Old 02-03-2009, 04:40 PM   #41
FrankP
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yep View Post
Part VI - How to treat a typical residential space for less than $100 in a single day.

Materials needed:

- 2'x4' Rigid fiberglass insulation panels (aka Owens-Corning 703 or 705, aka rockwool, aka mineral wool, aka mineral board, aka ductboard). This is the key ingredient and is NOT available at Home Depot, Lowes, or conventional hardware stores. You have to order it from insulation companies or industrial supply houses. Denser and thicker is better, but if you're doing corner traps with air gaps behind, pretty much any of it is fine. In the US, a company called SPI (Specialty Products Inc) has a lot of semi-retail branches that sell 2"x2'x4' panels for around $40 per bundle of 6. Check the yellow pages and make a couple calls.

Total $40
I was wondering if anyone can help me find a Specialty Products Inc in the San Diego area. I've tried the internet here

http://www.specialty-products.com/in...page=locations

I also tried my phone book with no luck.
FrankP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2009, 09:16 AM   #42
yep
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,977
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankP View Post
I was wondering if anyone can help me find a Specialty Products Inc in the San Diego area. I've tried the internet here

http://www.specialty-products.com/in...page=locations

I also tried my phone book with no luck.
1. wrong website, try here: http://www.spi-co.com/directory.html

2. SPI is by no means the best or only place to get this stuff, just one real-world example. Like saying that Stop and Shop sells bottled Coca-Cola for about $1. That doesn't mean that you need to drive across the state to find a Stop and Shop if there is not one close by, it's just an example.

3. Look in the yellow pages under insulation or building materials. You can also buy 703 or 705 from soundproofing companies but it's much more expensive. Welcome to the wonderful, pre-historic world of non-retail purchasing. Nothing is easy, nothing is clear, everything must be ordered at a counter, there is no real way to comparison-shop, etc. My example was just to give one real-world example of real-world prices from a real vendor to convey a sense of what's out there. Not to save anyone from having to make phone calls or fumble through counter salespeople who don't know what you're talking about. Sorry, that's just how supply houses work.

4. if you are really, really averse to spending an hour or two calling insulation and building materials supply houses, you can basically "make" rigid fiberglass by compressing regular pink fiberglass down to a much greater density, but this is such a PITA that you'll have to figure it out yourself.
yep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2009, 01:41 PM   #43
Yogi
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dunn, NC
Posts: 6
Default

I've read this thread and I must say there is some very good info here. I've been dealing with acoustics for well over 30 years. I'm a firm believer in the DIY course if you can do it. Having said that there are a few things I'd like to point out that I haven't seen discussions on yet. There is a lot to be said for resonances. EVERYTHING has a resonance. For some materials these can be inaudible, so difuse that they can not be determined, OR (worst case) somewhere below 250 Hz and they tend to ADD muddiness in those frequencies. Anyone want to venture a guess as the the resonant frequency of 1/2" drywall on wood studs at 16" centers? And the bigger part of this is that those cavities wind up being strong bass radiators at this frequency. 125 Hz. Smack dab in the middle of the bass range with the half wave at 62 and first harmonic at 250. Also if those studs happen to be steel studs (all commercial buildings constructed now) the resonance is at 80 Hz. and is almost overwhelming. I've mesaured 80 Hz. resonances in a few churches (I work with lots of churches to solve their acoustical problems) I've seen the resonances add up to 25 db. And no notch filter will remove it either. How can you tell if you have a resonance problem? Pretty easy, run a sweep frequency through your speakers. If you hear a bonk or rumble or sudden increase in volume that is present throughout the room at a particular frequency and it also occurs somewhat at freq/2 or freq*2 you have a resonance problem. In part two I'll give you some ideas on how to fix them.
Yogi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2009, 02:34 PM   #44
Tedwood
Human being with feelings
 
Tedwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: South Coast UK
Posts: 14,303
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yogi View Post
EVERYTHING has a resonance. For some materials these can be inaudible, so difuse that they can not be determined, OR (worst case) somewhere below 250 Hz and they tend to ADD muddiness in those frequencies. Anyone want to venture a guess as the the resonant frequency of 1/2" drywall on wood studs at 16" centers? And the bigger part of this is that those cavities wind up being strong bass radiators at this frequency. 125 Hz. Smack dab in the middle of the bass range with the half wave at 62 and first harmonic at 250. Also if those studs happen to be steel studs (all commercial buildings constructed now) the resonance is at 80 Hz. and is almost overwhelming. I've mesaured 80 Hz. resonances in a few churches (I work with lots of churches to solve their acoustical problems) I've seen the resonances add up to 25 db. And no notch filter will remove it either. How can you tell if you have a resonance problem? Pretty easy, run a sweep frequency through your speakers. If you hear a bonk or rumble or sudden increase in volume that is present throughout the room at a particular frequency and it also occurs somewhat at freq/2 or freq*2 you have a resonance problem. In part two I'll give you some ideas on how to fix them.

I'm a builder, trying to retire and be a PC repair man. I have put enough drywall/plasterboard up on walls and ceilings to know the sound off pat. I guessed about 150 Hz, (maybe it's not so big over here )


Two types of construction would have complete different results according to whether the studding was anchored to solid walls or suspended, both present different problems

The resonance will vary according to construction, for instance if the drywall is stuck to solid block work with drywall adhesive the resonance will vary according to how far apart the globs of adhesive are, in exactly the same way a drum goes up in pitch when you press in the center (second harmonic). If you move your finger around on the drum skin it's no longer the second harmonic and the sympathetic resonance would change. In this method the drywall has a much higher resonance. This may help with your drywall resonance but it transmits the vibrations through to the solid wall then and you may then have a problem with the resonance of that solid wall, which is typically very low, if not sub sonic. The analogy here is the drum shell amplifying the resonance of the the drum skin

In the case of the suspended type construction you have a resonance of 125 Hz per board, but only on their own, as soon as you construct something bigger it becomes like a bigger drum and it gets lower, unless you anchor it, and then you might have the first problem of transmission, if you could find a part of the building such adjoining walls that nullify the resonance so much the better. What ever you do though there is a catch, but one thing that could help a lot I can say after years of experience, is damping.

If I had large walls I would be looking at having the studwork floating, and not attached rigidly to the ceiling so you don't transmit and build up resonance problems. The second thing is I would pack glass fiber behind the suspended wall so that it "dampened" the resonance of the suspended wall.

These are just the basics and there may be more structural properties to consider that could cause further problems or could be put to good use in remedying resonances, such as cavities and adjoining walls.

Disclaimer
I'm not an acoustics expert but I am a builder with a good ear for sound, that could have it's advantages
__________________
The grass is greener where it rains

Last edited by Tedwood; 02-06-2009 at 02:49 PM.
Tedwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2009, 01:17 PM   #45
mewsac
Human being with feelings
 
mewsac's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 39
Default Have a look at this as well...

Mark Wheeler is an experienced audio engineer and music lover:

http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/room_acoustics1_e.html
mewsac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 12:15 PM   #46
Bubbagump
Human being with feelings
 
Bubbagump's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 2,024
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FarBeyondMetal View Post
Would you by chance have another link to this? Audiominds isn't accepting registrations anymore

We're back! Took forever, but you can go check out that tutorial now.
__________________
www.theslang.com
Bubbagump is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2009, 08:52 PM   #47
yep
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,977
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yogi View Post
...How can you tell if you have a resonance problem? Pretty easy, run a sweep frequency through your speakers. If you hear a bonk or rumble or sudden increase in volume that is present throughout the room at a particular frequency and it also occurs somewhat at freq/2 or freq*2 you have a resonance problem. In part two I'll give you some ideas on how to fix them.
I'm still kinda hoping for a part two...

One thing about the "everything has a resonance" bit-- the beauty of broadband bass trapping in recording studios is that it really doesn't matter much what kind of space you're in, because the whole idea is that you're just sucking up *all* of the resonances that could potentially be problematic.

Trying to create a great acoustical space for concert performances, or a world-class live room is almost certainly outside the scope of DIY home studio advice. But getting rid of the honk mud, and phasey, nasal mush in most residential spaces is pretty easy, and can be really cheap.

In movie theaters, "the walls are soft and dark" in the words of Camper van Beethoven, and they are made that way with very heavy curtains and absorption whose purpose is to make sure that the only sound the audience is hearing is sound from the speakers, not from reflections or surface resonance. Building a movie theater is not cheap, but it is much, much simpler than building a stone cathedral or orchestral concert hall.
yep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2009, 11:13 AM   #48
OrenS
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 197
Default Broadband panels in my room?

Hi Yep (and anyone else who can help),

I want to add broadband panels to my room, but as you will see in the attached pic, it is a little difficult to put them in the corners. The room was built with two built-in closets (I wouldn't call them "walk-in" as they are two feet deep and 3'10" wide). These closets are half full with some clothing which I assumed would help a little with reflections, but they don't. The room is 10 feet wide, 12 feet long, and 8 feet tall (approximately. I measured in metric...). There is a couch opposite of my workstation, and two extra desks as this room doubles as our den. I'm monitoring with 3" M-Audios at very reasonable levels, so the reflection don't usually effect my listening very much. They do, however, show their ugly head whenever trying to record vocals or acoustic instruments in the room. Is there a way to apply broadband panels to this room, or maybe a different solution? I'm planing on using 5.5" UltraTouch for what its worth.
Thanks!
Oren

OrenS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 09:10 PM   #49
yep
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,977
Default

Hang corner traps along the ceiling corners and you'll get a vast improvement.

"Planning on using 5.5 Ultratouch" is kind of meaningless, it all depends how you're using it. You want big traps with big space behind them, is all, and corners are better, for all the reasons listed earlier.

If you can take your 90-degree ceiling corners and turn them into 2-foot angled traps all the way round (or even just in the 3-way corners), you will create a vastly better acoustical space.

Any corner is as good as any other when it comes to bass-trapping. From your drawing, I count two 3-way corners that are currently just walls and ceiling, unused space. Also the wall-ceiling corners over the sofa and mixing desk. Covering those with corner traps will make a massive difference. If you want to go further, the closets could be bass-trapped top and bottom, or the doors could get a heavy insulator on one sideor another or both and be left partway open. Insulation could be stuffed under the sofa or tables, perhaps.

You could also build one or two absorbent gobos of whatever size is practical (bigger the better, but anything helps), and create a movable "dead corner" to sing or play into, or even just a big absorber in the room to kill some of the worst resonances.

When it comes to bass trapping, any is good, and more is better. The less room you have to fit in even a little bit, the more good that little bit will do. The point is not to "tune" the room, just to kill as much bass resonance as you possibly can, so that you are hearing bass frequencies from the speakers, not from their effects of bouncing all over the room and screwing up your frequency perception.

The general tendency to stick egg-crate foam all over the walls is actually on the right track, although totally the wrong approach. As long as the absorption is physically DENSE and DEEP (or DENSE and well-separated from the walls), it is a good thing, and you can just put it anywhere. The problem with the egg-crate-foam approach is that it often soaks up all the LEAST offensive reflections, while leaving the MOST offensive ones. This makes it sound like a bad recording in a bad room instead of a good recording in a bad room.
yep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2009, 09:13 AM   #50
OrenS
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 197
Default

Thanks! It seems like the ultratouch will be too expensive for this amount of traps, so now I have to find a 703/5 supplier in Calgary...
OrenS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2009, 10:31 AM   #51
stupeT
Human being with feelings
 
stupeT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: frankonia
Posts: 1,996
Default

So far this thread seemed to be all about improving acoustics for good recordings. I am having this one room studio. That means I also have to mix in there. I was not able to setup my main monitors strictly symmetrical to walls etc. to maintain a good stereo image.

In particular the right speaker is somehow close to wall while the other is not (open room). Isn't it a good idea to place some broadband absorbers right infront that wall to improve stereo imaging (by killing unwanted reflections from there to some degree)? And wont this also make the freq response at listening position more even (standing waves reduced)?
__________________
------------------------------------------
Don't read this sentence to it's end, please.
stupeT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2009, 05:19 PM   #52
yep
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,977
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stupeT View Post
So far this thread seemed to be all about improving acoustics for good recordings. I am having this one room studio. That means I also have to mix in there. I was not able to setup my main monitors strictly symmetrical to walls etc. to maintain a good stereo image.

In particular the right speaker is somehow close to wall while the other is not (open room). Isn't it a good idea to place some broadband absorbers right infront that wall to improve stereo imaging (by killing unwanted reflections from there to some degree)? And wont this also make the freq response at listening position more even (standing waves reduced)?
You are mistaken--this thread is not recording-specific, just about general room improvement.

That said, sub-optimal mix position (e.g. stuffed sideways into a corner) is the kind of thing that CAN'T be fixed with generalizations, but requires specifics. Asking how to improve monitoring where one speaker is in a corner and the other is in the middle of the room is like asking for the best way to play a guitar where one string is always out-of-tune. Nobody can help you if you can't achieve a certain baseline, you just have to do the best you can.

You could hire an acoustician to deign a custom solution, but I suspect that is impractical for most people whose recording lives are shoved into a corner.
yep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 02:13 AM   #53
hollunder
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2
Default

How well do you think mattresses would work for bass traps?
It would probably be far easier to cut up a mattress and cover it
with something than making some rockwool construction or similar.
At least for me oldish mattresses would be quite easily available.

I'm not so sure about the most sensible way to fix something like that to the wall.
I'm a bit opposed to drilling lots of holes into the concrete walls and ceiling.
Are there alternatives?

Last edited by hollunder; 07-27-2009 at 02:45 AM.
hollunder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2009, 01:39 AM   #54
thinking allowed
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 43
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hollunder View Post
How well do you think mattresses would work for bass traps?
It would probably be far easier to cut up a mattress and cover it
with something than making some rockwool construction or similar.
At least for me oldish mattresses would be quite easily available.
My guess is that anything to absorb frequencies is probably better than nothing. However, A matress isn't designed for absorbing frequencies so I'd bet that the absorption will be uneven, with some frequencies passing through like nothing is there.
Owens Corning 703 is tested and designed to be effective at reducing audio frequencies. If you hold it near your face and talk into it, you will be amazed at how it is like a vacuum sucking up sound. It is GREAT stuff, and really not that expensive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hollunder View Post
I'm not so sure about the most sensible way to fix something like that to the wall.
I'm a bit opposed to drilling lots of holes into the concrete walls and ceiling.
Are there alternatives?
703 is light enough that you can wrap some material around it and hang it with adhesive pieces of velcro. Then if you need to isolate a vocalist for a voiceover recording, you can grab a couple pieces off the wall and make a mini isolation chamber.
thinking allowed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2009, 06:01 PM   #55
yep
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,977
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hollunder View Post
How well do you think mattresses would work for bass traps?
It would probably be far easier to cut up a mattress and cover it
with something than making some rockwool construction or similar.
At least for me oldish mattresses would be quite easily available.

I'm not so sure about the most sensible way to fix something like that to the wall.
I'm a bit opposed to drilling lots of holes into the concrete walls and ceiling.
Are there alternatives?
A mattress is fine, so long as we are talking about the broadband absorption/bass-trapping side of things. Whether the frequency absorption pattern is consistent is irrelevant, because something that absorbed all frequencies equally would just leave you with the same room problems but a lower sound level. The point of broadband bass trapping is not to capture all low-end frequencies equally, it's to capture all low-end frequencies, period.

There are two completely different trajectories to this discussion. Think of it like having a room that is too bright due to too much sunlight:

A movie-studio lighting designer who cares about color balance and ambient light-levels and such might have to run calculations and comparisons and find specialized diffusers that diminish light levels equally at all frequencies (colors) etc, or "tune" the solution to create a specific lighting effect.

But a regular person who just wants a dark bedroom only has to put up opaque window shades and be done with it. She doesn't care whether it technically blocks green light more effectively than purple light or whatever, she just gets something that blocks ALL the light and then turns on a lamp if she wants to read. Solid lead might technically block light better than sheetrock or heavy curtains, but any of them will suffice to make a typical room pitch dark.

So it is with broadband corner trapping. As long as it is soaking up broadband low frequencies, it's working, and the more the better. The idea is not to "perfect" your room's bass resonance, it's to eliminate it, so that the only sound you hear is from the speakers and even, "flat" reflections. Bales of hay, mattresses, pink fiberglass, piles of dirty laundry etc all accomplish this to varying degrees depending on placement and volume.

Solutions such as rockwool, rigid fiberglass, mineral wool, etc are commonly used for this purpose because they are highly absorbent in thin panels that are fairly cheap and easy to work with in an aesthetic way. NOT because they are better at absorbing problem frequencies. How would they know which frequencies are the problem in your room? Why would "even" frequency absorption be an advantage if the objective is absorb everything?

Hope that makes sense.
yep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2009, 03:19 PM   #56
hollunder
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2
Default

Yes, that makes quite some sense, thanks.
Bass is only one of the problems my very small room suffers from but I guess I should start with that.

One other very obvious problem is high frequencies, when I clap my hands I hear multiple reflections.
Imagine a small room, reflective floor, ceiling, two opposing walls and a large window, and you get the idea..
I'll see if/how the bass trapping affects that as well and then maybe think about a carpet and a second one for a wall or so.

Yeah I know, with a room like this I should get another one but that won't happen for the next few years.
Thanks for the advice so far.
hollunder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2010, 09:35 AM   #57
d.bop
Human being with feelings
 
d.bop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,712
Default

Hey everyone,

I just posted this over at homerecording.com (couldn't access the REAPER website for a while..)

Anyway, I feel more at home here

----
I stopped at Home Depot yesterday to see what they had as far as bass trap material. I was going to go with R-30 bundles stacked in the corners, but the bundles are too large for my room. As I was leaving, I saw some smaller bundles of something called "Green Fiber." It's blow-in insulation but it comes in a compressed "brick." Would stacking these in the corners work well for bass traps? Here's what the website says:

Quote:
Originally Posted by http://www.greenfiber.com/techdoc.aspx?id=76
GreenFiber Cocoon Insulation is extremely effective in controlling sound transmission. This is especially true for airborne sound that is generated by traffic noise, airplanes, radios, televisions and conversation. This type of sound transmission can be significantly reduced by installation of GreenFiber Cocoon Insulation in ceilings, walls and between floors. In open attics, GreenFiber Cocoon Insulation easily molds around irregular construction and stays in place, fitting snugly against framing members and even moderate slopes.

GreenFiber’s insulation fibers have a natural tendency to trap air. It is also dense. The combination of these two characteristics provides effective noise reduction in walls and between floors.

Walls in new or existing construction that are insulated with GreenFiber Cocoon Insulation are able to suppress sound transmission much better than traditional batt materials. By completely filling spaces where sound can travel, GreenFiber Cocoon Insulation reduces the sound that can pass through gaps in batt-insulated walls.

Special effort should be taken during construction to make all walls, ceilings and floors airtight in order to eliminate any potential leaks for sound transmission. The staggering of outlets and plumbing is also recommended.
They don't have any absorption specs on their website, but the package does say R60 (though that's probably meaningless as far as acoustics go..) and it's basically made out of recycled paper.

Here is the website. http://www.greenfiber.com/

Does anyone here know if this would work well for bass trapping?

Thanks!
__________________
Sleepy-Time DSP - @sleepytimedsp
d.bop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 05:16 AM   #58
flmason
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
... if your claim seems to violate Occam's Razor

...
Why do people say this silly line from a movie? Is it because it has the word "razor" in it? LOL!

Occam's Razor is at best a suggestion of causes not a law. Geez, computer software defects prove time and again, sometimes the simplest apparent causes are not the real ones, LOL!

"the scientific method, Occam's razor is not considered an irrefutable principle of logic, and certainly not a scientific result.[6][7][8][9]"

[6] Philosophy of Chemistry, Vol. 3, pp. 3-28, (1997).
[7] ^ a b c Alan Baker, Simplicity, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, (2004) http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/simplicity/
[8] ^ a b c d e f g Courtney A, Courtney M: Comments Regarding "On the Nature Of Science", Physics in Canada, Vol. 64, No. 3 (2008), p7-8.
# ^ a b c d e f Dieter Gernert, Ockham's Razor and Its Improper Use, Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 135-140, (2007).
[9] ^ a b c d Elliott Sober, Let’s Razor Occam’s Razor, p. 73-93, from Dudley Knowles (ed.) Explanation and Its Limits, Cambridge University Press (1994).
flmason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2010, 04:56 PM   #59
BananaFish
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yep View Post
A room with any dimension smaller than 12 feet is probably going to be a problem in any realistic scenario, since you are getting into territory where acoustic guitars and lower male vocals are creating problems.
Hi Yep,

First, thanks for all of your helpful advice in this thread and in 'recordings sound like ass' - I've been learning a lot from these - much appreciated.

Just wanted to clarify your quote above, as I wasn't sure if you meant that this size of room is a problem that is not solvable by any amount of treatment, or if you mean to imply that the DIY broadband absorbers would allow a small room to become a usable recording space for acoustic guitar / male vocal.

I have a small room for recording where I think the shortest dimension is around 10 foot or so.

Thanks
BananaFish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2010, 06:58 PM   #60
toot
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 259
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flmason View Post
Why do people say this silly line from a movie? Is it because it has the word "razor" in it? LOL!

Occam's Razor is at best a suggestion of causes not a law. Geez, computer software defects prove time and again, sometimes the simplest apparent causes are not the real ones, LOL!

"the scientific method, Occam's razor is not considered an irrefutable principle of logic, and certainly not a scientific result.[6][7][8][9]"

[6] Philosophy of Chemistry, Vol. 3, pp. 3-28, (1997).
[7] ^ a b c Alan Baker, Simplicity, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, (2004) http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/simplicity/
[8] ^ a b c d e f g Courtney A, Courtney M: Comments Regarding "On the Nature Of Science", Physics in Canada, Vol. 64, No. 3 (2008), p7-8.
# ^ a b c d e f Dieter Gernert, Ockham's Razor and Its Improper Use, Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 135-140, (2007).
[9] ^ a b c d Elliott Sober, Let’s Razor Occam’s Razor, p. 73-93, from Dudley Knowles (ed.) Explanation and Its Limits, Cambridge University Press (1994).
occam's razor is an heuristic - 'the simplest correct solution is the best one' the wikipedia article is pretty good http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

but the thing to keep in mind is that Occam's razor is used to choose between competing correct accounts, not just competing accounts and is a kind of measure of utility rather than correctness(because it assumes equivalent correctness amongst the competing accounts)
toot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2010, 10:23 PM   #61
reapercurious
Human being with feelings
 
reapercurious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,626
Default

the anechoic chamber; is it the holy grail when all is said and done?
__________________
thanks!
reapercurious is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2010, 07:08 PM   #62
yep
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,977
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by reapercurious View Post
the anechoic chamber; is it the holy grail when all is said and done?
No.

An anechoic chamber is an extraordinary unpleasant place to spend time in, and is certainly not the ideal place for either recording or monitoring.

The "holy grail", if there is one, is probably a space with at least two rooms: an ideal concert hall, with a big, natural, "blooming" full-frequency resonance, and a small, intimate, short-decay "listening room", like a large, idealized living room.
yep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2010, 08:37 PM   #63
yep
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,977
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaFish View Post
Hi Yep,

First, thanks for all of your helpful advice in this thread and in 'recordings sound like ass' - I've been learning a lot from these - much appreciated.

Just wanted to clarify your quote above, as I wasn't sure if you meant that this size of room is a problem that is not solvable by any amount of treatment, or if you mean to imply that the DIY broadband absorbers would allow a small room to become a usable recording space for acoustic guitar / male vocal.

I have a small room for recording where I think the shortest dimension is around 10 foot or so.

Thanks
Your ears and your recordings are the best arbiter, but I did not mean to imply that it's impossible to make good recordings with sub-12-foot ceilings. You can make good recordings with sub-7-foot ceilings, but it's harder and more limiting.

Without looking up tables and wavelength values, there is a sort of useful cutoff at about 12 feet/3.5 meters where you have enough room for medium-low bass waves to develop (like the bottom string of a guitar). This also extends to low baritone voices, etc.

Close-miking and nearfield monitoring can mitigate (but never eliminate) a lot of the room effects, simply because the mic or your ears are picking much more of the direct sound, and less of the room effects.

You can get a decent monitoring situation in almost any well-treated space.

Recording becomes trickier the more you get into physically bigger sound sources. I.e., a combo amp is easier than an upright bass, and a grand piano is almost impossible in a small room (assuming you want it to still sound like a grand piano-- you can always stick a mic right up against the strings).

But in all cases, good sound is good sound. In a recording sense, even though the acoustics are harder, the judgement is easier: does it sound good through the monitors? But that requires monitors that give an accurate picture to begin with, which is trickier to determine.

So the baseline is to start with a trustworthy monitoring setup, which basically means a monitoring space where mixes sound the same when you play them back on earbuds, in the car, in the living room, at a friend's house, through a nightclub PA... just like real records "sound the same" even through different-sounding speakers. If you have that, and use that as the basis for the rest of your decision-making, everything else falls into place.
yep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2010, 04:41 PM   #64
Banned
Human being with feelings
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Unwired (probably in the proximity of Amsterdam)
Posts: 4,868
Default

Lol, this is *awesome* : http://www.realtraps.com/p_planter.htm
__________________
˙lɐd 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ǝɔıʌǝp ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıploɥ ǝɹ,noʎ
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2010, 12:58 PM   #65
penguin42
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2
Default

yep,

I've been reading through your posts with great interest. There's one thing I'm curious about that I've seen suggested elsewhere but that you haven't addressed, and that's placement of absorbers to reduce first reflections from speakers (generally around and behind the speakers, on the walls or on the ceiling between the speakers and the listening position), or on two flat surfaces that are facing each other to reduce flutter echo. This usually seems to be the prescribed use of "eggcrate" foam -- and is usually recommended in addition to bass absorbers in corners. What is your opinion on this kind of treatment? Would you recommend it for a home mixing room? Would standard acoustic foam work in this case or would more fiberglass broadband absorbers be recommended?

Thanks for these posts!
penguin42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2010, 07:21 PM   #66
KrisForward
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 9
Default

you know, I'd trade all the theory in the world for something that works
KrisForward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 03:50 PM   #67
Cableaddict
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,693
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by technogremlin View Post
Ermm... people like John Sayers and Ethan Winer are perceived as experts in the industry, both with decades of experience in building and tuning studios both large and small. And both support the fact that you CAN build working basstraps with this stuff. Of course you can't expect THE SAME results from an inexpensive solution as you would get from a Pro-solution, but YOU CAN expect results nevertheless.

