|
|
Post by tuantranaudio on May 29, 2017 11:55:45 GMT
I had bought carpet for floor and then I knew that it doesn't suit with floor. I don't want to spend money on wood - laminate, so I intend to use leather fabric and put above the carpet. Does it work? Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on May 30, 2017 3:39:36 GMT
I had bought carpet for floor and then I knew that it doesn't suit with floor. I don't want to spend money on wood - laminate, so I intend to use leather fabric and put above the carpet. Does it work? Hey tuan, I'm no expert on building materials but having a surface like that will probably reflect more high frequencies, and maybe some mids, more than exposed carpet will. I don't suspect that any solution that isn't specifically designed to be acoustics-centric would be much of a concern one way or another. -m |
|
|
|
Post by tuantranaudio on May 30, 2017 11:35:46 GMT
I had bought carpet for floor and then I knew that it doesn't suit with floor. I don't want to spend money on wood - laminate, so I intend to use leather fabric and put above the carpet. Does it work? Hey tuan, I'm no expert on building materials but having a surface like that will probably reflect more high frequencies, and maybe some mids, more than exposed carpet will. I don't suspect that any solution that isn't specifically designed to be acoustics-centric would be much of a concern one way or another. -m Hexspa, this material is made by polyester fibre (lower side) and PVC plastic/asphalt (upper side). Some calls "fake leather" in my country  |
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on May 30, 2017 11:56:56 GMT
Hey tuan, I'm no expert on building materials but having a surface like that will probably reflect more high frequencies, and maybe some mids, more than exposed carpet will. I don't suspect that any solution that isn't specifically designed to be acoustics-centric would be much of a concern one way or another. -m Hexspa, this material is made by polyester fibre (lower side) and PVC plastic/asphalt (upper side). Some calls "fake leather" in my country Well, I guess if it doesn't work out for flooring you can always wear it |
|
|
|
Post by tuantranaudio on May 30, 2017 14:39:57 GMT
Hexspa, this material is made by polyester fibre (lower side) and PVC plastic/asphalt (upper side). Some calls "fake leather" in my country Well, I guess if it doesn't work out for flooring you can always wear it Blanket, too hahaha |
|
|
|
Post by Ethan Winer on May 30, 2017 17:21:40 GMT
In home-sized listening rooms, carpet on the floor is usually better than a reflective floor. Is there a reason you want to cover the carpet?
I see your other thread, but it looks like Hexspa answered all your questions?
|
|
|
|
Post by tuantranaudio on May 30, 2017 17:48:24 GMT
In home-sized listening rooms, carpet on the floor is usually better than a reflective floor. Is there a reason you want to cover the carpet? I see your other thread, but it looks like Hexspa answered all your questions? I read some articles and some threads on Gearslutz, people said that carpet absorbs highs only and makes sound dull, they have said that concrete floor or wood floor should be used and good for more flat frequency. on the other thread, your opinion will be the same as Hexspa? |
|
|
|
Post by rock on May 31, 2017 13:38:06 GMT
I believe the concept you're referring has to do with materials with different absorption frequency bands may produce non-flat RT60. Alton Everest covers this in his Acoustics or Studio book (I can't remember which one). His fix for carpet on the floor was to use an "anti-carpet" absorber on the ceiling which had a complementary absorption curve to that of the carpet.
As you can see from Hexspa's and Ethan's posts, this is obviously NOT a big deal and the benefit of having a carpet outweighs the possibility of a flatter RT60 you may achieve with a reflective floor and full wideband absorption on the ceiling. But...you should still use WB absorbers on the ceiling if it's in your budget.
