: Thank you for taking the time to write, and provide me with your advice. Your points regarding the joint use of the space are well received and have been weighing on my mind. At this point my goal is to configure the room once, and ‘permanently’, favoring the recording side of the equation. After all I am guitarded…


At this point I may have to purchase a few components from each of 5 different companies! (Guilt is such a wasted emotion…. he, he, he)

[AcousTronic]

The best sounding rooms are rooms within rooms, no parallel walls... I'm in the same position as you, with about the same sized room and have been learning a TON of stuff here: http://www.johnlsayers.com/phpBB2/index.php Of coarse, I'm also growing more confused everyday... My wife tells me to quit worrying about having the "best" sounding studio, and "worry about writing some more badass songs". I think she's right, you can easily get lost in the art of recording, and start forgetting about the musicianship that got you to feeling you needed all that in the first place...

[Joel DuBay]

I absolutely agree with the importance of competent acoustical advice.


However, what many "believe" is competent acoustical advice is often times not backed up by abject, accredited acoustical lab data for their own products.
What you then receive is "opinion" that (in some cases) may be the analog to "assumption" based on the need to justify the cost of a product, etc. Chrysler made this mistake in Q3 of 91' and lost it's ass to a leaner, meaner company driven soley by the desire to make their products better, correct insane over pricing in the market place and prove it to the world with absolute science and consumer feedback.
In those instances, (acoustically speaking) you have to look no further than the company's own reported data if any (or what's left of it in their literature) to know whether or not you are receiving advice based on opinion, or advice based on the desire or need to sell acoustical treatments or any other product that REQUIRES scientific laboratory testing to reveal how an individual device performs.

The newest trend in fact is to dismiss high end, high functioning acoustical labs because company "A's" treatments no longer cut the mustard when compared to newer, better and much more affordable alternatives. This is the case throughout manufacturing history and is why markets determine costs as well as adjunct function of products that stick around.

To say there are choices in effective acoustic treatment is flatly an understatement. However, it should be noted that the companies who spend 10's of thousands of dollars PROVING and continuing to prove their individual treatments work as stated in an easy to find, easy to duplicate manner are far, and few between. Infact, I only know of ... well...1. There could be more. I am sure there are.

Funny, I now hear that one company (there could be more) no longer even bothers to tests their products in reliable, easy to fund and accredited acoustical labs because the resulting data is insignificat and won't warrant a full and complete report without embarrasing them. I am sure there are more. But as a consumer myself, I want to know everything I can about an expensive purchase before I lay my money down. Hell, there is no harm in knowing as much as you can about an individual purchase as you can, even if the company offering such is willing to offer you graph and a strong opinion about their own products,

The fact is folks, nothing beats a DIY acoustic treatment panel for performance, and they cost heaps less than pre-made pieces. As a consumer, I like knowing that I can spend a little and get a lot. Who doesn't? And man, when that new piece of gear calls my name at the same time, well, it's good to know I have science and a pile of extra cash on my side.

DO YOUR HOME WORK ,,,,,


Have a nice day.

Joel DuBay
http://readyacoustics.com/index.php?....acoustic-data

[Ethan Winer]

Joel,

> what many "believe" is competent acoustical advice is often times not <

I couldn't agree more. Every day I see a dozen posts by folks who are well-meaning but ignorant about the science. Acoustics is misunderstood by many people, including some vendors, even though it really is not very complicated.

So it's common to see advice based on conventional wisdom - but that is wrong - repeated again and again. Like the egg cartons myth ("it made my studio sound better") or Foam By Mail ("the specs are just as good as what Auralex sells but it costs one third as much"), and outright wrong advice ("double walls make your room sound better" or "angled walls avoid bass modes"), and so forth.

There's also the myth "all acoustic products are the same, and paying more doesn't get you a better product." As a consumerist I know that a higher price is no guarantee of a better product. But as often as not, you really do get what you pay for.

Thanks for helping to keep things in perspective Joel.

--Ethan