room acoustics on a budget

with industry Pro, Nick Batzdorf

Moderators: admin, mdc, TAXIstaff

Post Reply
jude3
Impressive
Impressive
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:30 pm
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: room acoustics on a budget

Post by jude3 » Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:25 am

Here is an interesting picture.What I am saying is the same as this stuff:http://www2.digidesign.com/digizine/dz_ ... =907anyone that knows about George Massenburg knows he would not do this if there the "standard" way was so good.there is an other studio in Nashville that does the same as this studio only with the tubes that I recommend here. I can't seen to find that picture right now.

User avatar
rld
Committed Musician
Committed Musician
Posts: 735
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2004 7:13 am
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: room acoustics on a budget

Post by rld » Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:54 am

Jun 30, 2009, 9:25am, jude3 wrote:Here is an interesting picture.What I am saying is the same as this stuff:http://www2.digidesign.com/digizine/dz_ ... =907anyone that knows about George Massenburg knows he would not do this if there the "standard" way was so good.there is an other studio in Nashville that does the same as this studio only with the tubes that I recommend here. I can't seen to find that picture right now.You're mixing apples and oranges.His room measures 36' x 25' x 27, is designed with acoustic properties in mind and you can be sure his low end is under control.The average project studio is a spare bedroom and bass treatment is more of a priority than mid to high diffusion, though both may be needed.For $150, bass absorption would give better results than diffusion treatment and hollow tubes aren't good absorbers.

User avatar
derekmcfarland
Impressive
Impressive
Posts: 402
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 12:27 am
Gender: Male
Location: Fort Mill, SC
Contact:

Re: room acoustics on a budget

Post by derekmcfarland » Tue Jun 30, 2009 7:11 am

Jun 30, 2009, 8:49am, jude3 wrote: They just follow the heard mentality.Don't know if it was intentional, but I LOVE the pun!(I'm also learning a lot from this thread - THANKS!)Derek

User avatar
mojobone
King of the World
King of the World
Posts: 11837
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 4:20 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Up in Indiana, where the tall corn grows
Contact:

Re: room acoustics on a budget

Post by mojobone » Tue Jun 30, 2009 9:02 am

I think some of the larger tubes might make decent bass traps if you pack 'em with high-density insulation. You can use the room's measurements to calculate where the biggest buildups of frequencies will occur, but it's probably more accurate to use a measurement mic and a spectrograph along with some test tones. Humps and dips in the bass and midbass are most common to small rooms. You probably can do a lot with diffusers; at any rate, materials that can effectively absorb bass tend to weigh tons.
The Straight Stuff; Roots, Rock & Soul

http://twangfu.wordpress.com
http://twitter.com/mojo_bone

jonathanm
Committed Musician
Committed Musician
Posts: 832
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 4:22 am
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: room acoustics on a budget

Post by jonathanm » Tue Jun 30, 2009 9:48 am

Jun 30, 2009, 9:54am, rld wrote:You're mixing apples and oranges.I've been trying to do that. Having trouble getting the apples to sit well in the mix.
"Everyone always misquotes me." - Frederick Q. Larson

jude3
Impressive
Impressive
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:30 pm
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: room acoustics on a budget

Post by jude3 » Tue Jun 30, 2009 10:27 am

Jun 30, 2009, 9:54am, rld wrote:Jun 30, 2009, 9:25am, jude3 wrote:Here is an interesting picture.What I am saying is the same as this stuff:http://www2.digidesign.com/digizine/dz_ ... =907anyone that knows about George Massenburg knows he would not do this if there the "standard" way was so good.there is an other studio in Nashville that does the same as this studio only with the tubes that I recommend here. I can't seen to find that picture right now.You're mixing apples and oranges.His room measures 36' x 25' x 27, is designed with acoustic properties in mind and you can be sure his low end is under control.The average project studio is a spare bedroom and bass treatment is more of a priority than mid to high diffusion, though both may be needed.For $150, bass absorption would give better results than diffusion treatment and hollow tubes aren't good absorbers.Have you ever done what i suggested? I bet not.What youare saying simply is not true. dont get me wrong. I know you are just saying what you have read. But it is not true.I have done what I say many times. Sound waves are sound waves no matter what size the room. it is more critical in a small room because the standing waves creat an effect that is often not noticed till you get rid of it.The common person that puts traps in a room does not solve most of the problems. They simple change the sound and create new problems. But since it sounds different they think they have done good.Do you know the size of the trap needed to suck up bass waves? I got news for you. Those little auralex thigs aret gonna do it. Nor is the one in the picture someone posted earlier. If you cut the tubes in half and mount them on the wall a small room would only cost about $80 or so. Your room would sound bitchin!

jude3
Impressive
Impressive
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:30 pm
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: room acoustics on a budget

Post by jude3 » Tue Jun 30, 2009 10:33 am

Jun 30, 2009, 10:11am, derekmcfarland wrote:Jun 30, 2009, 8:49am, jude3 wrote: They just follow the heard mentality.Don't know if it was intentional, but I LOVE the pun!(I'm also learning a lot from this thread - THANKS!)Derek You like that? hahahaaHaving built several studios myself. I have learned the hard way. It is tuff to present something that seems opposite of what most musicians have been told. But if you just use common sense you can understand the concept of breaking up waves. You can get a chart on the size of waves. Then just imagine that size of wave hitting a curved uneven surface. It breaks up and deflects. Its simple! I wish I had more time. I could pile this forum with evidence and examples.

