# Your Opinions on Acoustic Foam Panels



## Reid Rosefelt (Jun 17, 2021)

I have a big TV monitor in my setup, above my two computer monitors. I put it there because I didn't want to waste it when we got a new one. 
But I don't use it enough and it is very reflective. I really feel the sound is worse there when I record as opposed to other places. So I'm planning to give the TV away and put some acoustic foam panels in its place. Maybe six to eight panels ought to do it. 

I can't do the entire wall because it is 14 feet high and my wife would kill me. I don't have a studio and it's right in front of our bed. I live in a loft, which is one big room with very high ceilings. It's going to be very echoey in my place, no matter what. But I think this might be a slight improvement for voice-overs, particularly if I put something behind me. 

I can get stuff for less than $30, but, given what I've told you, is this something I shouldn't cheap out on? 

What do you recommend and where is the best place to buy it?

Also, my wife is not going to be very excited if I put something too ugly there. One thought I had for the immediate future would be to drape a blanket over the TV when I record. 

Thank you! 

Reid


----------



## Double Helix (Jun 17, 2021)

Perhaps ask your better half to help you choose colors (I do not think acoustic foam choices are limited to gray/charcoal/black)
That said, with your (enviable) 14-foot ceilings, anything you can do to mitigate the reverberbant space can't help but improve the overall effect. However, I have not noticed any objectionable audio reflections in your videos or Webcasts.

My first instinct would be to check Sweetwater, but I did an Amazon search first:
https://www.amazon.com/Sound-Absorbing-Foam/s?k=Sound+Absorbing+Foam


----------



## Marsen (Jun 17, 2021)

You could use a ceiling canvas/sail like Air has with a nice cloth cover and acoustic foam.

There are also (pricy, but elegant) elements from Vicoustic, like:


----------



## GtrString (Jun 17, 2021)

Don’t get foam, it will only deaden the high frequencies in your room, and do nothing to remove the room sound. You need mass.

I have had good luck with panels and gobos from GIK; check it out https://gikacoustics.eu/product-category/acoustic-panels

Also use a microphone that won’t pick up the room, a dynamic mic with hypercardioid pattern (look into the Shure’s), won’t pick much up from the room and sides, so if you use a mic screen in front, and an acoustic gobo behind, you should not need any room treatment. Also make sure your gain stage is good, if you have a decent preamp you can get less noise, otherwise use a cloudlifter to improve the noise to sound ratio.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Jun 17, 2021)

Thanks for your hellp.

I didn't say this, but should have. 

My issue is recording sound for my upcoming YouTube videos. Recording vocals or instruments I can do anywhere I want, using any mic or environment.

In this situation I am using a shotgun mic above and in front of me (out of frame) pointed at my mouth. It's extremely directional, but not completely. Also, a backdrop or green screen behind me. One thing I am planning to do is to put a velvet curtain behind me for some of the videos. But that would be very boring if all of them had the same background. 

The only thing I can control is what is in front of me. I know that my sound was better when I was in the middle of the room than it does now when I am sitting a few feet from the wall. Bouncing from the wall gives a brighter sound I don't like. I don't think I would mind if I lost high end. This is just dialogue and there is room to add EQ and other things later on. 

Putting anything on my 14 foot high treated ceiling isn't practical. I can't even hang a lamp there anywhere in my loft, although I would love to.


----------



## GtrString (Jun 17, 2021)

Ok, but the effect of foam might just be like turning an eq down from 10 to 9.5. Get closer to the mic instead, why not use a lavalier mic or a headset?


----------



## davidanthony (Jun 17, 2021)

Important to understand what the issue actually is before soliciting recommendations to fix, in my opinion. I would download Room EQ wizard (free) and, using your most neutral mic, take some measurements placing the microphone in its current position (the one you intend to use). Then take another set of measurements again where you said the sound was better.

Compare the measurements -- where are you seeing frequency bumps or nodes? I know you say the sound is brighter, but I would want to confirm that the sound is in fact boosted in the upper frequencies, and there could be a bunch of explanations for this, not all of which can be addressed by the same things, e.g. boundary interference effect (what's the polar pattern on your mic?) boosting unwanted frequencies, or perhaps in the middle of the room you were placing the mic in a room node that actually worked for you and you've grown accustomed to the sound, etc.

