New concrete block build

[Rod Gervais]

Originally Posted by gouge

well avatar doesn't do it for me on a personal level. that's probably harsh as i haven't experienced the space or studied the floor plans but aesthetically i find it a little internal feeling, no natural light, darkish etc. only going on photos.

Studios "A" is anything but dark....... it is actually very bright...... and I would describe it as warm..... as do most of the performers who've recorded i their - but the adjective is mine - and not necessary that you see it that way for it to work for the people who love the space for those reasons.

However - when you view other peoples work you have to (in some regard) take your "personal level" out of the picture........ or at least that's my take on things..

Any one doing design for a client has one primary goal (IMHO) - and that is to deliver the client's dream - to take a concept they have in their minds eye and turn it into reality..... sure it makes a ton of sense to look at the overall picture and offer the client things they hadn't envisioned - however - in the end it is their vision they are paying us to create - not ours.

manifold leaves me a little more torn. i get where it's coming from. the prairie/usonian influences it draws. it is beautiful internally and finely crafted.

again, acoustics are obviously superb.

being from a different country i find it vernacular externally which is why i'm torn. to me, and this is only my humble opinion, it lacks an architectural sympathy to the site. i struggle to get beyond why there seems to be no connection to the woods from the studio space and it feels a little heavy to me form wise.

but that's the point isn't it. that's not a studio designers focus. a studio designers focus is the acoustics. so it ticks all of the boxes. that's not what an architect/designers focus is. and that's my point repeated. you think manifold is great, imagine how great it would be if both wes and frank loyd wright worked on it together.

LMFAO - again - this is your dream you're expressing - not the owner's dream - what he has is his dream....... as delivered by Wes -

Let me further respond to that by looking at how Frank viewed such things (this taken from Bibliography In Sound: Frank Lloyd Wright)

Wright strongly believed in individualism and did not affiliate with the American Institute of Architects during his career, going so far to call the organization "a harbor of refuge for the incompetent," and "a form of refined gangsterism." When an associate referred to him as "an old amateur" Wright confirmed, "I am the oldest."

take pachyderm studios an example of a studio with a direct connect with the outside world.

for your clarification also, i am by no means suggesting that someone needs to be an architect to understand design. i've been pretty clear about that by referring to people as designers on the whole.

Pachyderm is a wonderful facility - however that was their dream - try to pull that one off in downtown Manhattan.......

yes i am aware that wright was a draftsman.

Wright was a fantastic architect - he did not need to join AIA and follow their guidelines to make that happen.. Just as no one ever had to belong to any organization to be an architect back in the days before those organizations even existed.

The organizations formed to make cash - and in the process decided to tie up the name "Architect" - however being able to legally use the name (I cannot legally do so in my paperwork even though I can legally design (depending on the state I am working in) up to 30,000s.f facilities up to 3 stories in height.) and being able to do the work are 2 totally different things....

Hey - call it anyway you see it - however I still stand by the fact that our clients love our work - their clients love our work - and in the end - those are the only people we have to worry about making happy.

Have a great day (night?)

Rod

[AwwDeOhh]

Speaking for myself only:
When i'm recording, the VERY last thing i want is ANY connection to the outside world. This includes knowing if it's day or nighttime outside. The less extraneous distractions there are the better. when recording, i like to be enveloped by the mood of the song, not the scenery outside...

[gouge]

well there's a lot in all of that rod. i'll leave the institute and frank comments to others. it's getting off track.

there's not much you can do to convince me otherwise that avatar is not a dark space. pointing out that 's it's bright is a laymen way of trying to address the issue. ie. here's a space. lets whack in a heap of lights cause it's dark inside. now it's bright. ultimately it's still the same space. ultimately lighting does not provide the same sense that natural light does which is why designers/archtects go to length to incorporate natural light into their designs. not just for brightness. it's because of the experience it provides. the contrast it creates. people who have been trained or worked under anyone that has any understanding of archtecture know the importance of natural light. but don't take my word for it, look at any of the major archectural works in the last 60 years. lautner, wright, neutra and co.

you don't think it's important. as you say, studios suggest no windows. that's your experience. there are tons of studios out there that re-inforce your view. most of them designed in the 60-70's by pepole who had no understanding of architcture or by people emulating those designs.

looking at your comments on pachyderm and manifold.

i am hardly expressing my "dream". i am looking at how the building adresses the site. if either were in new york the repsonse would be completely different obviously. one of the fundamental principles behind organic architecture is how the building addresses the site. i don't know how to explain that any clearer. in an architectural dialogue people often make references or comments that are based on known concepts and ideals of design.

i also gotta say, it's great your clients are happy, certainly means that you are providing the service they are seeking. but what does that mean. millions of people are happy living in their poorly designed project homes around the world but does that really mean it's a good thing.

only you can really decide on that. based on our discussion online i'd encourage you to look further into what it is that quality design brings forward.

i'd also appreciate seeing some of your work. being an expert in architecture i'm sure it's quality.