User avatar
mazz
Total Pro
Total Pro
Posts: 8411
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:51 am
Gender: Male
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: room acoustics on a budget

Post by mazz » Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:33 am

It seems to me that you are also inadvertently setting up tuned absorbers, which would be kind of like an organ pipe in reverse, i.e., the bass waves enter the tube (or rather excite the air in the tube) and the energy and frequency that is dissipated depends on the length of the tube. So you're really getting two ideas in one, some bass trapping from the hollow tube, and some diffusion from the curved surface of the tube. There are bass traps made of tubes with absorption material built in, as Mojo stated above, and the company that makes Tube Traps has been using this concept for years (check out their Attack Wall for the combo approach).Since bass seems to usually build up at boundaries and the effect is exacerbated by the typically square dimensions in most rooms in a house, applying 4 inch thick OC 703 2X4' panels across boundaries (i.e., from wall to ceiling) can effectively give you a combination of absorption and bass trapping. If you leave some walls alone, you will get the some of the effect of diffusion because the sound will bounce to the absorbers and will not bounce back, although it won't be as diffuse as it could be with proper diffusers.I put two of these types of devices just above and slightly behind my speakers at the wall ceiling boundary and another one directly behind me just resting on the top of my upright piano. I immediately noticed an improvement in stereo imaging from my speakers. I also have a carpeted floor, a futon and some bookshelves in the room so there is some natural absorption and diffusion inherent in the room.http://www.readyacoustics.com/index.php ... h=26_11_2I don't dispute jude's contentions, and I think they may help a room sound better. They may not be the ultimate solution but they could very well help.Mazz
Evocative Music For Media

imagine if John Williams and Trent Reznor met at Bernard Hermann's for lunch and Brian Eno was the head chef!
http://www.johnmazzei.com
http://www.taxi.com/johnmazzei

it's not the gear, it's the ear!

jude3
Impressive
Impressive
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:30 pm
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: room acoustics on a budget

Post by jude3 » Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:59 am

Jun 30, 2009, 2:33pm, mazz wrote:It seems to me that you are also inadvertently setting up tuned absorbers, which would be kind of like an organ pipe in reverse, i.e., the bass waves enter the tube (or rather excite the air in the tube) and the energy and frequency that is dissipated depends on the length of the tube. So you're really getting two ideas in one, some bass trapping from the hollow tube, and some diffusion from the curved surface of the tube. There are bass traps made of tubes with absorption material built in, as Mojo stated above, and the company that makes Tube Traps has been using this concept for years (check out their Attack Wall for the combo approach).Since bass seems to usually build up at boundaries and the effect is exacerbated by the typically square dimensions in most rooms in a house, applying 4 inch thick OC 703 2X4' panels across boundaries (i.e., from wall to ceiling) can effectively give you a combination of absorption and bass trapping. If you leave some walls alone, you will get the some of the effect of diffusion because the sound will bounce to the absorbers and will not bounce back, although it won't be as diffuse as it could be with proper diffusers.I put two of these types of devices just above and slightly behind my speakers at the wall ceiling boundary and another one directly behind me just resting on the top of my upright piano. I immediately noticed an improvement in stereo imaging from my speakers. I also have a carpeted floor, a futon and some bookshelves in the room so there is some natural absorption and diffusion inherent in the room.http://www.readyacoustics.com/index.php ... h=26_11_2I don't dispute jude's contentions, and I think they may help a room sound better. They may not be the ultimate solution but they could very well help.Mazzactually it is a solution. It is far better than what you have doneIf you think you hear the image now. Try what I said. You will thank me.People seem to think they can put up the traps you spoke of and suck up bass. well you can down to about 160Hz.That is ruffly a G below middle C on your keyboard!!!You think that is bass? heck no!The tubes might resinate. But a sound wave is traveling at the speed of sound. hahahaWhen it hits that tube it breaks up far more then sticks inside it.Big bass waves bubble in a small room. And when i say small room I mean anything less than 5000 square feet! yes, I said that right!So your best bet on those huge bubbleing waves is to break them up. if you can build the super chunks I have in my studio, be my guess. I have 5 of them 2 feet wide and 8 feet long!The cost of materials alone on that is about $1500I am not aiming at you mazz. Just trying to make a point.people here dont seem to believe me. But no one has done it but me.

jude3
Impressive
Impressive
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:30 pm
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: room acoustics on a budget

Post by jude3 » Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:02 pm

I found some pictures that may help. If you dig into this website this guy may know of what I am talking about as well:http://www.jdbsound.com/work/art558.html

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests