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
Low density fibre in 4" thick panels - worthwhile or worthless? Utility Software
Old 11th April 2018
  #31
Gear Guru
No Wrong

"Professional" is not a defined Acoustic term. The term 'wrong' is equally useless. A great deal of todays music is created in small and or poorly treated rooms.

I have been paid to Record and Mix multi million selling albums, in 'professional' studios. My main reference was and is a pair of Sennheiser Headphones.

DD
Old 11th April 2018
  #32
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan View Post
Dana, I am having difficulty in determining what you are trying to say. Clearly you are having similar difficulties

Whatever it is you are on about, it certainly isn't acoustics, and this is not your thread and much of what you have posted is blatant nonsense. e.g.

DD
As far as I know, you do work for GIK Acoustics. I told this community that when I built my home studio, 90% of the information came from this community. Dude, you have really pissed me off! I based my design with your advice in mind. I figured you knew what you were doing. The respect I had for you during this design is now gone. It was removed by your own words. The post I was looking for, I have now found. When you tell me I am spouting utter nonsense, it is only because I quoted you! Bass, why trap it, let it escape! This is your first quote in this thread.

Quote:
Yep... Granted you want to keep the outside sound from coming in, but it does make it harder to tame the room when soundproofed.
This would lead anyone to believe that if soundproofing was not needed, it would be better to let the bass escape, just as I said! I wont make the mistake of taking your advice again!
Old 11th April 2018
  #33
Gear Guru
Conflict

Dana, your ethos seems to be to seek out seemingly conflicting views and states and put them into a ring inside your head to duke it out. Like cockfighting.

There are no such conflicts, there are not thousands of people expressing different views on what is factual physics.

That last thread conflicts with nothing anywhere including within itself. Compared to a Concrete Bunker, Limp Bag type spaces enjoy the great acoustic benefit of leaking LF.
This lessens the burden of treatment, it certainly doesn't eliminate it.
Plasterboard partitions including ceilings, certainly support Modes and non resonant LF reflection nulling. Again concrete does this more strongly.

If isolation is required obviously one cannot use a Limp Bag.

There is no conflict in reality.

DD
Old 11th April 2018
  #34
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan View Post
Dana, your ethos seems to be to seek out seemingly conflicting views and states and put them into a ring inside your head to duke it out. Like cockfighting.

There are no such conflicts, there are not thousands of people expressing different views on what is factual physics.

That last thread conflicts with nothing anywhere including within itself. Compared to a Concrete Bunker, Limp Bag type spaces enjoy the great acoustic benefit of leaking LF.
This lessens the burden of treatment, it certainly doesn't eliminate it.
Plasterboard partitions including ceilings, certainly support Modes and non resonant LF reflection nulling. Again concrete does this more strongly.

If isolation is required obviously one cannot use a Limp Bag.

There is no conflict in reality.

DD
Wa Wa Wa Wa Wa.You said it, now own up to it. Anyone reading this thread will be able to judge for themselves. If you changed your mind, say so. If not, then dont degrade others who follow your own advice. The only conflict in reality is when people talk out of both sides of their mouth. Either it is, or it aint. Now, I will let you have the last word as I have nothing to sell anyone, nor do I have an ego to inflate. Out!
Old 11th April 2018
  #35
Gear Guru
Conflict

Dana again you are inventing conflicts inside your cock ring.

If I remember correctly you have a light walled building but no near neighbours.
In which case you are lucky to be able to enjoy the benefits of a 'Limp Bag'.
If you had mistakenly added unnecessary mass to your boundaries it would certainly have made your LF issues worse requiring more treatment.
If weather and isolation were not issues, mixing in a tent with little or no treatment would work well.
The more massive the boundaries, the stronger the LF issues, the more the treatment.
They are the two ends of the envelope, most reality exists somewhere between.
There is no conflict or 'wrong'.


DD
Old 12th April 2018
  #36
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dana_T. View Post
Wa Wa Wa Wa Wa.You said it, now own up to it. Anyone reading this thread will be able to judge for themselves. If you changed your mind, say so. If not, then dont degrade others who follow your own advice. The only conflict in reality is when people talk out of both sides of their mouth.
If you're going to be rude and confrontational here it'll just lead to someone pointing out that you have no idea what you're talking about and are totally misinterpreting things people have said.

