# Acoustic foam - tiles and bass traps - do they work at all?



## alligatorlizard (Jun 23, 2014)

After reading "Mixing secrets for the small studio" I was almost looking forward to the task of acoustically treating my room - get some plywood, stick on some foam tiles, hang on walls! However since heading over to gearslutz acoustic treatment forum earlier to do some research, my heads now full of rockwool and 702 and a bunch of bewildering graphs.... 

Can anyone help de-confuse me a bit? 

My situation is I'm currently set up in a far from ideal space, 12' x 11' (8' high ceiling) - however I'll be moving within the year, and will be looking for a better space. So I'm not after the ultimate acoustic treatment right now, just a few simple "guerrilla" measures that will give at least some improvement, and that I can transport to the next place, and add to over time. 

Main question - is the Auralex foam (or equivalent foam) worth getting? 

My plan would be to get a pack (i.e. 6) of the 4" (2'x4') studiofoam wedges and some LENRD bass traps. I'll either figure out a damage free way to hang the tiles, or build a stand for them, then put 2 behind speakers, 2 on back wall, 1 either side (traps in corners). This seems like the cheapest and simplest plan, but will still cost over £200, so if foam really is useless, maybe I'm better off investing in two GIK 244 bass traps for a similar total price?? 

Also, if I do go with the foam, there are some other companies that seem to be selling cheaper alternatives, but still with the claim of high quality acoustic foam, eg "Hyped up Acoustics" & "Advanced Acoustics". Anyone know if these really are as good as Auralex? I've googled extensively, but it's hard to find reviews.

One other thing - re. my choice of 4" foam for the panels - I'm choosing this as it absorbs more bass than 2" or 3" and that's the main problem in this small room! However is there any reason _not_ to choose the thickest foam for a small room?

Thanks in advance (and please no waterfall graphs!!) (o)


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 23, 2014)

The thicker the material, the lower the freqs it'll absorb. Auralex' stuff is high quality, but the way you use it is what will determine the results. LENRDs are good, but they're more like broadband traps than real bass traps.

I don't recommend side baffles, just the ones behind the speakers. Do a search and you'll see why. People argue with me but they're simply wrong.


----------



## gsilbers (Jun 23, 2014)

alligatorlizard @ Mon Jun 23 said:


> After reading "Mixing secrets for the small studio" I was almost looking forward to the task of acoustically treating my room - get some plywood, stick on some foam tiles, hang on walls! However since heading over to gearslutz acoustic treatment forum earlier to do some research, my heads now full of rockwool and 702 and a bunch of bewildering graphs....
> 
> Can anyone help de-confuse me a bit?
> 
> ...



yes , they go crazy with acoustic related info at Gearslutz.. and smome of them are consultants. which for pro studios you def need. 

on the other hand... we just need a better listening environment and low cost

so check these acoutic foam ebay stores 

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_trksid= ... &_from=R40

i checked the specs of some of these vs auralex and its ahbout the same. minus the big sticker price. 
there is even a store thats from one of the ex workers on auralex that now makes and sell its own. viva la competition =)

so about $100 bbucks a got almost my whole room covered and 8 bass traps..
thats the price of one of the "pro" bass traps. 
hope this helps until you get a nicer room. after doing a lot of reaearch i came to the conclusion that for some reason some companies and poeple claim better 
absorbtion etc, wehn for me, one of those ebay stores with much lower cost alternatives worked fine. i guess the final test would redo the same room with only auralex and hear the difference. ... but the foam i got.. worked fine. so no need to go that far. =)
as waterfall graghs go, just place the foam werever you think it needs it. like corners etc. also think of it as invisible energy coming out of your speakers and were they bounce. add foam on those places. on the side walls, on the back on the cealing. etc. 
keep in mind you desk will also create resonances and bass. 
you can also walk around in the room while listening to a well known recod you have and listen for bass pockets or other changes in sound affecting more ceretain freq than others. add pads there based on the imaginary bouncing. 
and remember, you are not sound proofing your room, only treating it.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 23, 2014)

Don't cover your whole room! Stick a bunch of stuff up at the front of the room behind the speakers, add whatever bass trapping you can, and put something diffusive at the rear of the room behind you (like a bookcase).


----------



## gsilbers (Jun 23, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Jun 23 said:


> Don't cover your whole room! Stick a bunch of stuff up at the front of the room behind the speakers, add whatever bass trapping you can, and put something diffusive at the rear of the room behind you (like a bookcase).



yes,, true. i went nutz. but nick is right.


----------



## alligatorlizard (Jun 23, 2014)

Thanks guys, these are the most useful replies I've had so far! Like you say, it's not always possible to design a perfect studio, but it's still worth improving things. 

Had a look on e-bay (though the UK site, as that's where I am) and found this very cheap kit: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/AFHS-Pro-Acou ... 5afc6ec125
It's made by Pro Acoustic, who certainly make strong claims about their foam being every bit as good Auralex: http://www.acoustic-foam.co.uk/pages/Choose-The-Right-Acoustic-Foam.html (http://www.acoustic-foam.co.uk/pages/Ch ... -Foam.html)
Anyway, am still searching for best prices etc - and also wondering if it might not be worthwhile investing in some of the GIK 244 bass traps in which case I'd only need tiles... if there's one thing foam's definitely not so good at it's trapping bass, right?