Well, forums are full of people that know close to nothing and/or have no real experience in the matter but present themselves as the ultimate guru on the matter at hand (in most cases on each and every subject that comes along on the forum, don't worry, I won't mention your name either).
Just re-reding this thread now.

Ethan Winer is no expert, in fact is a total bumbling idiot. He never built a room in his life. He was a musician who read a book or two (didn't understand what he read) then decided to start selling ultra-cheap acoustic "treatments", and started a website. His website is a magical, mystical place, where the laws of physics cease to exist. I've actually corrected him on various threads several times in the past, because he was giving totally wrong advice, after which he changed his website info accordingly. I no longer waste my time.

I used to build rooms for a living, how about you? I've worked for major acoustical design firms. You?

Try actually reading the BBC books, or the Everest books, or actual sabine-absorbtion data from companies like Owens Corning.

But hey, it's your money. Do what you you want. There are a ton of companies that will gladly sell you a hunk of foam, and tell you it's a bass-absorber. They have websites, so it must be true!

Last edited by Cableaddict; 07-29-2010 at 03:57 PM.
Cableaddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 10:34 PM   #68
technogremlin
Human being with feelings
 
technogremlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2,508
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cableaddict View Post
Ethan Winer is no expert, in fact is a total bumbling idiot.
I simply don't agree with you on that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cableaddict View Post
I used to build rooms for a living
Good for you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cableaddict View Post
how about you? I've worked for major acoustical design firms. You?
Why should I. I've never worked with a LHC either but I know a fair share about quantum mechanics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cableaddict View Post
But hey, it's your money. Do what you you want. There are a ton of companies that will gladly sell you a hunk of foam, and tell you it's a bass-absorber. They have websites, so it must be true!
Talking down to me doesn't do anything


But hey, it's a free internet forum, post whatever you like... I do as well
technogremlin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2010, 04:42 PM   #69
BananaFish
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14
Default DIY Bass Traps

Is it important that these DIY bass traps/broadband absorbers, when used across a corner of a room, are fixed such that their edges touch the walls...? I ask because across the corners in my room there are plenty of obstacles to stop me doing that - e.g. radiator, curtain pole, etc.

So - if I hung a trap from the ceiling, but it was slightly away from the walls, does anyone know if it would still be effective...?

Thanks!
BananaFish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2010, 10:13 PM   #70
davidandmary1
Human being with feelings
 
davidandmary1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 50
Default

Yea, I have seen Ethan put a broadband trap 4 inches from the wall or door, etc. He said it was helpful. I guess the more broadband traps, the better...
davidandmary1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2010, 11:06 PM   #71
artifus
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 114
Default

http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/archive/index.shtml
artifus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2010, 04:47 PM   #72
BananaFish
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidandmary1 View Post
Yea, I have seen Ethan put a broadband trap 4 inches from the wall or door, etc. He said it was helpful. I guess the more broadband traps, the better...
Thanks davidandmary1 & artifus !
BananaFish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2010, 10:38 PM   #73
fly
Human being with feelings
 
fly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 254
Default

I read the tips for DIY bass traps explained in this thread. Would 1 or 2 of these make a noticeable improvement in a small 11x11x8 room?


the recommended thing to do seems to cover up the walls with bass traps and reflections whatever they call those, but this is out of question for me.

Now perhaps my room needs more reflections stuff than bass traps . I don't know.but I just don't want to cover the walls.

I don't need to have the best sounding room, just something decent.


So what do you think? Should I invest in a minimal improvement or it's not worth it?

thanks
fly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2010, 11:52 PM   #74
yep
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,977
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fly View Post
I read the tips for DIY bass traps explained in this thread. Would 1 or 2 of these make a noticeable improvement in a small 11x11x8 room?


the recommended thing to do seems to cover up the walls with bass traps and reflections whatever they call those, but this is out of question for me.

Now perhaps my room needs more reflections stuff than bass traps . I don't know.but I just don't want to cover the walls.

I don't need to have the best sounding room, just something decent.


So what do you think? Should I invest in a minimal improvement or it's not worth it?

thanks
The point is less to cover the walls than to cover the corners. In that respect, anything you can do will almost certainly help an 11x11x8 room.
yep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 12:16 AM   #75
yep
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,977
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cableaddict View Post
Just re-reding this thread now.