Quote:
before I do any Bass trapping, I want to do the REW test first. There are many posts in this community that says under the right conditions, the bass can just escape. My room is 1/2 drywall with pink fluffy and plastic siding. It is 10 miles from any major roads. I am hoping I will not need to use them.
If you've done "9 months of research" and this is your belief, suffice to say you have a great deal to learn and would do well to take a more respectful tone toward people with exponentially greater knowledge and years of first hand professional experience.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dana_T. View Post
when I built my home studio, 90% of the information came from this community. Dude, you have really pissed me off! I based my design with your advice in mind. I figured you knew what you were doing. The respect I had for you during this design is now gone. It was removed by your own words. The post I was looking for, I have now found. When you tell me I am spouting utter nonsense, it is only because I quoted you! Bass, why trap it, let it escape! This is your first quote in this thread.
Dan's own words? You just quoted someone else (Glenn):
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn Kuras View Post
Granted you want to keep the outside sound from coming in, but it does make it harder to tame the room when soundproofed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dana_T.
This would lead anyone to believe that if soundproofing was not needed, it would be better to let the bass escape, just as I said! I wont make the mistake of taking your advice again!
It seems your primary mistake was taking something which was said, then stretching it to come to a wrong conclusion which was not stated at all. Things which were not said:

-all bass escapes from a single layer drywall room
-you don't need bass traps for a good LF response in a single layer drywall room

^Both of these are factually incorrect.


On the other hand, here are things which are correct:

-some bass escapes a single layer drywall room (primarily sub freqs).
-single layer drywall rooms typically have less severe LF issues (primarily in sub freqs).
-porous bass traps (IF design/coverage/placement is correct) are typically quite adequate for treating these spaces and getting good results, without needing to look to more complex pressure based/membrane/tuned traps.
-hiring a competent professional to consult on your project or design it for you can be an excellent choice, and typically a more productive use of your time than 9 months of internet research & forum reading.

Last edited by nms; 12th April 2018 at 05:28 AM..
Old 12th April 2018
  #37
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
If you're going to be rude and confrontational here it'll just lead to someone pointing out that you have no idea what you're talking about and are totally misinterpreting things people have said.
The least you can do is read the WHOLE thread. I simply offered the suggesting of letting the bass escape. This was before the OP stated he was surrounded by concrete and it was your buddy, that made the first insult, not me. Just like everything else on the www, everyone has their own opinion and everyone else is doing it wrong. The threads I referenced are from my 9 months of research that you feel is inadequate, yet they come from this very community.

Well, my 9 months of research saved my 6 grand. I went down the road you suggested and after I sent my room dimensions to a professional company, and this is the best part, even they would not guarantee after I installed their product, it would solve my problems. I think I will stick with the amateurs. They have nothing to sell and their advice is freely given.

Last edited by Dana_T.; 12th April 2018 at 07:13 AM.. Reason: Toned my reply down a tad.
Old 12th April 2018
  #38
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol303 View Post
I'd be very interested to read those posts if you have the links available.
Here is another link that talks about letting the bass escape. Some also comment on how they improve their situation by opening the windows. Although each room is different, it seems there are several little things one might be able to do, without spending a ton of cash.
Old 12th April 2018
  #39
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dana_T. View Post
The least you can do is read the WHOLE thread. I simply offered the suggesting of letting the bass escape.
Yes, your words again:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dana_T. View Post
Unless you are surrounded by concrete, you may get better results by doing nothing and letting the base escape the room.
Quote:
The threads I referenced are from my 9 months of research that you feel is inadequate, yet they come from this very community.
None of the threads you have linked support the idea that single layer drywall rooms don't require or greatly benefit from bass traps. Proper research would have been to clarify your perceived (but never stated) interpretation of those posts.

Aside from that, the quality/accuracy of advice and info you get from web forums is extremely varied.. a phenomena as old as the internet itself
Quote:
Well, my 9 months of research saved my 6 grand.
Your 9 months of research led you to a studio with no bass traps and some fundamentally incorrect ideas. If you spent the money 9 months ago you'd have saved 9 months of research and ended up with a better sounding room.

