Proposed acoustic treatment for 16' x 10' x 10' room
Old 26th March 2013
  #1
Lives for gear
 

Thread Starter
Proposed acoustic treatment for 16' x 10' x 10' room

I am getting ready to do some DIY treatment to my small composing/mixing space and would like to hear any input on my current ideas. I posed a drawing and some measurements I made from the listening position with FuzzMeasure and a Behringer ECM8000. Right now the room is untreated. The floor is short commercial carpet, the ceiling is 2' x 4' tiles with 8" batting on top of the tiles, the walls are 5/8" drywall on steel studs. The room is 9' 6" tall.

The drawing shows 4x bass traps in the corners, floor to ceiling, made with 4" OC703. Then, 4x 3" thick OC703 panels in the front end of the room for first reflections, 24" wide and 72" tall. Finally, on the back wall some 2" thick OC703 2' x 2' scattered blocks in a checkerboard pattern. I understand I will probably need to do more treatment than this, but I am not sure what.

Right now the midrange decay time is pretty annoying. There is not much in the room besides a desk, office chair, some keyboards and speakers.

Thank you,
Tim






Old 26th March 2013
  #2
Gear Guru
 
Glenn Kuras's Avatar
 

Because of the room being square (10'x10') more trapping if possible. Also for the back wall you need much thicker then 2" panels. If at all possible make them SUPER THICK. 12" is not to thick.
Old 26th March 2013
  #3
Old 26th March 2013
  #4
Lives for gear
 

Thread Starter
Thanks for the replies, I really appreciative the expert advice, I have read so much of it already and I can really see the genuine interest many of you have in acoustics and helping others.

I could easily add more trapping on the floor/wall corner all the way around the room. I can make the back wall very thick, I have lots of extra space in this room.

@Glenn, should I be using a scatter block effect on the back wall or maybe three 24" wide x 72" x 12" thick panels? Or one large panel?

@Jens
Point very respectfully taken about putting up useful data. I will remeasure again and make sure I got all those guidelines, I thought I covered everything in that sticky but probably didn't get the scales right on the impulse response or the cumulative spectral delay. I will repost later today.

Tim
Old 26th March 2013
  #5
Gear Guru
 
Glenn Kuras's Avatar
 

Quote:
@Glenn, should I be using a scatter block effect on the back wall or maybe three 24" wide x 72" x 12" thick panels? Or one large panel?
I would go with one solid block. Use a slat design over them, if possible to retain upper energy.
Old 26th March 2013
  #6
Gear interested
 
MediaRooms's Avatar
 

Just some general comments -

The peak just above 100 Hz. is probably due to having two identical room dimensions.

To improve your LF, I would install some Helmholtz resonators tuned to 40, 70, 100, and 110 Hz. These will focus on the LF peaks without pulling down everything else in that range.

I prefer using the resonators instead of traps, because traps pull all the LF down (within their limits), while resonators focus on the peaks. This has the effect of smoothing out the LF response rather than pulling it all down.

With all due respect to Glenn, I would not put in absorptive panels thicker than 2". I fixed a room for Bruce Botnick that had everything below 100 Hz. sucked out. Turns out the problem was some really thick insulation - 1 ft. to 2 ft. thick. . Below 300 Hz., I think you'll get better, smoother results by using Helmholtz resonators focused on the problem frequencies.
Old 27th March 2013
  #7
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaRooms View Post
To improve your LF, I would install some Helmholtz resonators tuned to 40, 70, 100, and 110 Hz. These will focus on the LF peaks without pulling down everything else in that range.
In your experience, are HH predictable most of the time?

Have you tried the approach where you over-trap then add reflective/diffusive surfaces to bring back life?
Old 27th March 2013
  #8
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn Kuras View Post
I would go with one solid block. Use a slat design over them, if possible to retain upper energy.
This is good advice. Slats can work well in small rooms.

More important is the tangential modes of the sides and ceiling/floor. Bass trapping in the edge corners will improve modal decay and FR. Most people ignore the edge corners, but in this case it is strongly advised.
Old 27th March 2013
  #9
Gear Guru
 
Glenn Kuras's Avatar
 

Quote:
More important is the tangential modes of the sides and ceiling/floor. Bass trapping in the edge corners will improve modal decay and FR. Most people ignore the edge corners, but in this case it is strongly advised.
If you mean floor to wall corners then YES. The other nice part about using that area is you do not have to mount the trap so it can be used when tracking if need be.
Old 27th March 2013
  #10
Lives for gear
 
audiothings's Avatar
 

Not getting into how much/what/where to put the insulation... there is a lifetime of reading material in that regard on this very sub forum. I noticed however, that the apex of your listening triangle is happening ahead of your listening position... that is calling for some funky imaging. Ideally you want your speakers angled 30 degrees each, and place everything so that the apex of the triangle is 10" or so behind your head.

btw, do i see a doepfer modular on your left and a vermona drum machine on your right? that is some pretty tasty gear you have in there...
Old 27th March 2013
  #11
Lives for gear
 

Thread Starter
You're right, it does look that way in the photos. I will check the angles, I moved all my gear in there in a bit of a frenzy one evening. The stands I have now sorta suck and when I walk behind the desk to move cabling and they spin easily on the poles of the stands.

Argosy speaker stands are on my buy list... these are just crappy stands with platforms I got at GC for cheap and never bothered replacing them.

Yup, that's a Doepfer setup and the Vermona DRM, both highly recommended!

Tim
Old 28th March 2013
  #12
Gear Guru
 
DanDan's Avatar
Testing

Tim there are some basic measurement hurdles and software behaviours to get over the first hurdle.
One speaker measuring is the norm. L, R, do L+R to see what happens below 300Hz if you want to be really thorough.

The default Watefall settings in FM are daft, I am sure that will change radically when Chris updates the App. CHRIS !

Your measuring levels are low.
Anyhoo, it's all in that Primer, which is hopefully short simple and for purpose, i.e. to get you up and running fast.

Are all your walls studded plasterboard or are there some concrete/brick?
Are the ceiling tiles acoustically porous or are they reflective?

Mediarooms, do you have tests showing DiY Helmholtz devices working well in real world rooms? Can you recommend calculators and practical designs which actually turn out to be accurate in practice?

DD
Old 28th March 2013
  #13
Lives for gear
 

Thread Starter
I really appreciate all the help!

The walls are 5/8" sheetrock with knockdown plaster on them (the norm in Arizona, USA). The front wall behind the speakers is a firewall and is 5/8" sheetrock, fireboard, then steel studs with batts between them. The right wall goes all the way to the steel (about 17 feet tall) and the left wall and rear wall stop at the ceiling tile grid, so they are not the most solid. They visibly move when the doors open and close. I can see some light coming under the ceiling tiles on the left of the room actually. Commercial buildings are always a cocktail of tenant "improvements" and cheap construction.

I did weatherstrip all the doors in the building this week which cut the noise floor in this room a bit. I also patched some holes and added Great Stuff in some openings in the wall behind the speakers (the firewall wall) because an air conditioned IT closet is on the other side.

I also got a 16 channel snake installed this week to connect this room to where I am tracking drums. Thanks Redco Audio!

I am going to thoroughly go through the measurement process again after getting my speakers positioned exactly.

Tim
Old 28th March 2013
  #14
Gear Guru
 
DanDan's Avatar
Location Location

Tim, speaker and listener position can greatly influence the response. Take a look at the last graph in that linked Measuring Primer.
DD
Old 1st April 2013
  #15
Lives for gear
 
Jens Eklund's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by timstoel View Post
@Jens
Point very respectfully taken about putting up useful data. I will remeasure again and make sure I got all those guidelines, I thought I covered everything in that sticky but probably didn't get the scales right on the impulse response or the cumulative spectral delay. I will repost later today.

Tim
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jens Eklund View Post
If unsure about what scales to use and what graphs to include, why not simply upload the actual IR-files (either in REW format or exported as wav/aiff if captured in other software), so that others can open/import it into the software preferred and inspect it without limitations.
Old 23rd April 2013
  #16
Gear interested
 

Mate, keep in mind that, speaker and listener position plays vital role for the attendants. You can efficiently use to "Acoustic treatment" for 16' x 10' x 10' room.
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
J-P / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
14
Black Bottle / High end
19
drfacehead / High end
10
Mastering101 / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
5

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

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.