One other thing, I don't know if this is a ridiculous idea, but I do have 4' wide 2' deep (6' high) closet on the rear wall of the room - there are clothes hanging in it, plus I've stuffed it with pillows and blankets - if I keep the closet doors open, is this likely to act as a very primitive form of bass trap??


----------



## shapeshifter00 (Jun 23, 2014)

alligatorlizard @ Mon Jun 23 said:


> Thanks guys, these are the most useful replies I've had so far! Like you say, it's not always possible to design a perfect studio, but it's still worth improving things.
> 
> Had a look on e-bay (though the UK site, as that's where I am) and found this very cheap kit: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/AFHS-Pro-Acou ... 5afc6ec125
> It's made by Pro Acoustic, who certainly make strong claims about their foam being every bit as good Auralex: http://www.acoustic-foam.co.uk/pages/Choose-The-Right-Acoustic-Foam.html (http://www.acoustic-foam.co.uk/pages/Ch ... -Foam.html)
> ...



I was actually planning to buy this as a basic starter kit for when I get myself a decent home studio setup, it can't be worse then no treatment and the price is good. This + some decent studio monitors with isoacousics ISO monitor stands should the trick as a start.


----------



## wst3 (Jun 23, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Jun 23 said:


> Don't cover your whole room! Stick a bunch of stuff up at the front of the room behind the speakers, add whatever bass trapping you can, and put something diffusive at the rear of the room behind you (like a bookcase).



That sounds remarkably like a LEDE(tm) design<G>!


----------



## germancomponist (Jun 23, 2014)

Old pants, dresses, blankets, t-shirts e.t.c. can do the job also very well!

No joke!


----------



## Maestro77 (Jun 23, 2014)

linda.com has some really nice video tutorials on acoustically treating a home studio. I highly recommend getting a one month membership ($25) just to check them out.


----------



## Beat Kaufmann (Jun 23, 2014)

See this little video it is probably on your line
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2MvKY55Ghg

Have fun
Beat


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 23, 2014)

Beat, I skipped to the middle of that video, directly to the guy with a freaking tape measure figuring out the center of an equilateral triangle!

Does anyone still believe that in 2014? You want to be at the point of an isosceles triangle, not necessarily an equilateral one, and the distance from the monitors depends on the speakers, your preference, and the room.

Then I skipped ahead and he's putting a mirror on the wall to figure out where to put side panels. 

Oy gevalt.

Why does this stuff persist? That guy is probably a great engineer, but he shouldn't be giving advice to people about setting up studios!


----------



## Bohrium (Jun 24, 2014)

alligatorlizard @ Mon Jun 23 said:


> One other thing, I don't know if this is a ridiculous idea, but I do have 4' wide 2' deep (6' high) closet on the rear wall of the room - there are clothes hanging in it, plus I've stuffed it with pillows and blankets - if I keep the closet doors open, is this likely to act as a very primitive form of bass trap??



It could work ... it depends on the room and the content of the closet .
The easiest way to find out is to measure your room with some measuring mic (maybe you can borrow one ... or something)

If you see the frequence response of your room , you will actually hear differently in that room afterwards, because you will know why your mixes always were translating in a certain way to other speakers or rooms.

All I'm saying is, it's a lot easier to know if you need treatment and what kind of treatment, when you know what you're dealing with.

How you're going to solve the problem ... is another discussion, but first you should identify it. And maybe that closet will be a solution then, after all.


----------



## Diffusor (Jun 24, 2014)

http://realtraps.com/art_front-wall.htm

I'd recommend GIK Acoustic panels. Great products and value. If you give them a schematic of your room they will even design the best acoustic treatment for your budget.

Don't waste your time with Auralex foam.


----------



## Diffusor (Jun 24, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Jun 23 said:


> Why does this stuff persist? That guy is probably a great engineer, but he shouldn't be giving advice to people about setting up studios!



You shouldn't either.


----------



## Ozymandias (Jun 24, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Jun 23 said:


> Beat, I skipped to the middle of that video, directly to the guy with a freaking tape measure figuring out the center of an equilateral triangle!
> 
> Does anyone still believe that in 2014? You want to be at the point of an isosceles triangle, not necessarily an equilateral one, and the distance from the monitors depends on the speakers, your preference, and the room.



I agree that preference and the room have some part to play, but surely it still makes sense to start out with an equilateral triangle and experiment from there. No?

What's the alternative? Taken literally, "isosceles triangle" could yield all sorts of listening positions...


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 24, 2014)

Bear in mind that i was out getting into trouble instead of going to geometry class in 10th grade.  But my understanding is that isosceles triangles have two equal sides, so if you're at the point then you're directly on the median plane between the speakers- which is where you want to be.

An equilateral triangle is a perfectly good place to start, sure, but what makes it better than, say, six inches or two feet farther back?

Diffusor, maybe you're right that I'm a charlatan, but I'd like to hear why you think bass traps are a substitute for foam. I've always understood that they serve different functions, and I know firsthand that Auralex' products are good quality (I have a bunch of it, although I'm not using it right now). But you must know something I don't.


----------



## Diffusor (Jun 24, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jun 24 said:


> Bear in mind that i was out getting into trouble instead of going to geometry class in 10th grade.  But my understanding is that isosceles triangles have two equal sides, so if you're at the point then you're directly on the median plane between the speakers- which is where you want to be.
> 
> An equilateral triangle is a perfectly good place to start, sure, but what makes it better than, say, six inches or two feet farther back?
> 
> Diffusor, maybe you're right that I'm a charlatan, but I'd like to hear why you think bass traps are a substitute for foam. I've always understood that they serve different functions, and I know firsthand that Auralex' products are good quality (I have a bunch of it, although I'm not using it right now). But you must know something I don't.



Biggest problems for smaller rooms is bass frequencies. That's the first place I'd look. At least bass trapping in the corners and then some broadband traps on the first reflection points on the ceiling and side walls which is consistent from what what I have read from most acousticians I know. Auralex can have its place I guess but adding that foam can kill the liveliness of the room, and just sound weird without treating the bass frequency nodes. When I treated my room the people I consulted with never said a word about the front wall behind the monitors either but I suppose it couldn't hurt after treating the other key areas. I also have some trapping in the back wall and back side walls that have scatter plates as well.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 24, 2014)

Bass-trapping is definitely important, and I agree 100% that putting foam in the wrong places is a bad thing. Auralex LENRDs are very thick wedges, so they function as broadband absorbers (only they aren't really bass traps).

I say the front wall behind the monitors is the *first* place to treat, because reflections that come from the same angle as the speakers are what comb filters with them. (ONLY from the same angle - not from the sides.) You're also getting rid of extra reverb in the room that way - deadening it.

Putting diffusion behind you is a good idea in my opinion.

Note that "most acousticians" believe a series of things that have no basis in acoustics!


----------



## synergy543 (Jun 24, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jun 24 said:


> ...because reflections that come from the same angle as the speakers are what comb filters with them. (ONLY from the same angle - not from the sides.)


Nick, that's just plain wrong. Hold your hands flat and cup behind your ears. Now you're getting reflections from the side reflecting off of your hands and you'll hear a great deal of comb filtering. If you can't hear it, then try it with two newspapers next to your head in the shape of elephant ears. The physics doesn't lie - you will get comb filtering from sounds reflecting from the side. Just a plain and simple fact. Nuff said.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 24, 2014)

synergy, we go through this every few weeks.

I'm very sorry, but if you'll be much farther ahead if you just accept that what I'm saying is true and then figure out why. Cupping your hands over your ears and newspapers have nothing to do with it.

The human brain is able to separate the angle the sound comes from. Sound bouncing off the side walls will categorically not comb-filter with the sound coming straight from the speakers. That is how psychoacoustics works. The ear is not a microphone.

You are free to argue as much as you want, but this is as true as blue and yellow makes green.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 24, 2014)

Actually, it's more than that. Bounces off the sides help you hear the speakers themselves better, which means you hear better stereo imaging.

This is from Dave Moulton's "Total Recording" book, which I edited:

"The microphone can’t detect this at all, while the ear does, in several interactive and highly complex ways. As sound enters the outer ear, reflections of the sound bouncing off the pinna (the flap of skin surrounding the ear canal) recombine with the direct signal to create very complex and distinctive interference patterns (comb filtering in the range between 5 and 15 kHz.). Each different angle of arrival of a sound yields its own distinctive and audible pattern, and the brain uses these (actually it happens at the basilar membrane and in the auditory nerve on the way to the brain) to determine which direction any sound element is coming from, from each individual ear."


----------



## synergy543 (Jun 24, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jun 24 said:


> synergy, we go through this every few weeks.
> 
> I'm very sorry, but if you'll be much farther ahead if you just accept that what I'm saying is true and then figure out why..


Nick its not about faith, but physics. You're starting to sound like a Republican now. 

Two sounds will cancel out if they are out of phase with each other regardless of their angle of project.

I'm sure Dave Moulton had a good point so possibly there is some misunderstanding/misinterpretation? Surely he wouldn't deny basic physics Mr. Batzdorf?

More likely, he was talking about the time-differential of the sound as it arrives at each ear at slightly different times depending upon the angle of project. Regardless, two out-of phase signals arriving at any point will cause cancellation. Another way to tell this is to play a high-frequency sine wave and move your head around - you tell me if you don't hear cancellation!


----------



## alligatorlizard (Jun 24, 2014)

OK, so here's what I've decided upon after weighing up all the advice and info I've read: 

Bass traps are clearly necessary for small room. For now I'm going to buy a pair of GIK 244's. I'm intending to place them one in each corner of the front wall (i.e. in front of me/behind the monitors). I've also been researching how to build them, so may do this in the future.

For foam, definitely going for 4" variety. However - partly as I keep getting told not to spend money on foam - am going for the cheaper ProAcoustic (comfortex) wedges. They have almost as good an NRC as the Auralex (http://www.soundspec.info/products/sound-absorbing-finishes/acoustic-foams.html (http://www.soundspec.info/products/soun ... foams.html)) but for a slightly larger surface area covered, are under half the price. These I might mount on some homemade wooden frames to either hang or have freestanding. I guess obvious places are behind monitors, left and right walls, rear wall (will rig up a way of hanging some in front of the open, blanket-stuffed closet!). Ceiling might be a problem, but will look into it.