It's not magic, just physics and what happens when you implement effective treatments to minimize the acoustic interference caused by your room boundaries.
Quote:
I went down the road you suggested and after I sent my room dimensions to a professional company, and this is the best part, even they would not guarantee after I installed their product, it would solve my problems. I think I will stick with the amateurs. They have nothing to sell and their advice is freely given.
I'm not aware of a single acoustic treatment manufacturer in the world that guarantees specific measured end results in your room. There are too many variables outside of their control for them to offer that.

You also don't need to rely on the advice & room planning included free with the purchase of a company's products. The best studios in the world are custom design/built. Hire a studio designer to consult on your project and he can do anything from help you adjust your existing plan where needed or design an entire room plan based on treatments you build yourself or buy from your preferred vendor, all while never having to worry about being sold things you don't need or won't work. People post threads looking for studio designers/consultants now and then. Several of us float through now and then and jump into a thread or two. It's hardly uncommon to find best results in less time by going to a specialist. When most people have problems with the transmission in their car, their first thought usually isn't "well, I better hit the forums and start learning how to diagnose and fix transmissions!".

It depends what your time is worth and how important it is to end up with the best result available to you.
Old 12th April 2018
  #40
Lives for gear
 
Jens Eklund's Avatar
Just a word of caution to anyone who automatically assumes that a light, thin wall assembly will be more transparent to very low frequencies than a thicker, heavier one:

Which of the following wall assemblies do you think will be more transparent to frequencies below 80 Hz?

Wall 1
Low density fibre in 4" thick panels - worthwhile or worthless?-wall-1.jpg

or wall 2
Low density fibre in 4" thick panels - worthwhile or worthless?-wall-2.jpg
Attached Thumbnails
Low density fibre in 4" thick panels - worthwhile or worthless?-wall-1.jpg   Low density fibre in 4" thick panels - worthwhile or worthless?-wall-2.jpg  
Old 12th April 2018
  #41
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
Yes, your words again: None of the threads you have linked support the idea that single layer drywall rooms don't require or greatly benefit from bass traps. Proper research would have been to clarify your perceived (but never stated) interpretation of those posts.
No, they just state that you may be wasting your money relying on the advice of others, that you need massive bass traps. And yes, the more bass that is allowed to escape, the less treatment will be needed to trap it.

Quote:
Aside from that, the quality/accuracy of advice and info you get from web forums is extremely varied.. a phenomena as old as the internet itself
Your 9 months of research led you to a studio with no bass traps and some fundamentally incorrect ideas. If you spent the money 9 months ago you'd have saved 9 months of research and ended up with a better sounding room.
As most of the members in this community are working off of a budget and creating their own home studio, 6 grand can be spent in much better and productive ways. As far as my 9 months of research goes, the most important thing it did was give me a better understanding on room acoustics. What's that old saying, "an educated consumer is our best customer".

Quote:
It's not magic, just physics and what happens when you implement effective treatments to minimize the acoustic interference caused by your room boundaries. I'm not aware of a single acoustic treatment manufacturer in the world that guarantees specific measured end results in your room. There are too many variables outside of their control for them to offer that.
Well, with that many variables, it seems that people should not talk about absolutes when telling others what they must and must not invest in, concerning room treatment. Again, as all the pros say, any room under 1500 cubic feet is just a waist of money trying to apply room treatment.

Quote:
You also don't need to rely on the advice & room planning included free with the purchase of a company's products. The best studios in the world are custom design/built.
By a show of hands, how many members here are building multi million dollar studios?

Quote:
Hire a studio designer to consult on your project and he can do anything from help you adjust your existing plan where needed or design an entire room plan based on treatments you build yourself or buy from your preferred vendor, all while never having to worry about being sold things you don't need or won't work.
I did try that and maybe I just did not get the right ones. Nobody would give any advice if I was building my own, which I did.

Quote:
People post threads looking for studio designers/consultants now and then. Several of us float through now and then and jump into a thread or two. It's hardly uncommon to find best results in less time by going to a specialist.
Yes, I can agree with that and in 2018, there are more and more people willing to put in their own time and effort.

Quote:
When most people have problems with the transmission in their car, their first thought usually isn't "well, I better hit the forums and start learning how to diagnose and fix transmissions!".
Really? The first thing most people do is hit YouTube. The fog light in my wife's car went out and the shop wanted $460.00 to replace it. Advanced Auto had the part for $68.00. 20 mins on YT and 15 mins under her car and the repair was complete. Just last week my Ford Explorer failed inspection due to a upper ball joint. All they wanted was $598.00 to replace it. I called Advanced Auto and they had the part for $58.00. I watched the YT video on "How to replace the upper ball joint on a Ford Explorer", 22 mins. I went to Advanced Auto and bought the part as well as rented the tool to remove it. 45 min later, the car was heading back to the inspection station and it was passed, the tool was returned and the money went back into my account.

Quote:
It depends what your time is worth and how important it is to end up with the best result available to you.
My time is just as valuable as anyone else. I am not a mechanic nor am I a Acoustical Engineer, but I ran read and follow directions, just as most people can.
Old 12th April 2018
  #42
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jens Eklund View Post
Just a word of caution to anyone who automatically assumes that a light, thin wall assembly will be more transparent to very low frequencies than a thicker, heavier one:

Which of the following wall assemblies do you think will be more transparent to frequencies below 80 Hz?

Wall 1
Low density fibre in 4" thick panels - worthwhile or worthless?-wall-1.jpg

or wall 2
Low density fibre in 4" thick panels - worthwhile or worthless?-wall-2.jpg
Is there any way you can make this comparison without including the fiberglass insulation? Most interior walls in the USA do not have insulation in them. Such is my case, my back wall in my room is an interior wall.

Last edited by Dana_T.; 12th April 2018 at 10:36 AM.. Reason: Spelling.
Old 12th April 2018
  #43
Lives for gear
 
Jens Eklund's Avatar
These are not simulations, but actual assemblies measured by the national research council in Canada. A total of 350 (!) different assemblies are evaluated, including some without insulation as well. I´ll post a link to the entire paper once I receive some guesses on my quiz.
Old 12th April 2018
  #44
Lives for gear
 
Jens Eklund's Avatar
Only if you use inappropriate wool; so dense that it transfers vibrations from one partition to another, effectively coupling them together. On reason not to use dense wool when building sound isolation wall assemblies. The other reason being that a high GFR (normal for denser wool) is less effective for absorbing low frequencies (that we want in order to lower the fc of the system in order to increase TL at low frequencies).
Old 12th April 2018
  #45
Deleted User
Guest
I am going to go out on the limb here and say that the cost would not justify the added drywall as the transparency would be very close on either wall, below 80hz.
Old 12th April 2018
  #46
Gear Addict
 

As the originator of this thread I feel slightly culpable for its current trajectory… but notwithstanding some of the insults, the discussion is insightful (as always on here) so I’m more than happy for things to veer off course, as I received the nugget of info I was looking for right here:

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan View Post
I think Drytherm is a good choice for further 8" treatments. I would not rebuild the existing 4" ones, but if you plan doing more I would recommend going denser. The damped membrane effect is significant.

@Dana_T: as a budding amateur myself, I appreciate that it can get frustrating when trying to glean advice from online forums. However, the regulars here on Gearslutz (DanDan, Jens, Andre, Glenn, Ethan, Boggy and many others) offer a wealth of clear and consistent advice, which they are willing to share, often with Saintly levels of patience, free of charge. And from my limited experience here, these regulars are also happy to question each others’ expertise when necessary in a very genial and productive way. It’s certainly no ‘cabal of salesmen’ trying to push products - quite the opposite. So with respect, I think the accusations you’ve raised in this thread are unwarranted and unnecessary.

In my own experience, I tend to find that what appears as conflicting information is sometimes due to me not asking the right question - or misinterpreting the information I’ve been given. But yes, sure, sometimes it is also genuinely conflicting advice. Either way it's always best to ask for clarity in such cases, rather than jumping to one’s own conclusions and then blaming the messenger for the confusion. This information is freely given, after all. And I don't think you can justify getting angry or throwing insults without paying for that privilege.

But that’s me speaking with my moderator’s hat on (I help to Mod another forum). And no serious harm done here from what I can tell

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jens Eklund View Post
Which of the following wall assemblies do you think will be more transparent to frequencies below 80 Hz?
Jens, I sense a trick question! At first glance I would say that Wall 1 is the most transparent to frequencies sub-80Hz because it is thinner/ contains less mass. Then I begin to wonder whether Wall 1 would actually function as a sort of ‘membrane trap’ at low frequencies, and that by comparison more LF would actually escape the room via Wall 2 (which would appear to be more rigid).