Ethan Winer is no expert, in fact is a total bumbling idiot. He never built a room in his life. He was a musician who read a book or two (didn't understand what he read) then decided to start selling ultra-cheap acoustic "treatments", and started a website. His website is a magical, mystical place, where the laws of physics cease to exist. I've actually corrected him on various threads several times in the past, because he was giving totally wrong advice, after which he changed his website info accordingly. I no longer waste my time.

I used to build rooms for a living, how about you? I've worked for major acoustical design firms. You?

Try actually reading the BBC books, or the Everest books, or actual sabine-absorbtion data from companies like Owens Corning.

But hey, it's your money. Do what you you want. There are a ton of companies that will gladly sell you a hunk of foam, and tell you it's a bass-absorber. They have websites, so it must be true!
This is like saying "I HAVE A FREIND WHOOSE REAL SMART AND HE SAYS ETHAN WINER'S A FAG!"

Which studios have you built?

Ethan Winer is meticulous and notorious for backing up everything he says with experimental measurements, and for providing all his raw data, not just the conclusions. Which is frustratingly rare in the audio world, where people instead tend to take everything personally and to resort to ad-hominems and assertions of superior backgrounds and accusing each other of being idiots, etc, with no basis.

To the point, it actually doesn't matter whether he's an idiot, or even a bumbling one. In science, as I'm sure you know, as an acoustical scientist yourself, the credentials of the presenter/hypothesist/experimenter are irrelevant. What matters is whether the hypothesis itself is falsifiable and testable. If it is, then it could come from a mentally retarded pathological liar, and as long as tests confirm it, it's legitimate.

So, giving you the benefit of the doubt, Ethan Winer may indeed be a bumbling idiot. But nobody has really ever discussed his IQ results, as far as I know. What is significant about him is not his idiocy but the quality of testable and falsifiable information about acoustics he provides.

You, on the other hand, have provided a bunch of name-calling and nebulous assertions of authority based on having "built rooms", and no information at all of any use to anyone, as near as I can see.
yep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 09:52 AM   #76
chip mcdonald
Human being with feelings
 
chip mcdonald's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: NA - North Augusta South Carolina
Posts: 3,369
Default

A small room is always going to sound like a small room.
__________________
]]]>- guitar lessons - www.chipmcdonald.com-<[[[
note: for future reference, anything and everything I say may be considered OPTIONAL. Thanks (the management)
chip mcdonald is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2010, 01:05 PM   #77
carlier74
Human being with feelings
 
carlier74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 87
Default

my ceilings are pretty high, probably close to 3.5 meters. Is it then still necessary to try to put ceiling-wall traps up first?

I found bass scale test somewhere. When I play it on my monitors, it's obvious some of the higher bass notes stand out. Is there a free plugin that tells me what frequencies these are, and is that even necessary to know?
carlier74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2010, 11:31 AM   #78
Smurf
Human being with feelings
 
Smurf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,169
Default

New YEP Folder is up! Updated to 9-23-10

This includes DOC & RTF file formats along with the PDF of the "Why do your recordings sound like ass?" thread for those who are using this on their portable readers. Please let me know if this works for you!

This also includes the "Producing Yourself" & thoughts on Acoustics threads, and the First Year folder zipped.

Enjoy!
__________________
Yep's First 3 Years in PDF's
HOW WIDE a difference is there between how you treat others when they make a mistake and how you would like them to treat you when you err?
Smurf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2010, 04:58 PM   #79
pgraham
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1
Default

The BBC acoustics pdf linked to earlier is very helpful - skip through the stuff about building studios from scratch, and go to the Room acoustics section. It's got detailed construction plans for different treatment panels, with charts of absorption by frequency for the different styles.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/archive...icpractice.pdf

The primary difference between their panels and the basic trap design yep lays out, is that they place thin perforated hardboard on the face of their mineral wool. They then build theirs as boxes with rigid sides and a grid of cardboard baffles in the space behind. Interestingly, the panel design with the best low frequency absorption uses fewer perforations in the front panel backed with an inch and a half of lower density fiber (3 lbs -ish), with about 10 inches of space behind. Panels with more perforations in the face, heavier wool (8-10 lb), and 6 inches of space behind are more broadband absorptive BUT roll off below 250hz. Basically the hardboard faces act as damped resonators, with the wool and the grid providing the damping. These designs do not look particularly difficult or expensive to construct, and there is clear measurement data on their effectiveness.
pgraham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2010, 08:08 PM   #80
Brian Cares
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 23
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pgraham View Post
Dude, this document is pure gold.
Brian Cares is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.