[gouge]

Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh

Speaking for myself only:
When i'm recording, the VERY last thing i want is ANY connection to the outside world. This includes knowing if it's day or nighttime outside. The less extraneous distractions there are the better. when recording, i like to be enveloped by the mood of the song, not the scenery outside...

i like a disconnect also and how that influences the creative vibe. it's yin and yang as i also like great inspiring views and landscapes and how that influences the creative vibe.

the problem with the model of the shut down studio environemnt is that there are no other options. the user has no influence over their surrounds other than turning on a light switch.

for some that's fine, for others it's not.

it's interesting if you look around at most top architectural studio designers like wsdg etc they are all including natural light in their designs.

[Rod Gervais]

Originally Posted by gouge

you don't think it's important. as you say, studios suggest no windows.

It's really bad form to attribute things to people that they haven't said.... that's the second time in this thread you've done that - and the second time I have addressed you doing that.

If you have an instance of my taking that position then link to it - I would love to see it.

Attempting to put words in other peoples mouths to prove a point really doesn't help your argument - especially when they aren't true.... perhaps you would do well in politics.

Let's examine what I really did say.......

I gave Bunker Studios, Brooklyn, as one example - it's a space located on the first floor of a high rise building......

There is one wall on the street side of the building - the space is otherwise flanked by corridors and other building tenants.

The space contains studio "A" and studio "B"

In Studio "B", the control room (which takes up the entire outside face of wall facing the street) has natural light because this was physically possible....

The remainder of the spaces do not have natural light because this was physically impossible.....

You must have been so busy thinking of what you wanted to say me that you missed all of that........

I'll save you going back to read that post - here it is again (just the pertinent part of the post of course):

Bunker Studios (Brooklyn NY) has no windows in the "A" room (although it does have windows in the "B" control room) - but that is a matter of practicality.

It's located on the first floor of building flanked by corridors and other tenants - and with the exception of the control room for Studio "B" it was physically impossible to put windows anywhere else....

The important part of that would be "it does have windows in the "B" control room"

Hmmmm....... what about this is inconsistent with your statement quoted above?

You know - One of the things I do is work directly for developers/owners heading up design teams for projects not related to recording studios, some of those project reasonably large in size (nothing larger that 750 million USD though so far) and have come in touch with the fact that there are plenty of great spaces designed that have no natural light.....

For example - high rise hotel - the pre-function spaces surrounding the grand ballroom on the 3rd floor are located at the perimeter of the building and thus provide natural light - while the ballroom itself does not (nor in this particular hotel do the meeting rooms on that floor - or the hotel office spaces) Of course this is only a 4 diamond hotel.

Why I am shocked that this architectural firm - who only have offices in NYC, Washington DC, LA, London and China would dare to make use of the space in such a manner as taking into consideration flow and function without making certain that the grand ballroom had natural lighting........

This from that hotel (Hartford Marriott Downtown , Hartford CT)

Pre-funtion"

Pre-Function Space - Hartford Marriott Downtown

Grand Ballroom:

Grand Ballroom - Hartford Marriott Downtown

OK - sarcasm aside - when conditions permit - any designer will make use of natural lighting if 2 things exist..... the first is that doing so fits within the physical constraints of the building - taking into consideration budget, flow and function - the second being that it fits within the specifications provided by their client.

Tony made absolutely the right call in NYC when he designed Power Station (not Avatar Studios) and this is true regardless of whether you like it or not........ it is a matter of function and flow...... clients and perspective clients are not interested in seeing a bunch of crap dragged through the lobby/lounge/reception area from the freight elevator when they are trying to relax or waiting for a meeting...... those same clients waiting there will certainly find it much more comfortable when they have the natural lighting they have in those areas.

I made the right call at Bunker Studios - we had roughly 18 feet of wall available with 2 tall windows in it - that was all of the light source that existed for roughly 3,500s.f. of studio build out that would eventually provide 3 studios for my client's use.

Now I suppose I could have told them to go find another place to build their studio - this regardless of the fact that their long term lease on that property was the most amazing deal they could have found - at roughly 1/3 of the cost for surrounding properties - but me - I'm the type of guy who actually works with his clients..... who gives them what they want - what they contracted for - what makes them successful - but then again..... who the heck am I?

Perhaps it's time for you to realize that not everything fits within your particular neat little box.

You want to see my work - feel free to go visit my clients sites... they're readily available.......

