room help needed

[goatsound]

Hey Everyone,

i got some room problems and would really love some help, i keep going back and forwards in my mind and have lost touch of what i should do.

I have a new house an intend on starting to build my recording/ mixing space very soon.
the room i am building is a brick structure and is 8.85 ft high, 11.8 wide and 32.8 long.
I intend on leaving it as one long room.
i intend on using plasterboard (drywall) an all brick surfaces and covering the cement floor with a wood surface.
my main concern right now is the ceiling height, i'm thinking the ceiling is too small.

1- should i pitch the roof?
2- would a pitched roof be o.k. for mixing/ recording?
3- should i keep the ceiling flat and spend the money on acoustic treatment?
4- should i just bag the brick surfaces and leave them?

any and all opinions on what i should do would be really appreciated.
also the pitched roof would be about 4-5 ft high at the highest point.

thanks in advance.

[Glenn Kuras]

In a room that long and that low of a ceiling to began with I would keep it flat and treat it with absorption.

Glenn

[jwl]

I disagree. If you can increase the height of the room -- thereby increasing room volume -- then go for it. It can only help.

It will make creating your Reflection-Free Zone a bit more complex; you'll have 5 surfaces to treat for first-reflection points rather than 3. But the non-parallel surfaces and the additional volume will help.

Either way, you'll still need to treat the room.

[goatsound]

Hey thanks for the replies, i really appreciate it.

I do have another couple questions though if you guys have time.

I MAY be able to get the ceiling another foot or so higher by raising the roof, would this be worth the effort involved?

I'm thinking that the difference between 8.5 foot and 9.5 could mean a lot in the end.
I guess I'm also going to lose a bit of height with the floor and ceiling in place too.

In the grand scheme of things I would much rather save money for treatment as i think I'm kind of limited anyway in what can be achieved in a room this size.
my budget will be only about 5 grand so im limited there too.

any more suggestions on how to proceed with a room this size and with this budget in mind are more than welcome.

cheers.

[Glenn Kuras]

Originally Posted by goatsound

Hey thanks for the replies, i really appreciate it.

I do have another couple questions though if you guys have time.

I MAY be able to get the ceiling another foot or so higher by raising the roof, would this be worth the effort involved?

I'm thinking that the difference between 8.5 foot and 9.5 could mean a lot in the end.
I guess I'm also going to lose a bit of height with the floor and ceiling in place too.

In the grand scheme of things I would much rather save money for treatment as i think I'm kind of limited anyway in what can be achieved in a room this size.
my budget will be only about 5 grand so im limited there too.

any more suggestions on how to proceed with a room this size and with this budget in mind are more than welcome
cheers.

As I said before with the room at 8.5 feet high it is not worth giving up the space and even with pitching to 9.5 and the room that long you just are not going to get the pitch angled enough to really make a huge difference.
One thing you could do is pitch the ceiling with the peak in the middle, but there are draw backs from that also. Make it easy on yourself, build it high and treat it.

I will email Bryan, our lead room designer, to have him post any other ideas he might have for you.

Glenn

[bpape]

There are a couple different things going on here.

First of all, the room is breaking one of the general rules of thumb that the length should be less than 3x the height. Even if you go to 9.5', that's only 28.5'.

As for the ceiling (or any splayed surfaces), to really be effective, you need to have a minimum of 1 inch per foot of length for each surface. So, since we can't change the floor angle, that means we try to get 2 inches per foot of length for the ceiling. That means losing 64" of height at one end so you end up with 9.5' at one end and basically 4' at the other end. Not terribly practical.

If you want to try to do it, you could angle the ceiling up from say 8' to 9.5' in the middle of the length and then back down to 8' at the other end. That will push your ceiling reflections past you and get enough angle to make a nice difference. It will require you to trap that peak you're creating and also likely hit the angled ceiling in the rear.

Bryan

[jwl]

Just to clarify my point, you should do whatever gives you the most room volume. If by pitching the ceiling you will go downward, ie, the ceiling would be 8.5' at its peak and come down, then don't.

It's up to you whether moving to 9.5' ceilings is worth the effort involved. It will help. But is it cost-effective? That depends on what's involved. I agree that you should make sure you have enough budget left to treat the room well.

[Weasel9992]

Yeah...don't pitch the ceiling. It won't be worth it. Sure, you might increase the room volume, but the percentage increase wouldn't be enough to make any difference at all. The expense is really impractical.

Frank

[jwl]

I don't want to get nitpicky or anything, but pitching the roof will certainly make a difference, both from the increased volume of the room, as well as the non-parallel ceiling.

Whether this difference is worth the cost/hassle to do is another story. If you have to modify what's there, then I probably wouldn't bother. If you are building from scratch, then go for it, as long as the pitching increases rather than decreases the ceiling height.

[Weasel9992]

Originally Posted by jwl

I don't want to get nitpicky or anything, but pitching the roof will certainly make a difference, both from the increased volume of the room, as well as the non-parallel ceiling.

Whether this difference is worth the cost/hassle to do is another story. If you have to modify what's there, then I probably wouldn't bother. If you are building from scratch, then go for it, as long as the pitching increases rather than decreases the ceiling height.

That's cool. I was just thinking in terms of value, that's all. I really don't think the gain would be worth the cost of admission. From the standpoint of pure physics you're right though.

Frank

[goatsound]

I really appreciate all the answers here guys. thanks.

I think i will stay with 8.5 height and then maybe try and split the room so it is a little shorter to try avoid the 3 to 1 thing, Maybe build a machine room or something to put all the computers and tape machines into? Maybe an iso booth?

Anyway as I think a drum room is out of the question in this room because of size restrictions i think i will concentrate more on treatment as opposed to soundproofing.

Thanks again everyone.

Now who distributes your products in Australia?

[Weasel9992]

We do!

Frank