Again, these are only temporary measures, and will all need to be transported to a (hopefully) bigger room within a year - also in this [email protected] space I'm really not sure if it's worth me getting too scientific about the placement, but will try and borrow and Omni-directional mic at some point to do those tests people have mentioned.

1 related question - I know monitors should ideally be a good few feet from the front wall - but as this room's only 11' front to rear (& 12' wide, 8'tall) could anyone suggest the best distance away from the front wall to have them? (in case it makes a difference, they're currently behringers, in a few days will be Adam A7x's :D - so front-ported nearfield)


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 24, 2014)

No new information there, synergy. I'm not misinterpreting anything, and calling me Republican is the worst insult you could come up with. What I'm saying is true, so claiming you're the one with the physics means nothing.

The two sounds will cancel out (partially) in microphone, but not in your brain unless they come from the same angle. Your sine wave test will actually support what I'm saying.

Here's another excerpt from "Total Recording":

"If the original sound and its reflec- tion have the same angle of arrival, we hear comb filtering and a dramatic change in timbre. If the original sound and its reflection arrive from different directions, we barely hear the comb-filtering. The comb filtering is still there and can be easily observed or measured with a spectrum analyzer.
So, the general rule is: when sound arrives from a single direction, any delays inherent in that sound are considered to be information about timbre. When the same sound arrives from multiple directions, any delays are considered to be information about space. In a real room, where there never is a single sound or even just one reflection, the multiplicity of reflections from different directions reduce even further the audibility of comb filtering. The fact that we have two ears and are therefore observing multiple points in space probably helps as well. So, mostly, in the real world, we don’t hear the effect of comb-filtering, even though it is there in spades."


----------



## synergy543 (Jun 24, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jun 24 said:


> Here's another excerpt from "Total Recording":
> 
> "If the original sound and its reflec- tion have the same angle of arrival, we hear comb filtering and a dramatic change in timbre. If the original sound and its reflection arrive from different directions, we barely hear the comb-filtering.



Agreed. Most likely due to the time delay difference and the difference in volumes.



Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jun 24 said:


> The comb filtering is still there and can be easily observed or measured with a spectrum analyzer.
> So, the general rule is: when sound arrives from a single direction, any delays inherent in that sound are considered to be information about timbre. When the same sound arrives from multiple directions, any delays are considered to be information about space.



Agreed.



Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jun 24 said:


> In a real room, where there never is a single sound or even just one reflection, the multiplicity of reflections from different directions reduce even further the audibility of comb filtering. The fact that we have two ears and are therefore observing multiple points in space probably helps as well. So, mostly, in the real world, we don’t hear the effect of comb-filtering, even though it is there in spades."



Mostly true, until you get to surfaces that are much closer to the ear or hard surfaces nearby the speakers (as is likely to happen in a small studio with speakers near a hard wall surface). Other surfaces from which you're likely to hear reflections are hard metal equipment racks, mixer surfaces, or computer monitors (any hard surface angled towards you ear will act as a good reflector and cause audible comb filtering). In these cases the sound is very very noticable. Here's a great experiment: Take an Auratone® and move it around the room while listening to how different surfaces reflect. You will see that far more surfaces than just behind the speakers will cause very audible comb filtering! Try it, your ears won't lie.

;/c]


----------



## Whatisvalis (Jun 24, 2014)

If you have the time it might be worth building yourself.

I got my materials from http://www.atsacoustics.com/cat--ATS-Ac ... --100.html

Concentrate on 4 inch thick bass traps for the corners and 2 inch panels for the first reflection points, then expand as needed. 

That foam is probably ok for treating flutter echos etc, but if you're building bass traps might as well just build all your panels.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 24, 2014)

> Mostly true



I agree with the second word.

If hard surfaces are comb filtering, it's because the reflections are coming from the same angle as the speakers - like if you have the speakers way back in corners. The same applies to equipment disrupting reflections - which isn't a good thing, but almost always for different reasons.

What you're saying about the Auratones...well, I've now repeated the same thing several times, which is a good indication that I have nothing else to say. Speakers absolutely do sound different in different positions - which is why I say there's nothing magic about the equilateral triangle that guy in the video recommends - but side reflections still won't comb filter with the sound from the drivers even if you use Auratones!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 24, 2014)

By the way, the computer monitor definitely presents acoustic problems. So do consoles in recording studios. Yet we still get work done!


----------



## Diffusor (Jun 24, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jun 24 said:


> Bass-trapping is definitely important, and I agree 100% that putting foam in the wrong places is a bad thing. Auralex LENRDs are very thick wedges, so they function as broadband absorbers (only they aren't really bass traps).
> 
> I say the front wall behind the monitors is the *first* place to treat, because reflections that come from the same angle as the speakers are what comb filters with them. (ONLY from the same angle - not from the sides.) You're also getting rid of extra reverb in the room that way - deadening it.
> 
> ...



All I know my room sound killer since I put about 3 grand into panels. Huge improvement. Even my wife noticed and commented on it. Treating your room is the most important thing imo, moreso than converters, monitors etc.

I guess I could have cheaped out and gone the egg carton route as you suggest.


----------



## jleckie (Jun 24, 2014)

Egg cartons are a myth. And yes room treatment is VERY important.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 24, 2014)

I only suggested that so you'd give me the eggs to make omelets.