Rod

[gouge]

Originally Posted by Rod Gervais

masonry units goes a long way (picture vermiculite in the cores) - especially seeing as he's talking a studio - which would suggest no windows (which are always building weak points when it comes to thermal loss/gain)

Rod

does it? why?

anyways, back somewhere in this thread i acknowledged that there will always be situations that don't allow for natural light. the question is how does one respond to that lack of light.

yes i've seen images of bunker studio.

you know the whole natural light thing is just one component. it became the focus because i was challenging your statement at the beginning of the thread.

when you referred to yourself as an architectural specialist, then had some condescending question asking me whether i even understood architecture and proclaimed that you did. i figured you must have some very special work to back it up with.

once someone has experience in architecture it's pretty easy to look at a drawing (just looking at the lines on the paper gives it all away) or image of completed works and know if an architect or someone with design ability was involved.

it has a certain feel,

[Rod Gervais]

gouge,

thanks for the link - I worded that very badly - but i did say it - so I owe you a mea culpa.

Consider this my apology.......

I am an architectural specialist - I specialize in studio design.......

I apologize for questioning you in the manner I did - it was not meant to disparage you - but rather was just trying to figure out where you were coming from and what your background was, I don't really know anything about you or what you do.

As I said - I know licensed architects that I would not let design a dog house on any of my projects - let alone a project..........

I know others that I pay very close attention to because it is impossible for me to spend even a short amount of time with them without learning something.

I hold architects (in general) in very high regard, and would not hesitate to ask for their advice or to collaborate with them on a project if there was a need.

In fact I do it more then you might imagine - I am quite often brought in as a consultant to work out particular aspects/or design specific spaces within a larger project and work very well with all of the architects I deal with.

In fact they usually hold me in fairly high regard after we do a project together. This is a recommendation from my linkedin page by the lead architect I worked with on a high rise hotel. I was coordinating the design efforts of the various Architectural/Engineering firms on this particular project for the owners - as well as providing onsite design to deal with the usual problems that would arise during the construction process (among a host of other things not pertaining specifically to design), as well as the same efforts for the convention center that was part and parcel of the overall project:

Jim McMullan, AIA LEED AP, Senior Associate, BBG-BBGM (colleague)

“As the project architect, I had the pleasure of working with Rod on a very complicated and challenging project. Rod is extremely detail oriented and very creative when it comes to problem solving. His knowledge of building codes, construction detailing and methodology surpasses most architects. My experience working with Rod amounted to a continuous learning opportunity. I would welcome the opportunity to work with Rod in the future.” January 26, 2010

As (I hope) you can see, I have no problem at all with architects - however there are times where I do not require them - and when those projects are the case, when I can provide a service to my clients without them - then I am perfectly capable of delivering a properly designed space that suits my clients needs.

Rod

[gouge]

cheers rod

i'm all good with things.

i've worked for a lot of different firms over the years but have always tended to be drawn to the design based ones.

i consider myself fortunate because of the teams and projects i've been part of. everything from high rise, multi res, university/education buildings, public spaces, sports halls, auditoriums, houses etc.

for the last few years i've been freelancing for a handfull of small boutique design firms. mainly focusing on high end residential projects which i have passion for.

i know my limits, acoustics are outside of those limits.


i did some searching last night and found a great video of wes talking about manifold and describing his efforts to introduce light, connect the outside spaces to the inside and deal with views.

Wes Lachot on Manifold Recording - YouTube

[Rod Gervais]

I'm quite familiar with that video - have watched it a couple of times in fact - Wes is a close friend and I try to stay on top of what he's up to.......

However - again - this was a particular project, with a particular client - who had a particular vision - and a set of pockets that was very VERY deep - I've never had the luxury of having a client walk up to me and tell me he has a clean plot of land & no budget restrictions - when that happens everything will be on the table.....

Not all of the studios Wes has designed had those luxury's.

Rod

[gouge]

i had that specific conversation with a colleague yesterday

he asked my opinion of some of his work. that very quickly became a conversation of how to respond to the site. when you question those outcomes it shouldn't be taken in a negative manner.

it's a genuine means of testing the design. how does the design respond to the brief, the site, the function, the users, the budget. in the end i believe that's what architecture is about.

it's a series of responses.

[Rod Gervais]

Originally Posted by gouge

i had that specific conversation with a colleague yesterday

he asked my opinion of some of his work. that very quickly became a conversation of how to respond to the site. when you question those outcomes it shouldn't be taken in a negative manner.

it's a genuine means of testing the design. how does the design respond to the brief, the site, the function, the users, the budget. in the end i believe that's what architecture is about.

it's a series of responses.

Nice to be able to agree.........

Rod

[piper]

Originally Posted by Rod Gervais

e.

Providing insulated masonry units goes a long way (picture vermiculite in the cores) - especially seeing as he's talking a studio - which would suggest no windows (which are always building weak points when it comes to thermal loss/gain)

12 inch block with vermiculite in the cores. R-8.5 to R-11.

R-Values | Concrete Masonry, Manufacturer, Northfield Block Company, Mundelein, Illinois, IL

The point of my post, which I guess wasn't clear, is that there are likely local building codes involved. The place to start is there. No point in designing something if you can't get a permit for it.

[timothyclee]

Didn't mean to start a war on here, went down to city hall last week to get a handle on the general building codes here in my city (Peoria, IL), and all looks good for what I want to build size wise on my property.