So I’m going to take a slightly counter-intuitive guess at Wall 2 being “more transparent to very low frequencies”. Do I win a prize if correct?
Old 12th April 2018
  #47
Lives for gear
IMO, the mass of the wall 2 makes the wall less transparent.
Old 12th April 2018
  #48
Deleted User
Guest
@Skol303 , your point is well taken and I had no desire to get your post to this degree of frustration. In the future I will just give my opinion and try and reference a thread or two for people to make up their own minds. Every room is different and every room will require different levels of treatment.
Old 12th April 2018
  #49
Gear Addict
 

@ Dana_T No problem from my side; I enjoy a good debate and have already learnt new things from this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dana_T. View Post
Every room is different and every room will require different levels of treatment.
Of that we can be certain!
Old 12th April 2018
  #50
Gear Guru
True That

One Hand Washes The Other. There are many circular truths, and Rules of Thumb. In General, pretty much useless IMO.
In various languages there are 'irregular' verbs. Confusingly they tend to be the most commonly used ones, like 'to be' or 'to go'.
Irregular?
The 1500 figure for a 'Professional' Studio is contextual. It presumes Money, Space, Isolation Requirement.
If one does not have the Space and No big Isolation ask, a tent or light wooden shed would work well.
From memory isn't your Studio such Dana? i.e. Light wooden structure with no near neighbours or noise sources?
The Monitoring in tiny spaces in some Recording Trucks is quite good, certainly to a workable Pro Standard in my experience doing Live Music on TV.

Door and windows 'perforate' a concrete bunker and are welcome in terms of LF passing through AND being absorbed. Opening them for Mixing or other critical times can be useful.
Overall though, worth knowing their LF behaviour. It can often advise to reverse the room, windows and doors in the Back Wall. Plasterboard comes in different thicknesses and even different densities. More importantly the mounting conditions can be rigid to floating. Stud spacing, resilient systems. Very different LF Transparency/ Absorbtion.
Here's a Rescue Puppy, a cross between Limp Bag and VPR, sort of, courtesy of Auntie. An interesting and largely unknown/ignored system.
Full text of "BBC Research and Development Report Number 1994-12"

DD

Last edited by DanDan; 12th April 2018 at 05:57 PM..
Old 12th April 2018
  #51
Lives for gear
 
Jens Eklund's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol303 View Post
Jens, I sense a trick question! At first glance I would say that Wall 1 is the most transparent to frequencies sub-80Hz because it is thinner/ contains less mass. Then I begin to wonder whether Wall 1 would actually function as a sort of ‘membrane trap’ at low frequencies, and that by comparison more LF would actually escape the room via Wall 2 (which would appear to be more rigid).

So I’m going to take a slightly counter-intuitive guess at Wall 2 being “more transparent to very low frequencies”. Do I win a prize if correct?
Of course it’s a trick question or I wouldn’t have asked it.

So yes; wall nr 2 is more transparent to frequencies below 80 Hz:

Wall 1
Low density fibre in 4" thick panels - worthwhile or worthless?-wall-1.jpg

Wall 2
Low density fibre in 4" thick panels - worthwhile or worthless?-wall-2.jpg

Reason being that wall nr 1 has low mass and small air gap which results in a high resonant frequency for the system, and it´s at resonant frequency transmission loss (TL) is at minimum. Above and also below this frequency, the wall becomes “stiff” again and starts to reflect. As can be seen, wall nr 2, due to its higher mass per partition and larger air gap, has a much lower resonant frequency that ends up at around 50 Hz (or perhaps even a tad lower) thus resulting in slightly lower performance in this frequency range compared to wall nr 1 even if it feels counterintuitive at first but this is yet another example of just how contradictory acoustics can be.


Here´s the full NRC paper (IRC-IR-761) with all 350 walls tested:
http://nparc.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/eng/view...7-da064b073e7f

The two walls in my example can be found on page 19 and 294 (page nr. according to print, not pdf).
Attached Thumbnails
Low density fibre in 4" thick panels - worthwhile or worthless?-wall-1.jpg   Low density fibre in 4" thick panels - worthwhile or worthless?-wall-2.jpg  
Old 12th April 2018
  #52
Deleted User
Guest
Good to know.
Old 13th April 2018
  #53
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jens Eklund View Post
Reason being that wall nr 1 has low mass and small air gap which results in a high resonant frequency for the system, and it´s at resonant frequency transmission loss (TL) is at minimum... it feels counterintuitive at first but this is yet another example of just how contradictory acoustics can be.
Thanks Jens, interesting and very well explained.

I have happily downloaded a copy of the report in lieu of my prize
Old 14th April 2018
  #54
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jens Eklund View Post
Of course it’s a trick question or I wouldn’t have asked it.

So yes; wall nr 2 is more transparent to frequencies below 80 Hz:

Wall 1


Wall 2


Reason being that wall nr 1 has low mass and small air gap which results in a high resonant frequency for the system, and it´s at resonant frequency transmission loss (TL) is at minimum. Above and also below this frequency, the wall becomes “stiff” again and starts to reflect. As can be seen, wall nr 2, due to its higher mass per partition and larger air gap, has a much lower resonant frequency that ends up at around 50 Hz (or perhaps even a tad lower) thus resulting in slightly lower performance in this frequency range compared to wall nr 1 even if it feels counterintuitive at first but this is yet another example of just how contradictory acoustics can be.


Here´s the full NRC paper (IRC-IR-761) with all 350 walls tested:
http://nparc.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/eng/view...7-da064b073e7f

The two walls in my example can be found on page 19 and 294 (page nr. according to print, not pdf).
Hello,

In the link below, i can read the opposite.
The wall 6 has the better sound insulation at Resonnance Frequency=40 Hz with 63 dB attenuation against the wall 2 FR=92 with 46 dB.
The wall 5 has an lower insulation than the wall 6.

Akustar -



And the modal caracteristics of a room can change drasticly the insulation

Limites physiques et acoustiques d'un local


The two link are in french, with google translate is easy to read.

Throw fiber or mineral wool in a room it's easy and without big consequences.
Set a sound insulation of a room, this is a another challenge and a special case as shown previously can not be a general case and from afar.
Old 14th April 2018
  #55
Lives for gear
 
Jens Eklund's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinococcus View Post
Hello,

In the link below, i can read the opposite.
The wall 6 has the better sound insulation at Resonnance Frequency=40 Hz with 63 dB attenuation against the wall 2 FR=92 with 46 dB.
The wall 5 has an lower insulation than the wall 6.

Akustar -



And the modal caracteristics of a room can change drasticly the insulation

Limites physiques et acoustiques d'un local


The two link are in french, with google translate is easy to read.

Throw fiber or mineral wool in a room it's easy and without big consequences.
Set a sound insulation of a room, this is a another challenge and a special case as shown previously can not be a general case and from afar.
Not sure I understand your point/question. How is it opposite? Can you clarify?
Old 14th April 2018
  #56
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan View Post
One Hand Washes The Other. There are many circular truths, and Rules of Thumb. In General, pretty much useless IMO.
In various languages there are 'irregular' verbs. Confusingly they tend to be the most commonly used ones, like 'to be' or 'to go'.
Irregular?
You may also be able to add, "must have", must be", will not work unless" as well.

Quote:
The 1500 figure for a 'Professional' Studio is contextual. It presumes Money, Space, Isolation Requirement. If one does not have the Space and No big Isolation ask, a tent or light wooden shed would work well.
Dan, you are the first reference I have read that added the word "Professional" into the wording. I have read that regardless of building it from the ground up, or converting a room in your home, if you do not have the min of 1500 sq ft, you are simply wasting your time as well as your money, if you are seeking professional results.

I do not believe this at all and it is hard to go against people who have made these statements, as they either do this for a living or have honorable credits attached to the name a mile long. Again, this simply goes back to all the information on the www, were everyone else is doing it wrong and you must do it my way.

Also, I am a firm believer that one may be better off using cans to mix, depending on their environment. According to the majority, this is absurd and I have dealt with this argument for years. It just made sense to me to remove the room out of the equation. I just about did a back flip when you said that you use cans as well in some circumstances.

