The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
How thick should wooden slats over an absorber be and how far apart? Modular Synthesizers
Old 15th January 2018
  #1
Lives for gear
 

How thick should wooden slats over an absorber be and how far apart?

I am going to try using slats on my 3rd and hopefully final studio build in my new house
I have a 12m X 5m X 3m(ceiling) which I am going to use as the room for recording acoustic guitar and for mixing. It is a concrete basement so all walls and floors are concrete and I believe that the best plan of action would be to design for a control room and have the back section as a tracking space. I will have ceiling and walls covered in 600mm fluffy and i plan on purchasing a couple of grands worth of diffusers for the back area (going to put another post regarding this). I would like to use the slats this time round because last time my room was too dead and this is where I have my doubts.

1) how thick, how wide and how far apart should the slats be?
2) above what frequency will they reflect back into the room?
3) where in the room should they be? Back side walls, across all walls?

thank you!
Old 20th January 2018
  #2
Lives for gear
 

Please can someone chime in on this. Or at least point me to any source info regarding the topic

cheers
Old 21st January 2018
  #3
Gear Guru
Search

Most things have been addressed over the years here, well worth getting good at the Search function.

Random is what we want. Random Scattering.
How to achieve that practically is another matter. Ideally every slat and gap would be different. Boggy's approach is good in terms of using simple materials.
Boggy's MLS slat sequence
But one could just chose a selection of different width (and thickness if you wish) and install them in a random looking pattern, including the gaps.
IMO, these arrangements are pretty innocuous, well, inaudible really, unless you go north of 50% wood. Say 70/30

You will see plenty of lathing on the webpages of Studio Builders. John Brandt, Boggy, Jeff Hedback, etc. etc.

Rod Gervais Bunker Studio is amazing. The Bunker Studio

DD
Old 22nd January 2018
  #4
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan View Post
Most things have been addressed over the years here, well worth getting good at the Search function.

Random is what we want. Random Scattering.
How to achieve that practically is another matter. Ideally every slat and gap would be different. Boggy's approach is good in terms of using simple materials.
Boggy's MLS slat sequence
But one could just chose a selection of different width (and thickness if you wish) and install them in a random looking pattern, including the gaps.
IMO, these arrangements are pretty innocuous, well, inaudible really, unless you go north of 50% wood. Say 70/30

You will see plenty of lathing on the webpages of Studio Builders. John Brandt, Boggy, Jeff Hedback, etc. etc.

Rod Gervais Bunker Studio is amazing. The Bunker Studio

DD
Thanks Dan. I really like studio B in Rod's studio and the slats do seem random and about 70% as you say. I think I am going to try something like this for my own studio and luckily I have Rod's book in the post already so maybe that might be helpful too. It is interesting that in the description it states "Studio Bs Live Room is a deader sounding room than most of Studio A" which also confirms what you say about the wooden slats sounding inaudible even at 70% which si what he seems to be using. Do you reckon that dimensions of such a room are even important because behind the slats is probably a lot of absorption?
Old 22nd January 2018
  #5
Lives for gear
 

What is the advantage of random slats? Aren't they just a low pass filter?

What about just using the multi layer absorber calculator
Multi-layer Absorber Calculator
Old 22nd January 2018
  #6
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyc View Post
What is the advantage of random slats? Aren't they just a low pass filter?

What about just using the multi layer absorber calculator
Multi-layer Absorber Calculator
I could be wrong but, I think using a low density fully reflective surface over the absorption would be a high pass filter, the fact that it is random might produce "scattering" but if someone with more info can chime in, I am all ears
Old 22nd January 2018
  #7
Old 22nd January 2018
  #8
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dinococcus View Post
The link is regarding an incorrect formula published in a textbook regarding Helmholtz resonators. Could you be more precise which part answers the question please?
Old 22nd January 2018
  #9
Gear Guru
Resonance

Random is desirable because any regularity will cause a frequency anomaly related to the it's dimensions.
DD
Old 22nd January 2018
  #10
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan View Post
Random is desirable because any regularity will cause a frequency anomaly related to the it's dimensions.
DD
Did a search (as you sugessted ) over here and found a post by Rod in which he says:

in my typical designs I use a 4- 6- 8 slat pattern - with slots aligned in particular widths (slot width varies based on the room your in) but all of the slots are exactly the same width simply because it is easier from both a design and construction point of view.........

Does 4- 6- 8 mean the width of each slat in inches?

hope this is explained in his book too which I can't wait to read
Old 22nd January 2018
  #11
Gear Guru
Newell

These numbers generally signify ratios, so one can resize to suit the space and availability of sized wood. 468 seems odd, at least two of those dimensions are obviously related. I guess the devil is in the detail, spacing. There is a 345 sequence which is and has been popular. But at 50:50 sonically a bit harmless IMO.
MLS and Newells sequence

DD
Old 22nd January 2018
  #12
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan View Post
These numbers generally signify ratios, so one can resize to suit the space and availability of sized wood. 468 seems odd, at least two of those dimensions are obviously related.
Oh ok, I thought they were actual measurements. If you look here the slats do appear to be following this sequence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan View Post
I guess the devil is in the detail, spacing. There is a 345 sequence which is and has been popular. But at 50:50 sonically a bit harmless IMO.
MLS and Newells sequence

DD
Yes it seems most agree that 50/50 is too dead so I think you were right on th emoney when you said 70% slats but I do recall that in an older post, Rod said that it depends what you want to use the room for and how large the room is. So since I am recording guitar and his studio B seems to be good for that purpose, I want to adopt a similar design for my live room. If I can't find exact widths for the slots/slats he used I think I will just go for the 345 sequence and do about 70%.
Old 22nd January 2018
  #13
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by attaboy_jhb View Post
The link is regarding an incorrect formula published in a textbook regarding Helmholtz resonators. Could you be more precise which part answers the question please?
You topic start by how tick if i read well...
Old 22nd January 2018
  #14
Gear Guru
Ratios

The 345 sequence is alternating slats and gaps,
intrinsically 50:50
I think you will find yourself constrained by actually affordably available wood sizes.
DD
Old 22nd January 2018
  #15
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan View Post
The 345 sequence is alternating slats and gaps,
intrinsically 50:50
I think you will find yourself constrained by actually affordably available wood sizes.
DD
You mean like this:

3" slat
4" slot
5"slat
3" slot
4"slat
5"slot

etc etc?

By the way, that post was excellent in describing the difference between the two. They seem very different.

I hadn't thought about the wood constraints and I am building this thing in our house in Spain where there are far fewer treest than there are in Ireland. Wood is pricey round these parts.
Old 22nd January 2018
  #16
Gear Guru
Sequence

Alternating yes but not in that sequence.
atta, you are proceeding question by question. But all of the subjects queried are widely written about. Search here or Google and they will appear. Recording Studio Design - Philip Newell - Google Books

DD
Old 23rd January 2018
  #17
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan View Post
Alternating yes but not in that sequence.
atta, you are proceeding question by question. But all of the subjects queried are widely written about. Search here or Google and they will appear. Recording Studio Design - Philip Newell - Google Books

DD
Ok will buy it, I hope it is good for nimrods like me
Old 23rd January 2018
  #18
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan View Post
Alternating yes but not in that sequence.
atta, you are proceeding question by question. But all of the subjects queried are widely written about. Search here or Google and they will appear. Recording Studio Design - Philip Newell - Google Books

DD
FYI found this post:

% slat coverage

this was covered in that thread and seem both Rod and BigKD use the slat sequence with equal slot widths.
Top Mentioned Products
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump