Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Need some serious input here with room acoustics
|
|
|
|
Re: Need some serious input here with room acoustics [message #79149 is a reply to message #79147] |
Mon, 29 January 2007 07:46 |
neil[1]
Messages: 164 Registered: October 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dimi, yes, it's rigid/compressed fiberglass. Owens-Corning
makes it, for one; dunno if that brand is available over there,
but there's got to be something similar.
What Don said about just getting some of that & wrapping sheets
of it in fabric could certainly work somewhat, but no better
than foam - you need mass to absorb low freqs efficiently - a
little bit better approach (if you don't want to build actual
bass traps) would be to glue it onto MDF (medium-density
fiberboard), THEN wrap that in some fabric for appearances'
sake. Also, I have a few of the Auralex LNRD corner traps & I
must say they work pretty well.
IMO, though, he's got a bit too much foam happening there.
I'm no acoustics expert, but I believe in minimal treatment...
let the room sound like the room, just carve out the
deficiencies, you know? Especially in that recording room/iso
booth shot... is that wood on the floor (can't tell), and
ceiling both? There might be a midrangey mode happening
there; he's got no reflections from any of the walls & nothing
but reflections between the floor & ceiling. If he wants a
pretty dead iso booth he probably should throw down some carpet
on the floor or foam up that ceiling, or both.
How does stuff that was recorded elsewhere (like a commercial
CD, for example) sound in the control room? Like it ought to, or
does that come out Midrangey, as well?
Neil
>Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>
>Yes please Don,
>Photos would be great.
>3" rigid insulation What's t5hat ?
>Is it the fiberglass ?
>We have here fiberglass and stonewool.
>Can you also suggest as where in the room put which ?
>I know he needs at sides in the control room some absorbers,right ?
>What about behing (in front) of his speakers ?
>Is this foam ok that they have ?
>Thanks for your suggestions !
>Regards,
>Dimitrios
>
>
>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>>If you'd like some photos email me
>>
>>DOn
>>
>>
>>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:45bddccf@linux...
>>> Looks like he needs some real asborbers as apposed to the auralex stuff
>he
>>> has...bass traps wouldn't hurt either
>>>
>>>
>>> Realtraps : http://www.realtraps.com/
>>>
>>> Ready Acoustics: http://www.readyacoustics.com/
>>>
>>> Modular Acoustics: http://www.modularacoustics.com/
>>>
>>>
>>> John L Sayers Acoustics forum: http://www.johnlsayers.com/
>>>
>>> Recording.org acoustics forum: http://www.modularacoustics.com/
>>>
>>> General info: http://forum.studiotips.com/
>>>
>>> Bottom line here is if you can find 3" rigid insulation (olive coloured)
>
>>> wrap it it a light cloth and hang the panels in the room roughly 3" off
>
>>> the walls and ceilings you'll save yourself a ton of money.
>>>
>>> cost for my layout was a little over $500 CDN
>>>
>>> Don
>>>
>>>
>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote in message news:45bdc60e@linux...
>>>>
>>>> I will post two pictures dictating the appearnace of the friend's studio
>
>>>> that
>>>> has the over midrange problem with whatever they record and all things
>
>>>> sound
>>>> midrangey through the Genelec monitors.
>>>> Note that he uses Neumann M149 thru the hybrid Millenia Media (tube
and
>
>>>> solid
>>>> state) that are considered as world class machines.
>>>> He uses a RME Fire800 card and Nuendo.
>>>> I would appreciatte and wall treatment propositions to tam this mid
>>>> frequencies
>>>> when recording and THE LACK OF BASS when montoring !!!
>>>> Thanks.
>>>> Dimitrios
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
Re: Need some serious input here with room acoustics [message #79150 is a reply to message #79149] |
Mon, 29 January 2007 07:22 |
Don Nafe
Messages: 1206 Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45be08ad@linux...
>
> Dimi, yes, it's rigid/compressed fiberglass. Owens-Corning
> makes it, for one; dunno if that brand is available over there,
> but there's got to be something similar.
>
> What Don said about just getting some of that & wrapping sheets
> of it in fabric could certainly work somewhat, but no better
> than foam -
Wrong big time! regular foam does next to diddly squat in terms of absorbing
frequencies and killing reflectivity
>you need mass to absorb low freqs efficiently -
No - you need mass to reduce sound excaping a room...as in creating an iso
booth...
> little bit better approach (if you don't want to build actual
> bass traps) would be to glue it onto MDF (medium-density
> fiberboard), THEN wrap that in some fabric for appearances'
> sake.
Wrong again...the fibre board actually reflects the sound before it get a
chance to be absorbed...hanging the insulation panels about 3" off the wall
does wonders for abbosrbing mid frequencies and reducing the reverberation
in the room.
Also, I have a few of the Auralex LNRD corner traps & I
> must say they work pretty well.
If you check the corners of my diagram there are floor to ceiling bass traps
and they are nothing more than two bats of insulation standing across the
corner. Granted there are several variations on this theme including "tuned
traps" but my panels worked remarkably well in taming bottom end
issues....and a very inexpensive place to start...
>
> IMO, though, he's got a bit too much foam happening there.
> I'm no acoustics expert, but I believe in minimal treatment...
Maybe for the room you're recording in but from the standpoint of a control
room the amount of insulation I used was just right...I fined the room to be
very pleasing to the ear. Granted I could go all anal and get tuned
absorbers and designed diffusers but this is just a home mixing room
Also since doing this treatment my mixes now translate very well across all
mediums.
> let the room sound like the room, just carve out the
> deficiencies, you know? Especially in that recording room/iso
> booth shot... is that wood on the floor (can't tell), and
> ceiling both? There might be a midrangey mode happening
> there; he's got no reflections from any of the walls & nothing
> but reflections between the floor & ceiling. If he wants a
> pretty dead iso booth he probably should throw down some carpet
> on the floor or foam up that ceiling, or both.
Carpets wouldn't hurt but once again I suggest these basic panels, if set up
on stands would provide much more flexibility and controlled absorbsion than
just throwning down a carpet.
Don't get me wrong here, there are many products out there that can do a
much better job at taming frequencies and taming room reverberation than my
panels but I'll say this...price out an equivilant set up as is in my room
with either Auralex or RealTraps and compare it to my cost...my setup is far
from the be all end all but it does work
>
> How does stuff that was recorded elsewhere (like a commercial
> CD, for example) sound in the control room? Like it ought to, or
> does that come out Midrangey, as well?
>
> Neil
>
>
>
>
>
>>Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>>
>>Yes please Don,
>>Photos would be great.
>>3" rigid insulation What's t5hat ?
>>Is it the fiberglass ?
>>We have here fiberglass and stonewool.
>>Can you also suggest as where in the room put which ?
>>I know he needs at sides in the control room some absorbers,right ?
>>What about behing (in front) of his speakers ?
>>Is this foam ok that they have ?
>>Thanks for your suggestions !
>>Regards,
>>Dimitrios
>>
>>
>>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>>>If you'd like some photos email me
>>>
>>>DOn
>>>
>>>
>>>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:45bddccf@linux...
>>>> Looks like he needs some real asborbers as apposed to the auralex stuff
>>he
>>>> has...bass traps wouldn't hurt either
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Realtraps : http://www.realtraps.com/
>>>>
>>>> Ready Acoustics: http://www.readyacoustics.com/
>>>>
>>>> Modular Acoustics: http://www.modularacoustics.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> John L Sayers Acoustics forum: http://www.johnlsayers.com/
>>>>
>>>> Recording.org acoustics forum: http://www.modularacoustics.com/
>>>>
>>>> General info: http://forum.studiotips.com/
>>>>
>>>> Bottom line here is if you can find 3" rigid insulation (olive
>>>> coloured)
>>
>>>> wrap it it a light cloth and hang the panels in the room roughly 3" off
>>
>>>> the walls and ceilings you'll save yourself a ton of money.
>>>>
>>>> cost for my layout was a little over $500 CDN
>>>>
>>>> Don
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>> news:45bdc60e@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> I will post two pictures dictating the appearnace of the friend's
>>>>> studio
>>
>>>>> that
>>>>> has the over midrange problem with whatever they record and all things
>>
>>>>> sound
>>>>> midrangey through the Genelec monitors.
>>>>> Note that he uses Neumann M149 thru the hybrid Millenia Media (tube
> and
>>
>>>>> solid
>>>>> state) that are considered as world class machines.
>>>>> He uses a RME Fire800 card and Nuendo.
>>>>> I would appreciatte and wall treatment propositions to tam this mid
>
>>>>> frequencies
>>>>> when recording and THE LACK OF BASS when montoring !!!
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
Re: Need some serious input here with room acoustics [message #79151 is a reply to message #79150] |
Mon, 29 January 2007 08:48 |
Neil
Messages: 1645 Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Gee, good thing all my trial & error over the years has proved
fruitless when there are so many experts here.
Between not knowing how to use an SSL, and not having learned
diddly-squat about acoustics, I guess I'll just drop the
recording stuff & take up shuffleboard.
Or did I just drop into the r.a.p. forum by mistake?
Neil
"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>
>"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45be08ad@linux...
>>
>> Dimi, yes, it's rigid/compressed fiberglass. Owens-Corning
>> makes it, for one; dunno if that brand is available over there,
>> but there's got to be something similar.
>>
>> What Don said about just getting some of that & wrapping sheets
>> of it in fabric could certainly work somewhat, but no better
>> than foam -
>
>Wrong big time! regular foam does next to diddly squat in terms of absorbing
>frequencies and killing reflectivity
>
>>you need mass to absorb low freqs efficiently -
>
>No - you need mass to reduce sound excaping a room...as in creating an iso
>booth...
>
>> little bit better approach (if you don't want to build actual
>> bass traps) would be to glue it onto MDF (medium-density
>> fiberboard), THEN wrap that in some fabric for appearances'
>> sake.
>
>Wrong again...the fibre board actually reflects the sound before it get
a
>chance to be absorbed...hanging the insulation panels about 3" off the wall
>does wonders for abbosrbing mid frequencies and reducing the reverberation
>in the room.
>
>Also, I have a few of the Auralex LNRD corner traps & I
>> must say they work pretty well.
>
>If you check the corners of my diagram there are floor to ceiling bass traps
>and they are nothing more than two bats of insulation standing across the
>corner. Granted there are several variations on this theme including "tuned
>traps" but my panels worked remarkably well in taming bottom end
>issues....and a very inexpensive place to start...
>
>>
>> IMO, though, he's got a bit too much foam happening there.
>> I'm no acoustics expert, but I believe in minimal treatment...
>
>Maybe for the room you're recording in but from the standpoint of a control
>room the amount of insulation I used was just right...I fined the room to
be
>very pleasing to the ear. Granted I could go all anal and get tuned
>absorbers and designed diffusers but this is just a home mixing room
>
>Also since doing this treatment my mixes now translate very well across
all
>mediums.
>
>
>> let the room sound like the room, just carve out the
>> deficiencies, you know? Especially in that recording room/iso
>> booth shot... is that wood on the floor (can't tell), and
>> ceiling both? There might be a midrangey mode happening
>> there; he's got no reflections from any of the walls & nothing
>> but reflections between the floor & ceiling. If he wants a
>> pretty dead iso booth he probably should throw down some carpet
>> on the floor or foam up that ceiling, or both.
>
>Carpets wouldn't hurt but once again I suggest these basic panels, if set
up
>on stands would provide much more flexibility and controlled absorbsion
than
>just throwning down a carpet.
>
>Don't get me wrong here, there are many products out there that can do a
>much better job at taming frequencies and taming room reverberation than
my
>panels but I'll say this...price out an equivilant set up as is in my room
>with either Auralex or RealTraps and compare it to my cost...my setup is
far
>from the be all end all but it does work
>
>>
>> How does stuff that was recorded elsewhere (like a commercial
>> CD, for example) sound in the control room? Like it ought to, or
>> does that come out Midrangey, as well?
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>>>
>>>Yes please Don,
>>>Photos would be great.
>>>3" rigid insulation What's t5hat ?
>>>Is it the fiberglass ?
>>>We have here fiberglass and stonewool.
>>>Can you also suggest as where in the room put which ?
>>>I know he needs at sides in the control room some absorbers,right ?
>>>What about behing (in front) of his speakers ?
>>>Is this foam ok that they have ?
>>>Thanks for your suggestions !
>>>Regards,
>>>Dimitrios
>>>
>>>
>>>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>>>>If you'd like some photos email me
>>>>
>>>>DOn
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:45bddccf@linux...
>>>>> Looks like he needs some real asborbers as apposed to the auralex stuff
>>>he
>>>>> has...bass traps wouldn't hurt either
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Realtraps : http://www.realtraps.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> Ready Acoustics: http://www.readyacoustics.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> Modular Acoustics: http://www.modularacoustics.com/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> John L Sayers Acoustics forum: http://www.johnlsayers.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> Recording.org acoustics forum: http://www.modularacoustics.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> General info: http://forum.studiotips.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> Bottom line here is if you can find 3" rigid insulation (olive
>>>>> coloured)
>>>
>>>>> wrap it it a light cloth and hang the panels in the room roughly 3"
off
>>>
>>>>> the walls and ceilings you'll save yourself a ton of money.
>>>>>
>>>>> cost for my layout was a little over $500 CDN
>>>>>
>>>>> Don
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>> news:45bdc60e@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will post two pictures dictating the appearnace of the friend's
>>>>>> studio
>>>
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> has the over midrange problem with whatever they record and all things
>>>
>>>>>> sound
>>>>>> midrangey through the Genelec monitors.
>>>>>> Note that he uses Neumann M149 thru the hybrid Millenia Media (tube
>> and
>>>
>>>>>> solid
>>>>>> state) that are considered as world class machines.
>>>>>> He uses a RME Fire800 card and Nuendo.
>>>>>> I would appreciatte and wall treatment propositions to tam this mid
>>
>>>>>> frequencies
>>>>>> when recording and THE LACK OF BASS when montoring !!!
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
Re: Need some serious input here with room acoustics [message #79154 is a reply to message #79151] |
Mon, 29 January 2007 08:03 |
Don Nafe
Messages: 1206 Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
My apologies if I offended you Neil...wasn't my intent but after rereading
my post I see I came off as as rude
sorry
Don
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45be1731$1@linux...
>
> Gee, good thing all my trial & error over the years has proved
> fruitless when there are so many experts here.
>
> Between not knowing how to use an SSL, and not having learned
> diddly-squat about acoustics, I guess I'll just drop the
> recording stuff & take up shuffleboard.
>
> Or did I just drop into the r.a.p. forum by mistake?
>
> Neil
>
>
> "Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>>
>>"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45be08ad@linux...
>>>
>>> Dimi, yes, it's rigid/compressed fiberglass. Owens-Corning
>>> makes it, for one; dunno if that brand is available over there,
>>> but there's got to be something similar.
>>>
>>> What Don said about just getting some of that & wrapping sheets
>>> of it in fabric could certainly work somewhat, but no better
>>> than foam -
>>
>>Wrong big time! regular foam does next to diddly squat in terms of
>>absorbing
>
>>frequencies and killing reflectivity
>>
>>>you need mass to absorb low freqs efficiently -
>>
>>No - you need mass to reduce sound excaping a room...as in creating an iso
>
>>booth...
>>
>>> little bit better approach (if you don't want to build actual
>>> bass traps) would be to glue it onto MDF (medium-density
>>> fiberboard), THEN wrap that in some fabric for appearances'
>>> sake.
>>
>>Wrong again...the fibre board actually reflects the sound before it get
> a
>>chance to be absorbed...hanging the insulation panels about 3" off the
>>wall
>
>>does wonders for abbosrbing mid frequencies and reducing the reverberation
>
>>in the room.
>>
>>Also, I have a few of the Auralex LNRD corner traps & I
>>> must say they work pretty well.
>>
>>If you check the corners of my diagram there are floor to ceiling bass
>>traps
>
>>and they are nothing more than two bats of insulation standing across the
>
>>corner. Granted there are several variations on this theme including
>>"tuned
>
>>traps" but my panels worked remarkably well in taming bottom end
>>issues....and a very inexpensive place to start...
>>
>>>
>>> IMO, though, he's got a bit too much foam happening there.
>>> I'm no acoustics expert, but I believe in minimal treatment...
>>
>>Maybe for the room you're recording in but from the standpoint of a
>>control
>
>>room the amount of insulation I used was just right...I fined the room to
> be
>>very pleasing to the ear. Granted I could go all anal and get tuned
>>absorbers and designed diffusers but this is just a home mixing room
>>
>>Also since doing this treatment my mixes now translate very well across
> all
>>mediums.
>>
>>
>>> let the room sound like the room, just carve out the
>>> deficiencies, you know? Especially in that recording room/iso
>>> booth shot... is that wood on the floor (can't tell), and
>>> ceiling both? There might be a midrangey mode happening
>>> there; he's got no reflections from any of the walls & nothing
>>> but reflections between the floor & ceiling. If he wants a
>>> pretty dead iso booth he probably should throw down some carpet
>>> on the floor or foam up that ceiling, or both.
>>
>>Carpets wouldn't hurt but once again I suggest these basic panels, if set
> up
>>on stands would provide much more flexibility and controlled absorbsion
> than
>>just throwning down a carpet.
>>
>>Don't get me wrong here, there are many products out there that can do a
>
>>much better job at taming frequencies and taming room reverberation than
> my
>>panels but I'll say this...price out an equivilant set up as is in my room
>
>>with either Auralex or RealTraps and compare it to my cost...my setup is
> far
>>from the be all end all but it does work
>>
>>>
>>> How does stuff that was recorded elsewhere (like a commercial
>>> CD, for example) sound in the control room? Like it ought to, or
>>> does that come out Midrangey, as well?
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Yes please Don,
>>>>Photos would be great.
>>>>3" rigid insulation What's t5hat ?
>>>>Is it the fiberglass ?
>>>>We have here fiberglass and stonewool.
>>>>Can you also suggest as where in the room put which ?
>>>>I know he needs at sides in the control room some absorbers,right ?
>>>>What about behing (in front) of his speakers ?
>>>>Is this foam ok that they have ?
>>>>Thanks for your suggestions !
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Dimitrios
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>>>>>If you'd like some photos email me
>>>>>
>>>>>DOn
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:45bddccf@linux...
>>>>>> Looks like he needs some real asborbers as apposed to the auralex
>>>>>> stuff
>>>>he
>>>>>> has...bass traps wouldn't hurt either
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Realtraps : http://www.realtraps.com/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ready Acoustics: http://www.readyacoustics.com/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Modular Acoustics: http://www.modularacoustics.com/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John L Sayers Acoustics forum: http://www.johnlsayers.com/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Recording.org acoustics forum: http://www.modularacoustics.com/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> General info: http://forum.studiotips.com/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bottom line here is if you can find 3" rigid insulation (olive
>>>>>> coloured)
>>>>
>>>>>> wrap it it a light cloth and hang the panels in the room roughly 3"
> off
>>>>
>>>>>> the walls and ceilings you'll save yourself a ton of money.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> cost for my layout was a little over $500 CDN
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Don
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:45bdc60e@linux...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I will post two pictures dictating the appearnace of the friend's
>
>>>>>>> studio
>>>>
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> has the over midrange problem with whatever they record and all
>>>>>>> things
>>>>
>>>>>>> sound
>>>>>>> midrangey through the Genelec monitors.
>>>>>>> Note that he uses Neumann M149 thru the hybrid Millenia Media (tube
>>> and
>>>>
>>>>>>> solid
>>>>>>> state) that are considered as world class machines.
>>>>>>> He uses a RME Fire800 card and Nuendo.
>>>>>>> I would appreciatte and wall treatment propositions to tam this mid
>>>
>>>>>>> frequencies
>>>>>>> when recording and THE LACK OF BASS when montoring !!!
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
Re: Need some serious input here with room acoustics [message #79155 is a reply to message #79154] |
Mon, 29 January 2007 08:07 |
Don Nafe
Messages: 1206 Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ps..And I ain't no expert...not even frigiin close...just enough knowledge
to get me into trouble and allow me to stuff my foot in my mouth more often
than not
:-)
D
"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:45be1b6e@linux...
> My apologies if I offended you Neil...wasn't my intent but after
> rereading my post I see I came off as as rude
>
> sorry
>
> Don
>
>
> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45be1731$1@linux...
>>
>> Gee, good thing all my trial & error over the years has proved
>> fruitless when there are so many experts here.
>>
>> Between not knowing how to use an SSL, and not having learned
>> diddly-squat about acoustics, I guess I'll just drop the
>> recording stuff & take up shuffleboard.
>>
>> Or did I just drop into the r.a.p. forum by mistake?
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>> "Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45be08ad@linux...
>>>>
>>>> Dimi, yes, it's rigid/compressed fiberglass. Owens-Corning
>>>> makes it, for one; dunno if that brand is available over there,
>>>> but there's got to be something similar.
>>>>
>>>> What Don said about just getting some of that & wrapping sheets
>>>> of it in fabric could certainly work somewhat, but no better
>>>> than foam -
>>>
>>>Wrong big time! regular foam does next to diddly squat in terms of
>>>absorbing
>>
>>>frequencies and killing reflectivity
>>>
>>>>you need mass to absorb low freqs efficiently -
>>>
>>>No - you need mass to reduce sound excaping a room...as in creating an
>>>iso
>>
>>>booth...
>>>
>>>> little bit better approach (if you don't want to build actual
>>>> bass traps) would be to glue it onto MDF (medium-density
>>>> fiberboard), THEN wrap that in some fabric for appearances'
>>>> sake.
>>>
>>>Wrong again...the fibre board actually reflects the sound before it get
>> a
>>>chance to be absorbed...hanging the insulation panels about 3" off the
>>>wall
>>
>>>does wonders for abbosrbing mid frequencies and reducing the
>>>reverberation
>>
>>>in the room.
>>>
>>>Also, I have a few of the Auralex LNRD corner traps & I
>>>> must say they work pretty well.
>>>
>>>If you check the corners of my diagram there are floor to ceiling bass
>>>traps
>>
>>>and they are nothing more than two bats of insulation standing across the
>>
>>>corner. Granted there are several variations on this theme including
>>>"tuned
>>
>>>traps" but my panels worked remarkably well in taming bottom end
>>>issues....and a very inexpensive place to start...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> IMO, though, he's got a bit too much foam happening there.
>>>> I'm no acoustics expert, but I believe in minimal treatment...
>>>
>>>Maybe for the room you're recording in but from the standpoint of a
>>>control
>>
>>>room the amount of insulation I used was just right...I fined the room to
>> be
>>>very pleasing to the ear. Granted I could go all anal and get tuned
>>>absorbers and designed diffusers but this is just a home mixing room
>>>
>>>Also since doing this treatment my mixes now translate very well across
>> all
>>>mediums.
>>>
>>>
>>>> let the room sound like the room, just carve out the
>>>> deficiencies, you know? Especially in that recording room/iso
>>>> booth shot... is that wood on the floor (can't tell), and
>>>> ceiling both? There might be a midrangey mode happening
>>>> there; he's got no reflections from any of the walls & nothing
>>>> but reflections between the floor & ceiling. If he wants a
>>>> pretty dead iso booth he probably should throw down some carpet
>>>> on the floor or foam up that ceiling, or both.
>>>
>>>Carpets wouldn't hurt but once again I suggest these basic panels, if set
>> up
>>>on stands would provide much more flexibility and controlled absorbsion
>> than
>>>just throwning down a carpet.
>>>
>>>Don't get me wrong here, there are many products out there that can do a
>>
>>>much better job at taming frequencies and taming room reverberation than
>> my
>>>panels but I'll say this...price out an equivilant set up as is in my
>>>room
>>
>>>with either Auralex or RealTraps and compare it to my cost...my setup is
>> far
>>>from the be all end all but it does work
>>>
>>>>
>>>> How does stuff that was recorded elsewhere (like a commercial
>>>> CD, for example) sound in the control room? Like it ought to, or
>>>> does that come out Midrangey, as well?
>>>>
>>>> Neil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes please Don,
>>>>>Photos would be great.
>>>>>3" rigid insulation What's t5hat ?
>>>>>Is it the fiberglass ?
>>>>>We have here fiberglass and stonewool.
>>>>>Can you also suggest as where in the room put which ?
>>>>>I know he needs at sides in the control room some absorbers,right ?
>>>>>What about behing (in front) of his speakers ?
>>>>>Is this foam ok that they have ?
>>>>>Thanks for your suggestions !
>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>Dimitrios
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>If you'd like some photos email me
>>>>>>
>>>>>>DOn
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:45bddccf@linux...
>>>>>>> Looks like he needs some real asborbers as apposed to the auralex
>>>>>>> stuff
>>>>>he
>>>>>>> has...bass traps wouldn't hurt either
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Realtraps : http://www.realtraps.com/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ready Acoustics: http://www.readyacoustics.com/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Modular Acoustics: http://www.modularacoustics.com/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> John L Sayers Acoustics forum: http://www.johnlsayers.com/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Recording.org acoustics forum: http://www.modularacoustics.com/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> General info: http://forum.studiotips.com/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bottom line here is if you can find 3" rigid insulation (olive
>>>>>>> coloured)
>>>>>
>>>>>>> wrap it it a light cloth and hang the panels in the room roughly 3"
>> off
>>>>>
>>>>>>> the walls and ceilings you'll save yourself a ton of money.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> cost for my layout was a little over $500 CDN
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Don
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:45bdc60e@linux...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I will post two pictures dictating the appearnace of the friend's
>>
>>>>>>>> studio
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> has the over midrange problem with whatever they record and all
>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> sound
>>>>>>>> midrangey through the Genelec monitors.
>>>>>>>> Note that he uses Neumann M149 thru the hybrid Millenia Media (tube
>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> solid
>>>>>>>> state) that are considered as world class machines.
>>>>>>>> He uses a RME Fire800 card and Nuendo.
>>>>>>>> I would appreciatte and wall treatment propositions to tam this mid
>>>>
>>>>>>>> frequencies
>>>>>>>> when recording and THE LACK OF BASS when montoring !!!
>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
Re: Need some serious input here with room acoustics [message #79159 is a reply to message #79143] |
Mon, 29 January 2007 08:41 |
duncan
Messages: 123 Registered: November 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
His room is a box -- thus, it sounds like a box. (Stick your head in
a box and say "Hello" -- yeah, that sound...) Low ceiling, square
angles. Yuck.
A friend of mine recently built a tiny room for a studio in his
backyard. Nice little room, plaster walls, wood floor... A box. It
sounded really truly awful. I suggested he get in touch with the
"Real Traps" guys... He talked it over with them, bought a couple of
their big corner traps, several of their regular panels, and hung them
up... OK -- so -- now, the room sounds -- nine times bigger. If you
close your eyes and talk, you'd think you were in a really much larger
room. Not dead, not boxy, not bouncy -- just open and natural. It's
the most striking example I've ever heard of the benefits of this kind
of treatment.
No their stuff isn't cheap, but it's like anything else -- if you want
to really deal with this problem you have to get tools that work.
Or build a better room in the first place. -- good luck with it --
chas.
On 29 Jan 2007 21:01:50 +1000, "Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>
>I will post two pictures dictating the appearnace of the friend's studio that
>has the over midrange problem with whatever they record and all things sound
>midrangey through the Genelec monitors.
>Note that he uses Neumann M149 thru the hybrid Millenia Media (tube and solid
>state) that are considered as world class machines.
>He uses a RME Fire800 card and Nuendo.
>I would appreciatte and wall treatment propositions to tam this mid frequencies
>when recording and THE LACK OF BASS when montoring !!!
>Thanks.
>Dimitrios
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Need some serious input here with room acoustics [message #79197 is a reply to message #79143] |
Mon, 29 January 2007 15:01 |
|
Looks like there are some serious issues with which frequencies you're friend's
treatment are eliminating and which are being left behind. The foam is pretty
useless below 500 Hz, and below 500 Hz is where most smaller studios have
the most problems. Check out the links and forums on this website:
http://studiotips.com/
Lots of good people hang out on the forum and they're generous with there
knowledge. I agree that he needs bass trapping. Also less hi freq absorption
and more diffusion. Speakers nearly on the desktop seems like a problem
to me also. I'd move them up and back on stands that decouple them from
the floor.
Gantt
"Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>
>
>
>I will post two pictures dictating the appearnace of the friend's studio
that
>has the over midrange problem with whatever they record and all things sound
>midrangey through the Genelec monitors.
>Note that he uses Neumann M149 thru the hybrid Millenia Media (tube and
solid
>state) that are considered as world class machines.
>He uses a RME Fire800 card and Nuendo.
>I would appreciatte and wall treatment propositions to tam this mid frequencies
>when recording and THE LACK OF BASS when montoring !!!
>Thanks.
>Dimitrios
Gantt Kushner
Gizmo Recording Company
Silver Spring, MD
www.gizmorecording.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Need some serious input here with room acoustics [message #79240 is a reply to message #79170] |
Mon, 29 January 2007 22:14 |
Neil
Messages: 1645 Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>Neil some rooms are inherantly better than others because of
>their dimensions...this is physics at work. As for your
>recordings and mixing I'd also say that your years of
>experience have as much to do with the final result as do the
>acoustics of the room..probably more.
Thanks for the compliment, but think about it... if I couldn't
hear what I was doing, it wouldn't matter if I had one year of
of experience, or a thousand. I'm not saying: "work in a shitty
acoustic environment because it's fun when you've got more of a
challenge, mates!", I'm saying that you should let the room be
the room and treat it minimally in terms of absorption because:
1.) You're right what you say about physics, and based on that,
no amount of bass trapping or other treatment is going to
COMPLETELY overcome the ENTIRE structure surrounding the space
you're working in. No practical or realistic amount, anyway.
2.) Hence, there is no "perfect" environment.
(Again, if there was, every top-notch studio would have this
exact same "perfect" environment, yes?).
3.) The best mixing environment is one you're used to.
4.) The best recording environment is one you know how to make
work for instrument "a" or vocal "b".
5.) If you overtreat a room, you've got a room with no "life"
to it. This goes for recording rooms (70's drum sounds,
anyone?) AND mixing rooms (ever sit an anechoic chamber? I've
been in a near-anechoic one... your eardrums sound like they
"compress" when the door closes - that, or any degree OF that,
can't be good for mixing, can it?).
6.) Skip six... numerologically, it would bring bad karma to
this thread.
7.) You don't need near as many bass traps as Ethan Winer &
various mode calculating spreadsheets might suggest... most
of you HAVE bass traps already built in... walls that are
constructed of drywall with an air gap & then sheet insulation
behind them fastened to the other side of the interior wall...
hmmm....? Sound familiar? :) Kinda just like.... oh, I
dunno - A BASS TRAP???
8.) You probably DO need SOME trapping, though, and if you can
trap a little bit of bass & get rid of standing waves to the
point where they'd be even as ridiculously high as -30 or
-40db, you could probably get a decent mix in a shower stall -
assuming you've done more than a handful of mixes in said
shower stall.
9.) Bigger is better, #8 notwithstanding.
10.) Don't "overspeaker" the room - if you've got a 10' throw
to the room, you do NOT need soffit-mounted Westlake Audio's
with the 15" woofs... for most (not all, depends on dimensions)
home/project studios I think anything more than nearfields are
a waste other than to give the band something to RAWK OUT TO!,
while you're tracking.
11.) I can't think of a #11... I was just on a roll & couldn't
stop typing in time.
Neil
|
|
|
Re: Need some serious input here with room acoustics [message #79257 is a reply to message #79240] |
Tue, 30 January 2007 05:31 |
Don Nafe
Messages: 1206 Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Neil, I think most of what you've said rings true, especially your comments
in Dimitrios' second post above, very observant, although there are a couple
of things that I will "agree to disagree with you" about.
For everyone else, I want to qualify this next diatribe by saying I am no
expert in the field but I did a lot of research, spoke personally to a
number of people who are a lot more knowledgeable than I am AND had the room
evaluated by two companies. And between me and the fence post I came up with
my basic room treatment plan.
sorry it's a little long in the tooth but I kept adding things I felt were
relevant as want along and what you have below is pretty well the whole
shebang (and a fun read I hope)
Now after a few months of research, asking really dumb questions, posing
scenarios etc. I went ahead and bought my materials then went to town and
the very first step was to rip out the walls between two bedrooms to make a
room roughly 20' X 10' X 8' not exactly a "golden" room but a heck of a lot
better than the 10' X 8' room I had been mixing in...talk about a friggin
acoustic nightmare.
I also purchased a Hafler P1500 power amp and a pair of Noteperfect Alpha
Pro's from Australia (sight unseen) after auditioning more monitors than I
care to remember. Everything from Mackie HR 824's through the JBL, KRK,
Genelec & Quested lines etc. to B&W 800 series and all I can say was that
process was an ear opening experience.
For those who might be interested in the Alpha's (shameless plug here) I
can best describe them as B&W 805 book shelf speakers with the bottom end of
the 804 floor model...and at 1/2 the price of the 805's I can say it was
the scariest moment in this whole process but I wasn't disappointed at
all...quite surprised actually. Mike Kontor at Noteperfect was dead on when
he said the Alpha's will blow away the competition at double the price.
But I digress...get to the acoustic treatment....
So after construction was complete and the room painted I went about setting
up my room
My treatment went up in four steps
1) the bass traps in the corners - immediately the bottom end tightened up
and lost much of it's muddiness
2) the wall panels went up next and there was a marked improvement of the
overall tightness across most of the frequencies and the stereo image became
more focused...the last wall panel to go up was the one behind the speakers
and believe it or not I noticed an improvement in the stereo imaging after
it was up.
3) the ceiling panels went up last as I had left over batts I thought what
the hell can't hurt if I put them at the mirror reflection points on the
ceiling and as soon as they went up a bit more skewing or smearing of the
mid / upper mid frequencies was cleared up as a result of taming more of the
room reverb / reflectivity in the room
4) The last step was speaker placement...this was this most analytical of
the process. Using a specific room mode calculator (I can pass it along to
anyone who'd like it) and some graph plotting as well as talking to the
builder of my speakers I was able to determine the sweet spots for my
speakers AND the optimum listening position for my room...I then put
together an adjustable stand set up that allowed me to place the speakers in
these sweet spots and very quickly determined one was the best for my room.
I then had sand filled speaker stands built and placed them into the known
sweet spot. Now here's a little side note - the sweet spot was a cube
roughly 12" square and by moving the speakers around in the sweet spot you
can actually hear differences in the stereo field, but I digress.
The very last step was to put shelving on the rear wall and fill it up with
all sorts of things to break up the sound hitting the rear wall. Did I hear
a noticeable difference...not really because things went up on it over time
and it's more a storage spot than a diffuser so I wasn't really expecting
much from it. I'm pretty sure it didn't hurt the sound any.
Now about a month ago I spent three days clearing out the non studio items
in the room and began moving panels around as well as removing some panels.
During this process I was shooting my room using three different ETF type
programs and my results are pretty good for the expense and work involved.
One thing I did notice was when I took out the panels in the back half of
the room the sound at my mixing position started smearing again. Once they
went back things tightened up...so there's my vote for treating the back
half of the room.
The not so final analysis:
Overall the freq response in the room is fairly flat but there is a 5db dip
between 100 and 500 and a 5 db bump between 8 and 12K at which point it
starts a gentle roll off to 20K...there are a few spikes and dips across
that and I will see if they are worth addressing in terms of $$$...afterall
this is just a homebrew mixing room. This is not to say that I can't improve
on the room it's just at this point in time it's not practical...but soon.
On the downside I do have an anomaly...the sound coming from my left speaker
is louder than the right...now I initially thought signal chain and tested
every individual component in my monitoring chain from the MEC to the
speakers including having all the components tested and everything is in
proper working order so after much discussion with a few more knowledgeable
people in the field I (we) have come to the conclusion that the difference
in wall construction of the two exterior walls vs the interior walls, as
well as the windows that are on my long wall are the main cause of the
problem....the fix...well the easiest was to just adjust the volume on the
amp...do some mixes and test them...so far so good but come spring I'm going
to look at this and other areas (mentioned above) and see if a cost
effective solution can be found.
In conclusion I want to say that my room sounds very similar to a typical
control room, at least the ones I've been in...it's fairly quiet but not
unpleasing and the sound is very focused at the mixing position and this was
what this whole project was about.
I'd also like to say that after reviewing my expenses the total cost for the
renovation (inc labour) , new speakers, new amp, speaker stands and the
room's acoustic treatment came in at roughly $5000 and the cost for the
treatment was roughly $500 although it should have been about $1000 as I got
some deals on a few materials from friends.
you may now return to your regularly scheduled programming
Don
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45bed419$1@linux...
>
> "Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>
>>Neil some rooms are inherantly better than others because of
>>their dimensions...this is physics at work. As for your
>>recordings and mixing I'd also say that your years of
>>experience have as much to do with the final result as do the
>>acoustics of the room..probably more.
>
> Thanks for the compliment, but think about it... if I couldn't
> hear what I was doing, it wouldn't matter if I had one year of
> of experience, or a thousand. I'm not saying: "work in a shitty
> acoustic environment because it's fun when you've got more of a
> challenge, mates!", I'm saying that you should let the room be
> the room and treat it minimally in terms of absorption because:
>
> 1.) You're right what you say about physics, and based on that,
> no amount of bass trapping or other treatment is going to
> COMPLETELY overcome the ENTIRE structure surrounding the space
> you're working in. No practical or realistic amount, anyway.
>
> 2.) Hence, there is no "perfect" environment.
> (Again, if there was, every top-notch studio would have this
> exact same "perfect" environment, yes?).
>
> 3.) The best mixing environment is one you're used to.
>
> 4.) The best recording environment is one you know how to make
> work for instrument "a" or vocal "b".
>
> 5.) If you overtreat a room, you've got a room with no "life"
> to it. This goes for recording rooms (70's drum sounds,
> anyone?) AND mixing rooms (ever sit an anechoic chamber? I've
> been in a near-anechoic one... your eardrums sound like they
> "compress" when the door closes - that, or any degree OF that,
> can't be good for mixing, can it?).
>
> 6.) Skip six... numerologically, it would bring bad karma to
> this thread.
>
> 7.) You don't need near as many bass traps as Ethan Winer &
> various mode calculating spreadsheets might suggest... most
> of you HAVE bass traps already built in... walls that are
> constructed of drywall with an air gap & then sheet insulation
> behind them fastened to the other side of the interior wall...
> hmmm....? Sound familiar? :) Kinda just like.... oh, I
> dunno - A BASS TRAP???
>
> 8.) You probably DO need SOME trapping, though, and if you can
> trap a little bit of bass & get rid of standing waves to the
> point where they'd be even as ridiculously high as -30 or
> -40db, you could probably get a decent mix in a shower stall -
> assuming you've done more than a handful of mixes in said
> shower stall.
>
> 9.) Bigger is better, #8 notwithstanding.
>
> 10.) Don't "overspeaker" the room - if you've got a 10' throw
> to the room, you do NOT need soffit-mounted Westlake Audio's
> with the 15" woofs... for most (not all, depends on dimensions)
> home/project studios I think anything more than nearfields are
> a waste other than to give the band something to RAWK OUT TO!,
> while you're tracking.
>
> 11.) I can't think of a #11... I was just on a roll & couldn't
> stop typing in time.
>
>
> Neil
|
|
|
|
Re: Need some serious input here with room acoustics [message #79261 is a reply to message #79258] |
Tue, 30 January 2007 07:14 |
Don Nafe
Messages: 1206 Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Neil
Nothing major in terms of disagreement
The point regarding walls as bass traps...wall mass definitely can and does
effect the acoustics but not in trapping lower frequencies, at least the way
Iunderstand bass traps (and I could be wrong here)....and although you
didn't state it I got the impression you think I have too much
treatment...and compared to the minimalist approach you're probably right
but after looking at my personal observations as well as the numbers
generated by the room analysis programs, I believe I have most of the bases
covered...sure there are a couple of areas I can address in the future but
for now I'm quite comfortable mixing in there.
The other thing is the importance of experience in the equation...all things
being equal a more experienced AE will always get better results than an
inexperienced one...being intimately familiar with you room and your gear
allows you to compensate for it's weaknesses. Being able to spot problem
areas is also a matter of experience...probably the more important of the
two.
Funny thing regarding my situation with the unbalanced room - it wasn't
until I cleaned out me room of non essential junk, which let it breathe so
to speak, that I noticed the weighting of one side of the room. So the
treatment exposed a flaw in the room that I was unaware of...which can be a
good or bad thing.
Bottom line here is we all agree that Dimitrios can and should improve his
recording and mixing environment and as such we are all contributing to that
end.
Don
"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45bf53a9$1@linux...
>
> "Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>
> You said:
> ***On the downside I do have an anomaly...the sound coming from
> my left speaker is louder than the right...now I initially
> thought signal chain and tested every individual component in
> my monitoring chain from the MEC to the speakers including
> having all the components tested and everything is in proper
> working order so after much discussion with a few more
> knowledgeable people in the field I (we) have come to the
> conclusion that the difference in wall construction of the two
> exterior walls vs the interior walls, as well as the windows
> that are on my long wall are the main cause of the
> problem....the fix...well the easiest was to just adjust the
> volume on the amp...do some mixes and test them...so far so
> good but come spring I'm going to look at this and other areas
> (mentioned above) and see if a cost effective solution can be
> found.***
>
> Which proves what I said, in that:
> ***You're right what you say about physics, and based on that,
>>> no amount of bass trapping or other treatment is going to
>>> COMPLETELY overcome the ENTIRE structure surrounding the space you're
> working in. No practical or realistic amount,
> anyway.
>>>
>>> 2.) Hence, there is no "perfect" environment.***
>
>
> Which further validates all my statements that followed.
>
> So I don't know what you're 'agreeing to disagree' with me on.
>
> Neil
|
|
|
Re: Need some serious input here with room acoustics [message #79263 is a reply to message #79257] |
Tue, 30 January 2007 08:01 |
EK Sound
Messages: 939 Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey Don,
For the window, make a '703 insert for it. Simply cover the window
when mixing. A large studio I worked at in Vancouver did this and it
worked well.
David.
Don Nafe wrote:
> Neil, I think most of what you've said rings true, especially your comments
> in Dimitrios' second post above, very observant, although there are a couple
> of things that I will "agree to disagree with you" about.
>
> For everyone else, I want to qualify this next diatribe by saying I am no
> expert in the field but I did a lot of research, spoke personally to a
> number of people who are a lot more knowledgeable than I am AND had the room
> evaluated by two companies. And between me and the fence post I came up with
> my basic room treatment plan.
>
> sorry it's a little long in the tooth but I kept adding things I felt were
> relevant as want along and what you have below is pretty well the whole
> shebang (and a fun read I hope)
>
>
> Now after a few months of research, asking really dumb questions, posing
> scenarios etc. I went ahead and bought my materials then went to town and
> the very first step was to rip out the walls between two bedrooms to make a
> room roughly 20' X 10' X 8' not exactly a "golden" room but a heck of a lot
> better than the 10' X 8' room I had been mixing in...talk about a friggin
> acoustic nightmare.
>
> I also purchased a Hafler P1500 power amp and a pair of Noteperfect Alpha
> Pro's from Australia (sight unseen) after auditioning more monitors than I
> care to remember. Everything from Mackie HR 824's through the JBL, KRK,
> Genelec & Quested lines etc. to B&W 800 series and all I can say was that
> process was an ear opening experience.
>
> For those who might be interested in the Alpha's (shameless plug here) I
> can best describe them as B&W 805 book shelf speakers with the bottom end of
> the 804 floor model...and at 1/2 the price of the 805's I can say it was
> the scariest moment in this whole process but I wasn't disappointed at
> all...quite surprised actually. Mike Kontor at Noteperfect was dead on when
> he said the Alpha's will blow away the competition at double the price.
>
> But I digress...get to the acoustic treatment....
>
> So after construction was complete and the room painted I went about setting
> up my room
>
> My treatment went up in four steps
>
> 1) the bass traps in the corners - immediately the bottom end tightened up
> and lost much of it's muddiness
>
> 2) the wall panels went up next and there was a marked improvement of the
> overall tightness across most of the frequencies and the stereo image became
> more focused...the last wall panel to go up was the one behind the speakers
> and believe it or not I noticed an improvement in the stereo imaging after
> it was up.
>
> 3) the ceiling panels went up last as I had left over batts I thought what
> the hell can't hurt if I put them at the mirror reflection points on the
> ceiling and as soon as they went up a bit more skewing or smearing of the
> mid / upper mid frequencies was cleared up as a result of taming more of the
> room reverb / reflectivity in the room
>
> 4) The last step was speaker placement...this was this most analytical of
> the process. Using a specific room mode calculator (I can pass it along to
> anyone who'd like it) and some graph plotting as well as talking to the
> builder of my speakers I was able to determine the sweet spots for my
> speakers AND the optimum listening position for my room...I then put
> together an adjustable stand set up that allowed me to place the speakers in
> these sweet spots and very quickly determined one was the best for my room.
> I then had sand filled speaker stands built and placed them into the known
> sweet spot. Now here's a little side note - the sweet spot was a cube
> roughly 12" square and by moving the speakers around in the sweet spot you
> can actually hear differences in the stereo field, but I digress.
>
> The very last step was to put shelving on the rear wall and fill it up with
> all sorts of things to break up the sound hitting the rear wall. Did I hear
> a noticeable difference...not really because things went up on it over time
> and it's more a storage spot than a diffuser so I wasn't really expecting
> much from it. I'm pretty sure it didn't hurt the sound any.
>
> Now about a month ago I spent three days clearing out the non studio items
> in the room and began moving panels around as well as removing some panels.
> During this process I was shooting my room using three different ETF type
> programs and my results are pretty good for the expense and work involved.
> One thing I did notice was when I took out the panels in the back half of
> the room the sound at my mixing position started smearing again. Once they
> went back things tightened up...so there's my vote for treating the back
> half of the room.
>
> The not so final analysis:
>
> Overall the freq response in the room is fairly flat but there is a 5db dip
> between 100 and 500 and a 5 db bump between 8 and 12K at which point it
> starts a gentle roll off to 20K...there are a few spikes and dips across
> that and I will see if they are worth addressing in terms of $$$...afterall
> this is just a homebrew mixing room. This is not to say that I can't improve
> on the room it's just at this point in time it's not practical...but soon.
>
> On the downside I do have an anomaly...the sound coming from my left speaker
> is louder than the right...now I initially thought signal chain and tested
> every individual component in my monitoring chain from the MEC to the
> speakers including having all the components tested and everything is in
> proper working order so after much discussion with a few more knowledgeable
> people in the field I (we) have come to the conclusion that the difference
> in wall construction of the two exterior walls vs the interior walls, as
> well as the windows that are on my long wall are the main cause of the
> problem....the fix...well the easiest was to just adjust the volume on the
> amp...do some mixes and test them...so far so good but come spring I'm going
> to look at this and other areas (mentioned above) and see if a cost
> effective solution can be found.
>
> In conclusion I want to say that my room sounds very similar to a typical
> control room, at least the ones I've been in...it's fairly quiet but not
> unpleasing and the sound is very focused at the mixing position and this was
> what this whole project was about.
>
> I'd also like to say that after reviewing my expenses the total cost for the
> renovation (inc labour) , new speakers, new amp, speaker stands and the
> room's acoustic treatment came in at roughly $5000 and the cost for the
> treatment was roughly $500 although it should have been about $1000 as I got
> some deals on a few materials from friends.
>
> you may now return to your regularly scheduled programming
>
> Don
>
>
>
> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45bed419$1@linux...
>
>>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Neil some rooms are inherantly better than others because of
>>>their dimensions...this is physics at work. As for your
>>>recordings and mixing I'd also say that your years of
>>>experience have as much to do with the final result as do the
>>>acoustics of the room..probably more.
>>
>>Thanks for the compliment, but think about it... if I couldn't
>>hear what I was doing, it wouldn't matter if I had one year of
>>of experience, or a thousand. I'm not saying: "work in a shitty
>>acoustic environment because it's fun when you've got more of a
>>challenge, mates!", I'm saying that you should let the room be
>>the room and treat it minimally in terms of absorption because:
>>
>>1.) You're right what you say about physics, and based on that,
>>no amount of bass trapping or other treatment is going to
>>COMPLETELY overcome the ENTIRE structure surrounding the space
>>you're working in. No practical or realistic amount, anyway.
>>
>>2.) Hence, there is no "perfect" environment.
>>(Again, if there was, every top-notch studio would have this
>>exact same "perfect" environment, yes?).
>>
>>3.) The best mixing environment is one you're used to.
>>
>>4.) The best recording environment is one you know how to make
>>work for instrument "a" or vocal "b".
>>
>>5.) If you overtreat a room, you've got a room with no "life"
>>to it. This goes for recording rooms (70's drum sounds,
>>anyone?) AND mixing rooms (ever sit an anechoic chamber? I've
>>been in a near-anechoic one... your eardrums sound like they
>>"compress" when the door closes - that, or any degree OF that,
>>can't be good for mixing, can it?).
>>
>>6.) Skip six... numerologically, it would bring bad karma to
>>this thread.
>>
>>7.) You don't need near as many bass traps as Ethan Winer &
>>various mode calculating spreadsheets might suggest... most
>>of you HAVE bass traps already built in... walls that are
>>constructed of drywall with an air gap & then sheet insulation
>>behind them fastened to the other side of the interior wall...
>>hmmm....? Sound familiar? :) Kinda just like.... oh, I
>>dunno - A BASS TRAP???
>>
>>8.) You probably DO need SOME trapping, though, and if you can
>>trap a little bit of bass & get rid of standing waves to the
>>point where they'd be even as ridiculously high as -30 or
>>-40db, you could probably get a decent mix in a shower stall -
>>assuming you've done more than a handful of mixes in said
>>shower stall.
>>
>>9.) Bigger is better, #8 notwithstanding.
>>
>>10.) Don't "overspeaker" the room - if you've got a 10' throw
>>to the room, you do NOT need soffit-mounted Westlake Audio's
>>with the 15" woofs... for most (not all, depends on dimensions)
>>home/project studios I think anything more than nearfields are
>>a waste other than to give the band something to RAWK OUT TO!,
>>while you're tracking.
>>
>>11.) I can't think of a #11... I was just on a roll & couldn't
>>stop typing in time.
>>
>>
>>Neil
>
>
>
|
|
|
Re: Need some serious input here with room acoustics [message #79264 is a reply to message #79261] |
Tue, 30 January 2007 09:07 |
Nil
Messages: 245 Registered: March 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>Neil
>
>Nothing major in terms of disagreement
>
>The point regarding walls as bass traps...wall mass definitely
>can and does effect the acoustics but not in trapping lower
>frequencies, at least the way I understand bass traps.
I'm not saying that bass traps are ineffective, I'm just saying
that unless the mode calculations you're using take into account
the materials & methods of construction of the room, you may
think you need more bass traps than you really do in a typical
modern construction of drywall/airspace/sheet insulation.
In this type of construction, every segment of wall between
studs is, in effect, a bass trap. Is it a super-efficent,
perfectly-designed one with no leakage? Hell, no. Is it
something that in fact, DOES make a difference in trapping some
low end? Yeah, only problem is you still need more trapping in
corners, mostly. Again, this is going to vary from one room to
another, allimsayinis: You probably don't need as many bass
traps as some purveyors of said items might lead you to beleive,
if you're working in a room of this nature.
>and although you didn't state it I got the impression you think
>I have too much treatment...
No, I don't think you have "too much" - I was just saying that
$5 Grand & dozens of hours of labor later & you still have a
problem - a kinda funky one, too (mismatched L/R db levels),
plus a couple of dips in crucial frequency ranges... is that
really all that much better than what you could've achieved with
minimal treatment? Something like 8 Auralex LNRD's (two stacked
in each corner), plus a couple of absorption panels here & there
to knock down standing waves in key spots?
Now you're looking at spending MORE to correct the imbalance and
wondering if it's practical to do so...? Don, I'm not
criticizing you for trying, I'm simply wondering out loud if a
minimalist approach might have saved you a lot of money and
yielded the same, if not better, results. Like you said
yourself... it's physics at work - and my contention is that no
"practical" amount of treatment is going to overcome the
thousands of pounds of mass in various materials that each wall
is comprised of. This is why some people do "rooms within a
room", and others spend more money on acoustic treatment than
the building itself cost. It takes a LOT to overcome your right
wall being made of brick fascia/plywood/sheet insulation/air
gap/drywall and your left wall being made of drywall/air
gap/drywall, for example.
Neil
|
|
|
Re: Need some serious input here with room acoustics [message #79268 is a reply to message #79263] |
Tue, 30 January 2007 09:48 |
Don Nafe
Messages: 1206 Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
That's the gameplan...or variations on that theme
:-)
Don
"EK Sound" <askme@nospam.com> wrote in message news:45bf6c35@linux...
> Hey Don,
>
> For the window, make a '703 insert for it. Simply cover the window when
> mixing. A large studio I worked at in Vancouver did this and it worked
> well.
>
> David.
>
> Don Nafe wrote:
>> Neil, I think most of what you've said rings true, especially your
>> comments in Dimitrios' second post above, very observant, although there
>> are a couple of things that I will "agree to disagree with you" about.
>>
>> For everyone else, I want to qualify this next diatribe by saying I am
>> no expert in the field but I did a lot of research, spoke personally to a
>> number of people who are a lot more knowledgeable than I am AND had the
>> room evaluated by two companies. And between me and the fence post I came
>> up with my basic room treatment plan.
>>
>> sorry it's a little long in the tooth but I kept adding things I felt
>> were relevant as want along and what you have below is pretty well the
>> whole shebang (and a fun read I hope)
>>
>>
>> Now after a few months of research, asking really dumb questions, posing
>> scenarios etc. I went ahead and bought my materials then went to town
>> and the very first step was to rip out the walls between two bedrooms to
>> make a room roughly 20' X 10' X 8' not exactly a "golden" room but a
>> heck of a lot better than the 10' X 8' room I had been mixing in...talk
>> about a friggin acoustic nightmare.
>>
>> I also purchased a Hafler P1500 power amp and a pair of Noteperfect Alpha
>> Pro's from Australia (sight unseen) after auditioning more monitors than
>> I care to remember. Everything from Mackie HR 824's through the JBL, KRK,
>> Genelec & Quested lines etc. to B&W 800 series and all I can say was that
>> process was an ear opening experience.
>>
>> For those who might be interested in the Alpha's (shameless plug here)
>> I can best describe them as B&W 805 book shelf speakers with the bottom
>> end of the 804 floor model...and at 1/2 the price of the 805's I can say
>> it was the scariest moment in this whole process but I wasn't
>> disappointed at all...quite surprised actually. Mike Kontor at
>> Noteperfect was dead on when he said the Alpha's will blow away the
>> competition at double the price.
>>
>> But I digress...get to the acoustic treatment....
>>
>> So after construction was complete and the room painted I went about
>> setting up my room
>>
>> My treatment went up in four steps
>>
>> 1) the bass traps in the corners - immediately the bottom end tightened
>> up and lost much of it's muddiness
>>
>> 2) the wall panels went up next and there was a marked improvement of the
>> overall tightness across most of the frequencies and the stereo image
>> became more focused...the last wall panel to go up was the one behind the
>> speakers and believe it or not I noticed an improvement in the stereo
>> imaging after it was up.
>>
>> 3) the ceiling panels went up last as I had left over batts I thought
>> what the hell can't hurt if I put them at the mirror reflection points on
>> the ceiling and as soon as they went up a bit more skewing or smearing of
>> the mid / upper mid frequencies was cleared up as a result of taming more
>> of the room reverb / reflectivity in the room
>>
>> 4) The last step was speaker placement...this was this most analytical of
>> the process. Using a specific room mode calculator (I can pass it along
>> to anyone who'd like it) and some graph plotting as well as talking to
>> the builder of my speakers I was able to determine the sweet spots for my
>> speakers AND the optimum listening position for my room...I then put
>> together an adjustable stand set up that allowed me to place the speakers
>> in these sweet spots and very quickly determined one was the best for my
>> room. I then had sand filled speaker stands built and placed them into
>> the known sweet spot. Now here's a little side note - the sweet spot was
>> a cube roughly 12" square and by moving the speakers around in the sweet
>> spot you can actually hear differences in the stereo field, but I
>> digress.
>>
>> The very last step was to put shelving on the rear wall and fill it up
>> with all sorts of things to break up the sound hitting the rear wall. Did
>> I hear a noticeable difference...not really because things went up on it
>> over time and it's more a storage spot than a diffuser so I wasn't really
>> expecting much from it. I'm pretty sure it didn't hurt the sound any.
>>
>> Now about a month ago I spent three days clearing out the non studio
>> items in the room and began moving panels around as well as removing some
>> panels. During this process I was shooting my room using three different
>> ETF type programs and my results are pretty good for the expense and work
>> involved. One thing I did notice was when I took out the panels in the
>> back half of the room the sound at my mixing position started smearing
>> again. Once they went back things tightened up...so there's my vote for
>> treating the back half of the room.
>>
>> The not so final analysis:
>>
>> Overall the freq response in the room is fairly flat but there is a 5db
>> dip between 100 and 500 and a 5 db bump between 8 and 12K at which point
>> it starts a gentle roll off to 20K...there are a few spikes and dips
>> across that and I will see if they are worth addressing in terms of
>> $$$...afterall this is just a homebrew mixing room. This is not to say
>> that I can't improve on the room it's just at this point in time it's not
>> practical...but soon.
>>
>> On the downside I do have an anomaly...the sound coming from my left
>> speaker is louder than the right...now I initially thought signal chain
>> and tested every individual component in my monitoring chain from the MEC
>> to the speakers including having all the components tested and everything
>> is in proper working order so after much discussion with a few more
>> knowledgeable people in the field I (we) have come to the conclusion
>> that the difference in wall construction of the two exterior walls vs the
>> interior walls, as well as the windows that are on my long wall are the
>> main cause of the problem....the fix...well the easiest was to just
>> adjust the volume on the amp...do some mixes and test them...so far so
>> good but come spring I'm going to look at this and other areas (mentioned
>> above) and see if a cost effective solution can be found.
>>
>> In conclusion I want to say that my room sounds very similar to a typical
>> control room, at least the ones I've been in...it's fairly quiet but not
>> unpleasing and the sound is very focused at the mixing position and this
>> was what this whole project was about.
>>
>> I'd also like to say that after reviewing my expenses the total cost for
>> the renovation (inc labour) , new speakers, new amp, speaker stands and
>> the room's acoustic treatment came in at roughly $5000 and the cost for
>> the treatment was roughly $500 although it should have been about $1000
>> as I got some deals on a few materials from friends.
>>
>> you may now return to your regularly scheduled programming
>>
>> Don
>>
>>
>>
>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45bed419$1@linux...
>>
>>>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Neil some rooms are inherantly better than others because of
>>>>their dimensions...this is physics at work. As for your
>>>>recordings and mixing I'd also say that your years of
>>>>experience have as much to do with the final result as do the
>>>>acoustics of the room..probably more.
>>>
>>>Thanks for the compliment, but think about it... if I couldn't
>>>hear what I was doing, it wouldn't matter if I had one year of
>>>of experience, or a thousand. I'm not saying: "work in a shitty
>>>acoustic environment because it's fun when you've got more of a
>>>challenge, mates!", I'm saying that you should let the room be
>>>the room and treat it minimally in terms of absorption because:
>>>
>>>1.) You're right what you say about physics, and based on that,
>>>no amount of bass trapping or other treatment is going to
>>>COMPLETELY overcome the ENTIRE structure surrounding the space
>>>you're working in. No practical or realistic amount, anyway.
>>>
>>>2.) Hence, there is no "perfect" environment.
>>>(Again, if there was, every top-notch studio would have this
>>>exact same "perfect" environment, yes?).
>>>
>>>3.) The best mixing environment is one you're used to.
>>>
>>>4.) The best recording environment is one you know how to make
>>>work for instrument "a" or vocal "b".
>>>
>>>5.) If you overtreat a room, you've got a room with no "life"
>>>to it. This goes for recording rooms (70's drum sounds,
>>>anyone?) AND mixing rooms (ever sit an anechoic chamber? I've
>>>been in a near-anechoic one... your eardrums sound like they
>>>"compress" when the door closes - that, or any degree OF that,
>>>can't be good for mixing, can it?).
>>>
>>>6.) Skip six... numerologically, it would bring bad karma to
>>>this thread.
>>>
>>>7.) You don't need near as many bass traps as Ethan Winer &
>>>various mode calculating spreadsheets might suggest... most
>>>of you HAVE bass traps already built in... walls that are
>>>constructed of drywall with an air gap & then sheet insulation
>>>behind them fastened to the other side of the interior wall...
>>>hmmm....? Sound familiar? :) Kinda just like.... oh, I
>>>dunno - A BASS TRAP???
>>>
>>>8.) You probably DO need SOME trapping, though, and if you can
>>>trap a little bit of bass & get rid of standing waves to the
>>>point where they'd be even as ridiculously high as -30 or
>>>-40db, you could probably get a decent mix in a shower stall -
>>>assuming you've done more than a handful of mixes in said
>>>shower stall.
>>>
>>>9.) Bigger is better, #8 notwithstanding.
>>>
>>>10.) Don't "overspeaker" the room - if you've got a 10' throw
>>>to the room, you do NOT need soffit-mounted Westlake Audio's
>>>with the 15" woofs... for most (not all, depends on dimensions)
>>>home/project studios I think anything more than nearfields are
>>>a waste other than to give the band something to RAWK OUT TO!,
>>>while you're tracking.
>>>
>>>11.) I can't think of a #11... I was just on a roll & couldn't
>>>stop typing in time.
>>>
>>>
>>>Neil
>>
>>
|
|
|
Re: Need some serious input here with room acoustics [message #79331 is a reply to message #79264] |
Wed, 31 January 2007 12:52 |
Don Nafe
Messages: 1206 Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45bf6d42$1@linux...
>
> "Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>>Neil
>>
>>Nothing major in terms of disagreement
>>
>>The point regarding walls as bass traps...wall mass definitely
>>can and does effect the acoustics but not in trapping lower
>>frequencies, at least the way I understand bass traps.
>>
>
> I'm not saying that bass traps are ineffective, I'm just saying
> that unless the mode calculations you're using take into account
> the materials & methods of construction of the room, you may
> think you need more bass traps than you really do in a typical
> modern construction of drywall/airspace/sheet insulation.
> In this type of construction, every segment of wall between
> studs is, in effect, a bass trap. Is it a super-efficent,
> perfectly-designed one with no leakage? Hell, no. Is it
> something that in fact, DOES make a difference in trapping some
> low end? Yeah, only problem is you still need more trapping in
> corners, mostly. Again, this is going to vary from one room to
> another, allimsayinis: You probably don't need as many bass
> traps as some purveyors of said items might lead you to beleive,
> if you're working in a room of this nature.
>
I guess using the term bass trap to describe the cavity between wall studs
had me confused...I'm sure some frequencies get trapped in there but I doubt
it's low end.
>>
>>and although you didn't state it I got the impression you think
>>I have too much treatment...
>>
>
> No, I don't think you have "too much" - I was just saying that
> $5 Grand & dozens of hours of labor later & you still have a
> problem - a kinda funky one, too (mismatched L/R db levels),
> plus a couple of dips in crucial frequency ranges... is that
> really all that much better than what you could've achieved with
> minimal treatment? Something like 8 Auralex LNRD's (two stacked
> in each corner), plus a couple of absorption panels here & there
> to knock down standing waves in key spots?
>
> Now you're looking at spending MORE to correct the imbalance and
> wondering if it's practical to do so...? Don, I'm not
> criticizing you for trying, I'm simply wondering out loud if a
> minimalist approach might have saved you a lot of money and
> yielded the same, if not better, results. Like you said
> yourself... it's physics at work - and my contention is that no
> "practical" amount of treatment is going to overcome the
> thousands of pounds of mass in various materials that each wall
> is comprised of. This is why some people do "rooms within a
> room", and others spend more money on acoustic treatment than
> the building itself cost. It takes a LOT to overcome your right
> wall being made of brick fascia/plywood/sheet insulation/air
> gap/drywall and your left wall being made of drywall/air
> gap/drywall, for example.
As for me spending $5000 to end up with a problem...that's not really
accurate or fair. Yes there is a problem but it was the acoustic treatment
that brought the problem to my attention. Granted, one of the options to
remedy this problem is very expensive, but there are others that might tame
this beast which are incredibly cheap by comparison (as in pennies on the
dollar) I'll find out soon enough...either way the temporary fix is
working.
As for the rooms frequency response...I'll take these two gentle 5db dips
over the 20-40db spikes the room exhibited right after construction. That
empty room sucked donkey balls. But as I expected (hoped) with each
improvement to the monitoring and the acoustics I could hear a noticeable
difference in the room. that alone speaks volumes about how much treatment
was required to achieve my end.
I 'd also like to add that last fall I spent the better part of a week
shooting the room with various combinations of panels in the room and
without even looking at the graphs the difference in what I heard was
amazing. Remember this is a mixing room not a tracking room...would I track
in a room with this rooms acoustic signature...I doubt it as it's too dead
for my liking. But for mixing it's very nice.
From the outset this room was never intended to compete sonically or
economically with commercial studios. It was to be a comfortable place where
I could go (in my home) to mix CDs and to that end it has succeeded. I agree
that to do this properly would have required tens of thousands of dollars
and many more hours of research and labour on my part, so in that respect
spending $5000 to renovate and treat a room AND upgrade my monitoring system
would have to be considered a minimalist approach.
Don
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun Nov 17 07:14:17 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.12016 seconds
|