----------



## jleckie (Jun 24, 2014)

lol.


----------



## Diffusor (Jun 24, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jun 24 said:


> I only suggested that so you'd give me the eggs to make omelets.



:D


----------



## Dan Mott (Jun 24, 2014)

I personally like side panels. The reason I have them there is due to lot's of flutter echo. They are broadband though. I do think if you have flutter echo, that shit needs to be sorted.

Side panels I assume are a personal preference thing. For me it creates a more comfy listening stage. Cozy is the word that comes to mind when I have my side panels up. I'd say put them there and then take them down and hear what you like best without looking at a graph :D. I do not have any sound stage imbalances, so it's not like it's destroying the soundstage. I wouldn't say that it is a WRONG choice to make.

Comb filtering from the side walls? Well if you have that then that could mean you are incredibly close to your side wall, or there is other crap going on, perhaps from your desk or objects on your desk.

You can make a massive difference without panels first. Speaker placement/listener placement. Speaker stands/small desk/mopads, ect. Once you are in the best spot. Add bass traps to problem areas. Corners first. Then go wtih your personal stage design - Side wall panels/no side wall panels/diffusion/ceiling panels (ceiling panels make a hell of a difference and it will since you have an 8ft high ceiling)

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## jleckie (Jun 24, 2014)

Most importantly, it should look good. All purple works for example.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 24, 2014)

Dan. DAN.

YOU DO NOT HAVE FLUTTER ECHO ON THE SIDES!

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR SPEAKERS TO EXCITE THEM.


----------



## Dan Mott (Jun 24, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Jun 25 said:


> Dan. DAN.
> 
> YOU DO NOT HAVE FLUTTER ECHO ON THE SIDES!
> 
> IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR SPEAKERS TO EXCITE THEM.



Ok.

Pay for a ticket to come to AUS. Take a taxi to my house. Come up to my room and clap and you will hear flutter echo. I have no insulation in my walls which makes things worse. 

If I take my panels down, then I hear an unpleasant echo from my listening position. Put my panels back up and It's gone and I feel better that way. 

Even if it IS impossibly for the speakers to excite them, I still feel more secure if that unpleasant echo isn't there and as I said, it gives me a more cozy soundstage. As well as if I am recording vocals, I am not getting major boxy room syndrome. 

Take me into a bigger room then I would agree with everything you are saying Nick.


LOVE YOU :D


----------



## synergy543 (Jun 24, 2014)

Nick, maybe this article will help you make your case. This doesn't mean I concede as I don't completely with your wording but there are other factors that come into play as you say including masking and psychoacoustics, and semantics (over which I don't want to argue - editors always win, but that doesn't mean they're right :D ).


http://www.moultonlabs.com/more/about_c ... versal/P0/

Nick, think about it this way. If side walls had absolutely zero impact, then we could set up a mixing room only as wide as the speakers, say in a hallway. But both you and I know, that will sound terrible.

I'm not denying there is "some" truth to what you are saying, just that I think there are still two sides to the issue (no pun intended) and its not just a simple black and white issue.


----------



## Dan Mott (Jun 24, 2014)

I personally agree with what he is saying when it comes to a room that is big enough that the side walls are not an issue.

I believe that if you are in a small cube of a room, you are going to have issues all over the place which is why I like to tackle most of my early reflections with at least something that can scatter the sound away or absorb so that I do not get a constant decay build up.


----------



## synergy543 (Jun 24, 2014)

Dan Mott @ Tue Jun 24 said:


> I personally agree with what he is saying when it comes to a room that is big enough that the side walls are not an issue.


I agree. I have no baffling on my side walls but my studio is 26 feet wide. My speakers are 7 feet in front, so any reflections from wall surfaces arrive long after the direct sound and essentially have no impact as Nick argues, and yes, it sounds very good.

I've been in much smaller rooms before and small rooms can have a devastating effect. The biggest problem I had with small rooms beside coloration was balancing the low end.


----------



## alligatorlizard (Jun 25, 2014)

jleckie @ Wed 25 Jun said:


> Most importantly, it should look good. All purple works for example.



haha, are you serious? It has amused me while shopping for this stuff to notice that it's all made in either very plain utilitarian grey - or garish purple!! How did the industry determine these were the two colours musicians wanted? In the absence of a lush crocodilian green shade being available, I'm going for the grey.

btw, someone mentioned building my own panels - when I get a bigger space, and the freedom to put lots of nails in the walls, I will definitely look into this, or buying similar (eg GIK 242's) - for now tho, foam is just going to be easier to work with - and with two freestanding bass traps, I'm hoping to see some sort of improvement - will report back when it's installed.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 25, 2014)

> Come up to my room and clap and you will hear flutter echo



We're not talking about clapping, we're talking about monitors. Your speakers will not excite flutter echoes.

synergy, I didn't say side walls have zero impact, because they certainly do - in fact they have a positive impact! What I said is that bounces off them won't cause you to hear comb filtering with the sound coming from the speakers, and putting up absorbent material on the sides is not a good idea. Remember, if the bounce comes from the same angle as the speaker then it will be heard as comb filtering; if not, it won't.

The hallway is going to have multiple issues, starting with the room ratios. I'd have to think more about this, but my hunch is that if you're close enough to the speakers, the bounces off the side will not be at the same angle as the speaker and won't comb filter.

That article of Moulton's is very old*, from when he was at Berklee - before his acoustic lenses, which disperse the tweeter and midrange 180˚ and are very much based on what I'm saying here (the reason they image so spectacularly is exactly because of this). Most of that article is about phase and polarity in a recording, and that's a totally different thing; we all know about combining delayed versions of something with itself, mono compatibility, etc. We also know about phase issues in a *recording* room - bounces off the walls picked up by mics. This thread is only about *monitoring* - which is why Dan's clapping argument is totally irrelevant.

The one sentence in that article that applies to what we're talking about here is pretty nebulous: "Only after you’ve got most of the other acoustic issues under control will you want to worry about the effect of comb filtering between loudspeakers and reflections in your mixing room."

He's a friend of mine and I've had many conversations about this with him, so trust me when I say he refined that view - or at least what he has to say about it - since then!

*Something very similar is in "Total Recording," by the way.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 25, 2014)

By the way, t I did a lot of listening to the effects of acoustic treatment back in the day, so this isn't chin-stroking verbiage, it's what I've heard.

Actually, Auralex is one of the companies that sent me a bunch of stuff to listen to. ASC is the other.


----------



## alligatorlizard (Jun 25, 2014)

...any chance I could get you guys to argue over best speaker placement in a 11'deepx12'wide room? They're currently only about a foot from the wall, which ends up with me sitting probably about dead centre of said room - which according to what I've read is the _worst_ place to sit! To get near the 38% point, I'm going to have to move the monitors back towards the wall... 

Yes, I know, I need to do tests to tell for sure, but I don't have an Omni-directional mic right now. But, in theory, what's the best compromise in this situation? (bearing in mind there will soon be foam panels behind monitors, and a 244 bass trap in each corner behind them.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 25, 2014)

Placement depends on the speakers, but I wouldn't particularly worry about sitting in the middle of the room, and there's nothing magical about 38% or any other %.

What I'd do is ignore everything anyone tells you, because 99% of it is a load of bollox. Then move yourself and/or your speakers around and listen for a) the distance where they sound best to you; and b) where the bass gets weaker and stronger (you don't want to sit in the middle of a node where it's weaker).

And don't be afraid to make ergonomics a priority! Being comfortable is very important too. I have my big speakers in a totally suboptimal position out of necessity, yet they still sound pretty damn good.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 25, 2014)

Oh, and I think you know proximity to walls and especially corners reinforces a speaker's bass freqs. That can be good or bad, but more often than not it makes the low end muddy.

So 1' in might not be the best place, especially if your speakers have rear-facing ports.


----------



## jleckie (Jun 25, 2014)

alligatorlizard @ Wed Jun 25 said:


> jleckie @ Wed 25 Jun said:
> 
> 
> > Most importantly, it should look good. All purple works for example.
> ...



I was joking of course. This has always been a major bug for me, i.e., the limited options available for studio owners in terms of colors, etc. You can make your own. Its probably best.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 25, 2014)

Purple has excellent acoustic properties. I learned that from the YouTube video.


----------



## synergy543 (Jun 25, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Jun 25 said:


> Purple has excellent acoustic properties. I learned that from the YouTube video.


50% gray is much more neutral. :wink: 

btw, Nick gave some really good advice about finding the best listening spot (sorry, nothing to argue about there :roll: ). 
Do this first before you start locking yourself into any specific location. You'll find a favorite spot and that is where you'll want to locate.


----------



## germancomponist (Jun 25, 2014)

I have a very well treated room. 

Believe it or not: If I only put another chair or something else everywhere in the room, I can hear it! o/~


----------



## alligatorlizard (Jul 1, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed 25 Jun said:


> Oh, and I think you know proximity to walls and especially corners reinforces a speaker's bass freqs. That can be good or bad, but more often than not it makes the low end muddy.
> 
> So 1' in might not be the best place, especially if your speakers have rear-facing ports.



Thanks for the tips - am just getting things set up now.

Are you suggesting moving them _more than _1' away from the front wall of the studio? (they're front ported btw, and not too close to the corners - plus the front corners will soon have bass traps in them)

Anyway, will trying out a few combinations of placement of monitors/bass traps/myself, hopefully my ears will lead me to the best setup.


----------



## Dan Mott (Jul 2, 2014)

alligatorlizard @ Tue Jul 01 said:


> Nick Batzdorf @ Wed 25 Jun said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, and I think you know proximity to walls and especially corners reinforces a speaker's bass freqs. That can be good or bad, but more often than not it makes the low end muddy.
> ...




Your ears won't lead you to the best setup. I assure you. Graphs will make life so much easier for you. If you cannot use a graph, then play a song you know well in a good pair of head phones, or one shot kick/snare/hat sample, plus bass, ect and see how it sounds on your speakers. Take note of the low end boost, highend dips and mid dips.

Also, do not be afraid of being too close to the front wall. You may find that it actually has no affect on the sound. Sometimes in a small room it's good to be as close to the front wall as possible.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 2, 2014)

> Are you suggesting moving them more than 1' away from the front wall of the studio? (



Possibly, or closer. You really just have to listen.



> Your ears won't lead you to the best setup



I think they will.