Depending on the results of those measurements I would look to figure out how to treat the issue. "Acoustic foam" would be close to last on my list of solutions to investigate. First, because it's usually just rebranded poly foam that you could buy significantly cheaper from a foam supplier, and second, because it's not a particularly efficient way of dealing with high frequency issues, and rarely is it sold in the right specifications to deal with lower frequency issues at all.

If the issue is just some high frequency buildup, then changing the pattern on your microphone, or moving the location slightly, or employing something like thick moving blankets that you could furl / unfurl for recording may be a better compromise solution as they provide similar attenuation in the higher end of the spectrum and would not need to remain permanently installed. There are also wooden solutions that look nicer as a permanent installation (e.g. RPG Flutter Free, but if you're handy you can build these yourself or get a local woodworker to do it.)


----------



## Marsen (Jun 17, 2021)

GtrString said:


> Don’t get foam, it will only deaden the high frequencies in your room, and do nothing to remove the room sound.


This is just not true.
It depends on the depth and the kind of foam. Don´t read it, like I would suggest cheap DIY-market pyramid-foam.

I got myself absorbers in order from an acoustician, who planned and built a lot of studios in germany.
It´s not intended as a bass-trap, but with 20cm depth, and hanging from the ceiling, it absorbs a broader range then just high frequencies.
These acoustic-foam is quiet expensive and very effective, if it´s placed right and also in the right amount.
As I understood it, we´re still talking about a private room, not a studio-facilitiy.


----------



## Trash Panda (Jun 17, 2021)

How comfortable are you with DIY projects? There are some very cheap ways to do acoustics better than foam, if you have the time, tools and comfort with some light woodworking.


----------



## Ben (Jun 17, 2021)

From my research getting good acoustic panels can get quite expensive fast. As long as you don't plan to build the perfect studio DIY is way cheaper in my experience:

I used to have a reverberant room as well. I tried the cheap pyramid foam first, but it did improve abolutely nothing... A while later I got rid of the foam and considered improving acoustics using rock wool. But thanks to someone I knew I could also get Basotect for a very cheap price, so I did go for the latter.
I got some cheap fabric in two colors I liked (there is also acoustic fabric available, but my budget was quite limited during my university days). The Basotect material was cut to 60x60cm, I put on the fabric, and placed the panels with some space to each other and to the wall (in a checkerboard configuration, therefore the two fabrics with different colores).

Looks nice, the room is no longer too reverberant but also not dead, and it cost me around ~120-150 € and a day or two to create 25 of these 60x60cm panels and experiment with placement.
Of course, instead of the quite expensive Basotect you can also simply use rock wool + an air-tight foil or fabric.


----------



## Rex282 (Jun 17, 2021)

It’s relatively easy and cheap to make your own panels.I’m a arty guy so I went with ......art panels.


----------



## Soundbed (Jun 17, 2021)

Foam is ok for the final x%

I use GiK for the majority of the “work” in these scenarios.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Jun 17, 2021)

This is all very helpful. Thank you for taking the time to write


----------



## jcrosby (Jun 17, 2021)

Another vote for actual acoustic panels... They accomplish the same thing while working on a much broader range of frequencies.... If it's mainly for voice you actually shouldn't need a ton of panels. A couple on each wall should do the job for what you need. Another upside about panels (Pre-fab or DIY) is that you can hang them like a picture... Whereas foam is typically a spray on situation which will ultimately leave a mess on your walls if you ever want to take them down...

So basically while it might cost you more for acoustic panels in the short term, if your plan was to just stick them up with the typical spray adhesive you'll wind up paying the difference later on in terms of time and supplies to remove the mess...


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Jun 17, 2021)

Double Helix said:


> However, I have not noticed any objectionable audio reflections in your videos or Webcasts.


i'm generally happy with the sound when I shoot in the middle of the room (with my keyboard behind me), but the stuff I shoot sitting at the keyboard (for the tutorial parts) has not been as good. At this point I'm going to be shooting all my videos from this position. 

But people have given me a lot of good information to think about. I was making an assumption that the acoustic panels would automatically be a good thing. It's not as simple as that. 

So I will do some experimenting.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Jun 18, 2021)

Excuse the noobie questions:

If I buy fabric of some sort, do I stretch it out on the kind of stretchers artists use for their canvases? Or is there something else that's better? Stretchers aren't particularly cheap. 


But I'm going to begin by experimenting with hanging various fabrics off the TV when I'm recording. Then I'll compare the varying results.

As with everything, it comes down to what sounds better to me. Any improvement would be nice. 

It would not be a big deal for me to someday make a makeshift booth using light stands on my right and left, in the same way as I hang my backdrops behind me--if it was worth it. But I think that if my sound is decent and with a few plugins it will be fine. Better than most YouTube videos, probably. 

As I record videos maybe once a week at most (more like every two weeks) I might not need a permanent solution. I do a lot of setup anyway. 

But thanks to all of you, I'm not going to glue some acoustic foam on my wall.


----------



## SergeD (Jun 18, 2021)

Check for acoustic panels on Kijiji, it could save you time and money, who knows.


----------



## davidanthony (Jun 18, 2021)

TigerTheFrog said:


> If I buy fabric of some sort, do I stretch it out on the kind of stretchers artists use for their canvases? Or is there something else that's better? Stretchers aren't particularly cheap.


If you're talking about using fabric for absorption, then you can hang it however makes sense for your space, e.g. 





It doesn't need to be pulled taut, and if you can leave a little air gap between the blanket and the wall (2"-4"), all the better (improves absorption characteristics).


----------



## steveo42 (Jun 18, 2021)

Some additional information can be found here: 

http://ethanwiner.com/acoustics.html


----------



## Crowe (Jun 18, 2021)

I've sworn to never use 'foam panels'. Bass traps tackle the same frequencies plus many, many more.

I've made small panels of 100cmx60cm filled with rockwool of different thicknesses. With a light enough chassis, you can place them anywhere you like. The effect of placing one or two can instantly be heard, as opposed to hanging up blankets or using foam.


----------



## NekujaK (Jun 18, 2021)

My small studio space is treated with Auralex foam - on 3 walls and the ceiling (plus there's carpeting on the floor). The foam completely deadens reflections the room to the point where I successfully record professional vocalists for commercial releases here. No problem.

I also have foam bass traps in the corners, and those are pretty much worthless. As has been mentioned in previous posts, taming low frequencies requires far more substantial materials. But for high frequency reflections, foam is prefectly suitable.


----------



## greggybud (Jun 19, 2021)

I'm not sure if Ethan Winer has fallen out of forum grace, but this gives a lot of basic information as well as DIY projects.








Ethan Winer


Acoustics FAQ



ethanwiner.com


----------



## David Kudell (Jun 20, 2021)

If you’re just talking about recording your dialog for YouTube videos, you only need to tame the mids and highs since you should be rolling off anything below 100Hz anyway. Totally different than “treating your room” for listening.

And you said you’re using a shotgun mic - if you look at the pickup pattern of a shotgun, it picks up primarily in front but also picks up a significant amount directly behind the mic. This is why production dialog guys on films don’t use shotguns indoors, they actually use a hyper-cardioid mic (the Schoeps 641 being the leading choice).

Anyway, not saying to go buy a new mic. Actually a couple strategically placed moving/packing blankets are all you really need. And right behind a shotgun mic will help a bunch. Then on the sides or anywhere off camera. Then you can take them down when you’re not filming. 

Of course treating your room is a more permanent solution, but just offering another idea.


----------



## Marsen (Jun 20, 2021)

David Kudell said:


> if you look at the pickup pattern of a shotgun, it picks up primarily in front but also picks up a significant amount directly behind the mic


I agree on this.

I lately saw a video of Reid. 
Good content, but I have to say that the speech intelligibility was so problematic, it really was hard to follow.
If a bigger approach in acoustic treatment is not possible, maybe a lavalier could be the answer?

I know that a construction like this 




would work, but presenting on Youtube without head is subpar 😀


----------



## DimensionsTomorrow (Jun 20, 2021)

I ended up randomly watching a YouTube video yesterday where someone was saying that bookshelves filled with hardcover books arranged horizontally and vertically make for a cheap and attractive alternative to bass traps. I made a mental note to look into that more. I wonder if shelves filled with vinyl would also work.

The bit on acoustic treatment starts at 5:51. Kind of an annoying video, but that bit about the bookshelves was interesting.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Jun 20, 2021)

Marsen said:


> I agree on this.
> 
> I lately saw a video of Reid.
> Good content, but I have to say that the speech intelligibility was so problematic, it really was hard to follow.


Interesting. I am only aware of one of my videos that has truly terrible sound and that is the one about Albion One and Symphobia. I agree with you about that one.

But the problem with the audio on that particular video was caused by the editing program, Vegas Pro. Believe it or not, the original recording was fine. The sound was so awful that I didn't want to take a chance on that happening again, so I switched to Premiere Pro. 

Which one of my videos did you find so hard to understand?


----------



## Marsen (Jun 21, 2021)

TigerTheFrog said:


> Interesting. I am only aware of one of my videos that has truly terrible sound and that is the one about Albion One and Symphobia. I agree with you about that one.
> 
> But the problem with the audio on that particular video was caused by the editing program, Vegas Pro. Believe it or not, the original recording was fine. The sound was so awful that I didn't want to take a chance on that happening again, so I switched to Premiere Pro.
> 
> Which one of my videos did you find so hard to understand?


Yes, it was this video, I was referring to.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Jun 21, 2021)

Marsen said:


> Yes, it was this video, I was referring to.


That makes me feel better. I totally agree that the sound on that one is terrible, but my other videos are not as bad. After many weeks working on that video (which few will ever watch) I just had to walk away and wince at how bad the sound is. Live and learn.


----------



## bill5 (Jun 21, 2021)

GtrString said:


> Don’t get foam, it will only deaden the high frequencies in your room, and do nothing to remove the room sound. You need mass.
> 
> I have had good luck with panels and gobos from GIK; check it out https://gikacoustics.eu/product-category/acoustic-panels
> 
> Also use a microphone that won’t pick up the room, a dynamic mic with hypercardioid pattern (look into the Shure’s), won’t pick much up from the room and sides, so if you use a mic screen in front, and an acoustic gobo behind, you should not need any room treatment. Also make sure your gain stage is good, if you have a decent preamp you can get less noise, otherwise use a cloudlifter to improve the noise to sound ratio.


Agree with this, except the "you should not need any room treatment" part. Mic shields IMO generally don't do much and are a poor substitute for room treatment. IMO you ALWAYS needs room treatment if you want a really good result. 

As for foam, IMO it's mostly a waste of time and money.




TigerTheFrog said:


> I was making an assumption that the acoustic panels would automatically be a good thing. It's not as simple as that.


It is automatically a good thing. But yeah the devil's in the details. What kind of materials, how you place them etc.


----------



## AvantGuy (Jun 23, 2021)

steveo42 said:


> Some additional information can be found here:
> 
> http://ethanwiner.com/acoustics.html


More than "additional" -- this is all the info one needs. Foam panels glued to the walls are ineffective except at the very top of the range which is seldom where room problems reside, and which means they're ineffective for almost any situation. GIKacoustics is the one other web resource to rival Ethan's, but for DIY I prefer Ethan's site (bear with the old fashioned _Web 1.x_ - looking website, it's ugly). Ethan's commercial site (almost as ugly) has all kinds of absorbent traps (wideband and bass) and well as diffusors.


----------



## AvantGuy (Jun 23, 2021)

DimensionsTomorrow said:


> I ended up randomly watching a YouTube video yesterday where someone was saying that bookshelves filled with hardcover books arranged horizontally and vertically make for a cheap and attractive alternative to bass traps. I made a mental note to look into that more. I wonder if shelves filled with vinyl would also work.
> 
> The bit on acoustic treatment starts at 5:51. Kind of an annoying video, but that bit about the bookshelves was interesting.



Oh goodness, they are *not *an alternative to bass traps! They're not an alternative to HF traps either. There's no alternative to traps but there is something that can supplement traps in certain type of rooms: diffusors. Shelves of books are sometimes advised as a cheap (well, if you already have the books!) alternative to real diffusors, but they are said to be *vastly *inferior. As a trap, forget it is my recommendation. "Skyline" diffusors are the most effective diffusor types and are very cool looking. But it should be remembered that DIY home studio rooms first line of defense is almost always absorption. That's bass traps and, at the very least, mid/HF absorption at the first reflection points.

Skyline diffusor...


----------



## brainditch (Jun 24, 2021)

At the risk of sounding a bit off-putting, I've been studying and building the Acoustics of smaller spaces for quite some time (approx. 20 years overall). Here's what I found out:

1. Low frequencies are the most problematic for smaller spaces. The smaller the space is, the more the "trouble spots" are shifted into higher frequencies of the spectrum, and the more difficult Acoustic Treatment becomes overall (because one needs to try to absorb lower in the spectrum than one has the space to design for, generally).

2. The worst thing is when huge dips occur in the spectrum, which will tend to occur at 100Hz-250Hz (depending on Room Volume). Dips are caused by Wave Interference Patterns that occur naturally (sometimes known as the Speaker Boundary Interference Response or SBIR), but the goal is Acoustic Treatment sufficient to smooth room response to +-15 dB, and also reduce "Ringing" from approx. 1000 msec to 400 or less. Obviously better response is possible, but at significantly greater cost(and space).

3. As with other posters here, my advice is to attempt whenever possible to use Acoustic Modules. Store bought can work well, but my DIY efforts were far more cost effective to get more of them (which is what is needed to get dramatic smoothing effects), and with selectable raw materials (including print designs for flame resistant fabrics), I could put all kinds of tasteful work into an aesthetic result.

4. Up to a certain amount of Reflection Loss (frequency dependent) Fibrous Absorbers are the way to go (Acoustic Foam generally doesn't do as well here, due to some complex physics of absorption). Recommended minimum thickness for effectiveness is approx. 4" (100 mm). Deeper will trap Reflections of Bass Frequencies, which will reduce the classic 120 Hz "notch" significantly.

5. Taking measurements is not only cheap and accurate, but can help you to verify the audible improvements as you correct the space. I use a $100 calibrated Measurement Mic and free/shareware software (Room EQ Wizard combined with ARTA is a must) for the best, most repeatable results.

6. Other things worth examining: Room Correction & Calibration Software can do very good things these days. It won't ever remove the deep dips of a room, but can help with improving the response dramatically once the basic room physical corrections are complete.

7. Also, for very deep bass issues: VPR/CBA Tech, such as used in the Modex Plate, can dramatically absorb down to the 50Hz range, tunable by Thickness of Foam (yes, one area it actually does very well in) and Plate Geometry. We built a couple of Verbund Platten Resonator's in several of MonoLab's corners to great effect.

Here's a photo of my last large treatment effort that I traveled to work on at MonoLab studio in Cuenca, Ecuador, and REW files to show the Acoustic Efficiency at the Listening Position:
Note: the REW Spectral Waterfall screenshots are from later in the full series as improvements were made.


----------



## brainditch (Jun 24, 2021)

TigerTheFrog said:


> I have a big TV monitor in my setup, above my two computer monitors. I put it there because I didn't want to waste it when we got a new one.
> But I don't use it enough and it is very reflective. I really feel the sound is worse there when I record as opposed to other places. So I'm planning to give the TV away and put some acoustic foam panels in its place. Maybe six to eight panels ought to do it.
> 
> I can't do the entire wall because it is 14 feet high and my wife would kill me. I don't have a studio and it's right in front of our bed. I live in a loft, which is one big room with very high ceilings. It's going to be very echoey in my place, no matter what. But I think this might be a slight improvement for voice-overs, particularly if I put something behind me.
> ...


Depending on what you want to do, and your specific Room Metrics, you may want to reposition your Workdesk further away from the Front Wall, yet move your speakers near there.

For larger Video Monitors between the speakers, the possible Comb Filtering will be offset by their tendency to provide extra support to your Main's low frequency content and imaging. Think of it like this: if the flat plane of that large monitor is acting like a reflective surface, then it becomes closer to the response expected in "Studio Monitor Soffits" that are purpose built - they call this the "Infinite Baffle" effect. Not all reflections are terrible for room response, thankfully those that are nearest the source are also the smoothest (unless Comb Filtering becomes an issue due to a sound source competing with the Mains).

As to modifying it: again because of its beneficial effect to the lows, the Front Wall can go either way: dead or "live" w/r/t higher frequency Response. See "Attack Walls" as an alternate view of what's going on here.
No harm in trying to drape a heavy blanket or sleeping bag as a temp absorber to give you some options if the goal is to simply kill some highs/mids for a Podcast!


----------