Cheers,
Rock
|
|
|
|
Post by tuantranaudio on May 31, 2017 14:23:19 GMT
I believe the concept you're referring has to do with materials with different absorption frequency bands may produce non-flat RT60. Alton Everest covers this in his Acoustics or Studio book (I can't remember which one). His fix for carpet on the floor was to use an "anti-carpet" absorber on the ceiling which had a complementary absorption curve to that of the carpet. As you can see from Hexspa's and Ethan's posts, this is obviously NOT a big deal and the benefit of having a carpet outweighs the possibility of a flatter RT60 you may achieve with a reflective floor and full wideband absorption on the ceiling. But...you should still use WB absorbers on the ceiling if it's in your budget. Cheers, Rock Ya. I have already planned clouds for ceiling (FRZ - 12'' panel). What makes me confused is about leather fabric (image attached), not carpet, that I don't know how it is effective, how good or bad. |
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on May 31, 2017 14:37:50 GMT
I believe the concept you're referring has to do with materials with different absorption frequency bands may produce non-flat RT60. Alton Everest covers this in his Acoustics or Studio book (I can't remember which one). His fix for carpet on the floor was to use an "anti-carpet" absorber on the ceiling which had a complementary absorption curve to that of the carpet. As you can see from Hexspa's and Ethan's posts, this is obviously NOT a big deal and the benefit of having a carpet outweighs the possibility of a flatter RT60 you may achieve with a reflective floor and full wideband absorption on the ceiling. But...you should still use WB absorbers on the ceiling if it's in your budget. Cheers, Rock Ya. I have already planned clouds for ceiling (FRZ - 12'' panel). What makes me confused is about leather fabric (image attached), not carpet, that I don't know how it is effective, how good or bad. I'd advise measuring before and after installation. REW etc. That's the only way to know for sure. -m |
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on May 31, 2017 14:46:18 GMT
I believe the concept you're referring has to do with materials with different absorption frequency bands may produce non-flat RT60. Alton Everest covers this in his Acoustics or Studio book (I can't remember which one). His fix for carpet on the floor was to use an "anti-carpet" absorber on the ceiling which had a complementary absorption curve to that of the carpet. As you can see from Hexspa's and Ethan's posts, this is obviously NOT a big deal and the benefit of having a carpet outweighs the possibility of a flatter RT60 you may achieve with a reflective floor and full wideband absorption on the ceiling. But...you should still use WB absorbers on the ceiling if it's in your budget. Cheers, Rock Ah, yes. RT60; that quality I've hitherto ignored. Thanks for reminding me, rock. I'm going to play armchair Acoustician (wait, isn't that what my previous 700 posts have been about) and say that evenness in spectral RT60 is a factor just under (in importance) ringing being equal-to-or-less-than 20dB@150ms - for me. Or maybe just under an SPL tighter than +-10dB. In other words I've completely forgotten about it. To paraphrase myself, this rabbit hole is obscenely reminiscent of a snakefish vent. That is to say it can get ugly quick. In other words, I'm not going to concern myself with that quantifier in this room; as noble of a goal though it may be. On a side note, I really want to be in a room that meets or exceeds all these criteria we here discuss - and there spend substantial amounts of time. I know my room is ok, and I've visited supposedly well-treated rooms, but I'm certainly not immersed in the ultimate awesomeness of what's possible. Regardless, thanks for the reminder that I'm not there yet. -m |
|
|
|
Post by Ethan Winer on Jun 1, 2017 18:13:14 GMT
I can add a little about carpet absorption. It's true that carpets absorb mostly high frequencies, but if the carpet is very thick, and has a thick pad underneath, you can get effective absorption to below 1 KHz. Sorry for the poor quality, but hopefully this image is clear enough to read when you click to see it full size:  |
|
|
|
Post by tuantranaudio on Jun 4, 2017 15:14:51 GMT
I can add a little about carpet absorption. It's true that carpets absorb mostly high frequencies, but if the carpet is very thick, and has a thick pad underneath, you can get effective absorption to below 1 KHz. Sorry for the poor quality, but hopefully this image is clear enough to read when you click to see it full size: Thank you for your sharing this information. It's depth is approximate 1 cm. I'm just worried that it will cause boxy sound, but maybe I should take measurement in detail Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on Jun 5, 2017 10:52:16 GMT
Based on Ethan's chart you should only expect to notice a difference in sound above 2kHz.
I mean, I don't know what the threshold of noticing would be; it should depend on surface area.
But when we make broadband panels we're expecting nearly an absorption coefficient of 1.00. With carpet we're talking 0.20 at 2kHz.
It just seems to not be a primary concern unless you have good control of your low frequency ringing and a good RFZ.
You can measure RT60 with REW, I think. To be clear I don't think waterfalls indicate RT60 - it's a separate graph.
So, again, if everything else is specced out then you can take a before-and-after RT60 and tailor it with carpet, pads etc.
Thanks,
-m
|
|
|
|
Post by tuantranaudio on Jun 5, 2017 12:41:15 GMT
Thank you, Hexspa. I will take notes. Would you mind taking a look at my thread about room within room?
|
|