Quote:
From memory isn't your Studio such Dana? i.e. Light wooden structure with no near neighbours or noise sources?
Yes that is correct. Being involved in this thread has opened my eyes that "no one size fits all" and before I give any advice on this subject in the future, I will request the needed information to give an educated opinion. I do not have to read it off of a website, I can simply look at my own situation and explain what has worked for me, in my situation.

Quote:
The Monitoring in tiny spaces in some Recording Trucks is quite good, certainly to a workable Pro Standard in my experience doing Live Music on TV.
I agree 100%. I guess it is like hearing the bass thumping from a car you hear, 30 secs before you can see the car go by.

Quote:
Door and windows 'perforate' a concrete bunker and are welcome in terms of LF passing through AND being absorbed. Opening them for Mixing or other critical times can be useful.
I agree 100%. Again, as I have witnessed this first hand.

Quote:
Overall though, worth knowing their LF behaviour. It can often advise to reverse the room, windows and doors in the Back Wall. Plasterboard comes in different thicknesses and even different densities. More importantly the mounting conditions can be rigid to floating. Stud spacing, resilient systems. Very different LF Transparency/ Absorbtion.
I agree Dan, as this is where most of the bass will be in the beginning. My door is located on the rear wall and I set it up factoring this in. In the US, it is very common to use 1/2 drywall. More expensive homes will use 5/8s and insulate all the walls around the bathroom, to keep embarrassing noises from escaping. It amazes me how some rich people think sometimes.

In the US, we associate plaster walls when you frame up a wall, and nail wire mesh over the studs. You then use an interior stucco, concrete like material, with a hawk and trial and cover the wire mesh. It can be 1/4 to 1/2 inch thick. I assume our word for drywall is your word for plaster board. In Florida, this is common practice for the outside finish on homes. It is cheap and easy to install.

Quote:
Here's a Rescue Puppy, a cross between Limp Bag and VPR, sort of, courtesy of Auntie. An interesting and largely unknown/ignored system.
Full text of "BBC Research and Development Report Number 1994-12"

DD
Thanks for the link Dan. I will check it out as time permits. Have a great weekend.
Attached Thumbnails
Low density fibre in 4" thick panels - worthwhile or worthless?-plaster.jpeg  
Old 15th April 2018
  #57
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jens Eklund View Post
Not sure I understand your point/question. How is it opposite? Can you clarify?
hello,


the first link i posted show the contrary.

The wall 1 in your exemple is the more transparent in the link named wall 2
The wall 2 in your exemple is the less transaparent in the link named wall 6.

The author of the two pages i posted, build his own database with his measurements of differents walls, windows, doors... in real conditions.
Old 15th April 2018
  #58
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinococcus View Post
The author of the two pages i posted, build his own database with his measurements of differents walls, windows, doors... in real conditions.
I found the last two paragraphs in the second article to be very enlightening.

Quote:
On the other hand, the more a partition is damped, the less pronounced the stationary modes. American homes, usually built with a wooden frame, suffer less from stationary modes than our hard material constructions.

Calculation of proportions
In the light of the foregoing, it will be understood that any in-depth calculation of the ideal proportions is unfounded. One wonders why this concept persists for so long. The calculation of the proportions of a room is justified only to avoid the caricature reports (square wall, cube, tubular geometry) and the ceilings too low. Beyond that, it is better not to worry about it.

Last edited by Dana_T.; 15th April 2018 at 11:18 AM.. Reason: Added translated paragraphs.
Old 15th April 2018
  #59
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dana_T. View Post
I found the last paragraph in the article to be very enlightening.
In the light of the foregoing, it will be understood that any in-depth calculation of the ideal proportions is unfounded. One wonders why this concept persists for so long. The calculation of the proportions of a room is justified only to avoid the caricature reports (square wall, cube, tubular geometry) and the ceilings too low. Beyond that, it is better not to worry about it.


Me too
Old 15th April 2018
  #60
Lives for gear
 
Jens Eklund's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinococcus View Post
hello,


the first link i posted show the contrary.

The wall 1 in your exemple is the more transparent in the link named wall 2
The wall 2 in your exemple is the less transaparent in the link named wall 6.

The author of the two pages i posted, build his own database with his measurements of differents walls, windows, doors... in real conditions.
What data are you referring to? I can only se general STC numbers in your link ...
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