----------



## jleckie (Jul 2, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Jul 02 said:


> > Are you suggesting moving them more than 1' away from the front wall of the studio? (
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If they don't, better check your ears Dan my man.


----------



## Dan Mott (Jul 4, 2014)

:D

The reason I said your ears won't tell you is because what you might think sounds good in a small room, could be totally inaccurate. It is better to look at a graph, otherwise it's a complete maze. Its quite tough to tell where your dips and nulls are by ear, especially in the mid range. I'm saying this because my room fooled me many times. Its easiest to tell what bass problems and highend problems you have, but you still will never know how MUCH of a problem it is until you see it.

Aside from that. The most important thing is to enjoy your space. My room isn't accurate, but I enjoy listening in it and that's the point. If you decide not to measure then that's good for you because it will save headache and hairloss. I just like things to be perfect, so I couldn't help my self but to check on a graph. 

I got pretty depressed with my room, but that was because I saw my graph. Funny.... Ignorance is bliss sometimes. I also remember getting way more work done when I was ignorant to acoustics and how plugins and music structure works. The more you know, the more you over think things.

Peace.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 4, 2014)

Assuming we are discussing mixing music to be sent to others and not just listening for enjoyment, like a home stereo, Dan, you are wrong when you write "The most important thing is to enjoy your space."

The most important thing is to know how mixes done in your space translate to the outside world.


----------



## Dan Mott (Jul 4, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Jul 04 said:


> Assuming we are discussing mixing music to be sent to oothers and not just listening for enjoyment, like a home stereo, Dan, you are wrong when you write "The most important thing is to enjoy your space."
> 
> The most important thing is to know how mixes done in your space translate to the outside world.



Yes. I agree to that, but I don't think you can really start mixing until you enjoy your space at least. Or if you space is so bad then I'd just buy headphones and go from there (good ones though).

I enjoy my space, it's not accurate and I am still learning how to mix in it. It really helps when you know where exactly your problems are.


----------



## Arksun (Jul 5, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Jun 25 said:


> > Come up to my room and clap and you will hear flutter echo
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hitting the first reflection points on the side walls with absorbing panels has a dramatic impact on improving the sound. The soundstage becomes bigger whilst sounding more focused and clear at the same time. For back wall depending on the distance can either be absorbing or diffusing.

As for speakers not being able to excite flutter echos, I have no idea what you're on about there. If you can hear flutter echoes with a clap, there's no reason why you couldn't hear them with a speaker. Sound waves and sound waves, there's nothing mystical about the sound waves generated from a clap, other than its source position being close to the persons head.


----------



## wst3 (Jul 5, 2014)

I'll let Nick explain his points, but I will add that there is a very real difference in the way the human ear/brain interprets different types of signals, and a hand clap, whether it is done in the room or played back through speakers, will make any discrete echos much more obvious than say a legato string passage, or even a strummed guitar.

The human brain (and ears) are remarkable. I worked on a study back in the early 1980s where we tried to understand better how people react to paging systems. The short version was that you could ignore both a high noise floor and pages that weren't intended for you, but if the page included your name you could tune it in quite quickly.

but I digress...


----------



## MichaelL (Jul 5, 2014)

Thanks for your input Nick re diffusion. 

I just moved into a new, much smaller space, and I'm was ready to hang Auralex foam on the front wall behind my speakers, and on the wall behind me. After reading your comments, I finally know what to do with the sustain wave prism diffusor that I picked up a few years ago at a store closing sale. It's going behind me!

LENRDs are all I've got for bass traps. They'll have to do.


----------



## wst3 (Jul 6, 2014)

Michael - one quick bit - there are potential problems with placing diffusers behind you if the distance from your ears to the rear wall is less than about 12 feet. If that is the case you may need to angle the diffuser to increase the path length - which of course is a challenge since you are diffusing the energy<G>.


----------



## alligatorlizard (Jul 8, 2014)

Well it's all sounding good! GIK bass traps in front corners, 4" wedge foam in all the first reflection points, or at least where it's possible to put them as I'm kind of restricted with windows, doors, shelves, closet. Am actually quite surprised by how much difference all this does make.

It's definitely _not_ a very scientific arrangement at this point (didn't even use a mirror...) but I did spend a day moving things around in various combinations and there were clearly positions for monitors and foam panels which worked better than others. 

I definitely will be paying a bit more attention to room measurements etc. when I move, but for now, it's a lot better than it was.


----------



## GP_Hawk (Jul 12, 2014)

Good to hear! Glad you are moving in the right direction. Glenn is definately the guy to talk to at GIK. :mrgreen:


----------



## Giant_Shadow (Jul 12, 2014)

I recently spent a day at Grammy award winning producers studio in California. His 100 year old Spanish style house and studio has solid wood floors, a couch, and gear, and sounds great and he is making great music there. When I brought up the subject he pointed to his awards and said none those guys had any soundproofing. Don't drink the kool aid.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 12, 2014)

Kind of a cranky thing for him to say, i'nit? Why go to an OB-GYN when women delivered babies without them for thousands of years.

Another way to look at it: far more music that totally sucks was made in rooms that sounded much better than his. Therefore you should treat the f out of every room and your music will be good.

Anyway, we're not talking about soundproofing, we're talking about acoustic treatment to make a problematic room workable.


----------



## Justin Miller (Jul 12, 2014)

Acoustical treatment is a very complex subject, more so than sound proofing. Many factors come into play to get a good frequency balance in a room--
-position of speakers (preferably in the middle of the shortest dimension of the room, toward back wall)
-height of speakers
-density of absorptive material
-distance absorptive material is from the wall
-amount of reduction in low frequencies, esp in the back of the room
-room dimensions
-furniture placement

Simple acoustic treatment packages like Auralex foam and their bass traps only reduce a portion of the frequency response in the room, leaving an unbalanced representation of the mix when played back. More high frequencies and mid-high frequencies will have greater reduction than the low, so you will overcompensate in your mixes by adding too much high end.

I would recommend hiring an acoustician to figure out what you need and how to arrange things so that you can maximize the listening experience in your room. If you would like a couple of names, just pm me. Best of luck


----------



## Giant_Shadow (Jul 12, 2014)

Talk about cranky. :lol: You go ahead and spend money and hours of your lives on sound "Treatment" if you want, have a ball or maybe you do sound treatment for a living now ? I'm going to study some counterpoint and modes now and listen to the Beatles later.



Nick Batzdorf @ Sat Jul 12 said:


> Kind of a cranky thing for him to say, i'nit? Why go to an OB-GYN when women delivered babies without them for thousands of years.
> 
> Another way to look at it: far more music that totally sucks was made in rooms that sounded much better than his. Therefore you should treat the f out of every room and your music will be good.
> 
> Anyway, we're not talking about soundproofing, we're talking about acoustic treatment to make a problematic room workable.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 12, 2014)

How much of that music your Grammy-winning friend produced was written by people who know "counterpoint" or can even identify [nose in air] "modes?"

Or maybe you do counterpoint for a living?

You're clearly wasting your time. Start spending money and then phaff with your room.


----------



## MichaelL (Jul 12, 2014)

wst3 @ Sun Jul 06 said:


> Michael - one quick bit - there are potential problems with placing diffusers behind you if the distance from your ears to the rear wall is less than about 12 feet. If that is the case you may need to angle the diffuser to increase the path length - which of course is a challenge since you are diffusing the energy<G>.



Unfortunately Bill, I traded space for a water view. This is the smallest room I've ever been in. The back wall is slightly less than 2 feet away. But the view is nice. :D 
Would I be better off with foam behind me? I've got Russ Berger Space Couplers above me.


----------



## Justin Miller (Jul 12, 2014)

You need to get a program to measure the frequency response of the room. Put microphones in front of each speaker and analyze the playback, and you can go from there. First make sure your speakers are in the correct position of the room and correct height. Good luck. Most likely more sound treatment in the back, but diffusion and absorption along the sides can improve the stereo image.


----------



## pkm (Jul 12, 2014)

Justin Miller @ Sat Jul 12 said:


> You need to get a program to measure the frequency response of the room. Put microphones in front of each speaker and analyze the playback, and you can go from there. First make sure your speakers are in the correct position of the room and correct height. Good luck. Most likely more sound treatment in the back, but diffusion and absorption along the sides can improve the stereo image.



The frequency response at the listening position is much more important than in front of each speaker. I'd put the measurement mics where my ears would be,


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 12, 2014)

Yeah, I'm going to have to bite my fingers and not repeat myself now.

It really is frustrating that there's so much outright bullshit about this going around, even among professionals. Especially among professionals, actually. It has zero factual basis, yet there isn't a thread on the internet about treating rooms without the same ridiculous misinformation.

***

My personal opinion - as distinct from the objective facts I've been shouting about - is that unless you're prepared to call in the architects, you won't get very far with measurement mics. What are you going to do about the massive lumps we all live with in our rooms? And the response can change a lot if you barely move the mic. You can hear if you need bass trapping or if the room is too live without using mics.

I guess you can use a little room EQ, but I don't know how I feel about that (other than that I don't use it). IK Multimedia's ARC, which builds an inverse curve to what's hitting your ears, is also interesting. I'm undecided whether I like what it does.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 12, 2014)

And of course Paul is right. It's only what's going on at your ears that matters.


----------



## Justin Miller (Jul 12, 2014)

Sorry guys I wasn't specific enough. I've worked with a very experienced professional in the field for over a year on my studio and have seen other ones in town done this way, so I know the process. With laser alignment, the microphones are placed where the ear is (in front) of the speaker (which is tilted) and pink noise is measured from each speaker one by one. Any room can be configured to sound balanced, but I do recommend hiring someone to do it right.

Nick, if you want more information on the process I am referring to you can pm me for more info.


----------



## wst3 (Jul 13, 2014)

Russ... the guy is a MONSTER! Not only is he one of the most knowledgeable folks alive today on the topic of small, critical space acoustics, but he is remarkably generous with his knowledge. And he is a genuinely nice guy to boot.

Those space couplers are amazingly effective, and so simple I could smack myself for not thinking of them first<G>!

With 2 feet behind your head I'm not sure what you can do. Can you send me the dimensions, or a sketch or something (off line is fine) and I'll see if anything springs to mind.

If it were me? Yeah, I'd take the water view over space every time too!


----------



## MichaelL (Jul 13, 2014)

Thanks Bill. Just sent you an email with a photo of my "cubicle."

Michael


----------

