|
Post by rock on Oct 26, 2021 22:03:35 GMT
Hi Ynot, Welcome to the forum. I think the most important thing to know about recording is the ratio between the source/mic distance and source/boundary (wall, floor, ceiling etc.) distance. The greater the ratio, the less the influence from the reflected sound from the boundary into the mic. Below is a fairly basic plan for your voice recording. It may be overkill or it may not be enough but it sounds like you don't have time to experiment. If you did have more time, you could take test recordings as you go. If you do have the time, at least make some recordings right now as it is and see how good or bad is is with the source (you) close to the mic (4" or so) and away from the boundaries like I describe below. You probably have a unidirectional mic (picks up mostly from the front and less from the back) so your mic's back can be closer to a wall than the front of the mic. Maybe pick a spot about 5 feet from a short wall and face the mic toward the farther wall. In an area about 4' X 4' above you (the source) and the mic, remove ceiling tiles and put unfaced batts between the joists and cover with breathable, acoustically transparent fabric. (keeps fibers in and looks better than insulation). (you could do this for the whole ceiling but $$ and time...) On the long side walls in the area of the mic, put panels of at least 2" thick, 4' x 4'(but 4" thick is better etc. and spacing from the wall is even better but we're trying to keep is simple, cheap, and fast) dense rigid fiberglass or mineral wool. You could actually just hang bare insulation on the wall to see how is works for you without actually building panels. A panel on the back wall (behind you) will also help and even one on the wall behind the mic too. Moveable panels are nice too because you can place them around you. When recording in small rooms, the more absorbers, the less reflections, the better. See pic of my moveable panels. Since you don't have issues with outside sound and won't bother anyone else, you don't need to consider "soundproofing". If the appliances cause a hum/noise in your recordings, can you switch them off during takes? Let us know what you think and how it goes. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by rock on Oct 6, 2021 3:46:34 GMT
You are correct in that this is a big undertaking. Whatever you choose to do for your desired results, you need a solid comprehensive plan and you need to follow through and not cut corners mid-way through the project, which will almost certainly compromise your intended goal.
Obviously, the biggest room you can afford to build will be the most flexible for future projects. If you have a fully isolated big room, you can always sub-divide with additional solid construction (Drum booth etc.) or even just use gobos.
There's an old adage: "If you want the best (or better) but buy something inferior, you'll always remember (or regret) what you did not choose BUT... If you buy what you really wanted, in time you'll probably forget how much extra you had to pay but still be happy with your choice.
Back to your original question about removing drywall or keeping in place:
This may well be a big project, much larger than your drywall removal. I suggest formulating two or three comprehensive plans estimating costs, performance (isolation/attenuation estimates) and functionality (room size etc.). This will give you a much better idea of what you're getting into. Start with doing as much as you can yourself but along the way, don't hesitate to look into hiring a consultant. Planning is everything!
|
|
|
Post by rock on Oct 5, 2021 13:40:46 GMT
One concept for the room in a room is both structures to be isolated at all points. Any rigid connection will "short circuit" vibrations from inside to outside and negate attenuation.
If you have ductwork connecting between, you must use something that will not transmit vibrations...a section of flexible duct might be used.
|
|
|
Post by rock on Oct 5, 2021 2:59:28 GMT
As you know already, "soundproofing" is a highly specific science and one "false move" can easily reduce your sound attenuation significantly. On this forum, we mostly focus on room treatment as opposed to room to room sound isolation or attenuation so this is not the best resource for your question. One expert I can suggest and maybe you know is Rod Gervais but I'm sure there are others. If you don't, you can look for him on Gear Slutz. From what I have learned from Rod's book to try to answer you question "In order to get a good level of soundproofing in the room, do I need to remove the existing drywall or can I just go over it with a new frame?"... ...You want a wall/ceiling/floor with THREE and only THREE sections 1-MASS, 2-AIR (or insulation) and 3-MASS, in that order. Your mass layers can be composed of 2 or 3 (or more?) laminations of dry wall or other massive material but in the end will be one MASS unit on each side of an AIR or insulation center. You also need the inner MASS wall/ceiling/floor isolated from the outer MASS wall/ceiling/floor. In your case, it sounds like you have a standard stud wall with drywall on each side. You're best with two stud walls with Drywall layers on the outside of each and only air (insulation) in between. If you're not considering flanking and isolation of walls, ceilings and floors, you need to look into understanding how to achieve that level of construction. NOW, if you just want to leave the old dry wall in place and work from there inward without the trouble and mess of removing it all, you might still be OK but you will want to consult with an expert or at least start by reading Rod's book www.amazon.com/Home-Recording-Studio-Build-Like/dp/143545717X
|
|
|
Post by rock on Aug 25, 2021 20:17:22 GMT
That's very interesting.
From what I understand, nulls or notches are caused by destructive interference and peaks, conversely, by constructive interference. This is done all the time with electronic circuits in one dimensional wires (or conductors). If we lived in a one dimensional world, it should work exactly the same way as with electronic circuits (or on paper)...but our spaces have 3 dims so my guess is, that's maybe what makes things more complicated and not behave in a simple additive or subtractive process.
Now this may be just semantics but you mention the video says "You can't lessen a null by targeting it with absorption, you can only deepen it". Absorbers are generally broadband and work over a wide range of frequencies...So how can you target anything with something that affects virtually everything?
Can you send the url to that video? I'd like to see it.
Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by rock on Aug 24, 2021 13:09:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by rock on Aug 24, 2021 12:45:52 GMT
I only have 3 of those stands so I would guess I have the advantage...even so, I'll bet you'll still finish yours first I've got an ongoing project painting exterior window frames around the house. But that's just an excuse, you'd probably still finish first...but you never know ha ha ha.
|
|
|
Post by rock on Aug 24, 2021 1:50:24 GMT
Wow, they look really nice!
Glue line rip blade? OK, I had to look that one up but yeah, that looks like it saves time and make a perfect cut!
|
|
|
Post by rock on Aug 21, 2021 13:24:06 GMT
About that partition: It's probably never going to be of any practical use at all and can be a source of unwanted reflections. At the very least, it may just end up being in the way and you'll wonder why you didn't get rid of it in the first place. I think the first thing you should do is to knock it down and start with an open floor plan.
Additionally, on second look, it seems like you have a significant space ( 4" or more" ) on the back wall behind the door opening. You can use that to your advantage with absorption about equal to that thickness. Above the door opening, you can extend the thickness to 2' continuing your back wall bass trap to the wall above the door.
|
|
|
Post by rock on Aug 20, 2021 1:56:45 GMT
Sometimes I think we get a little too far in the weeds... But I can't help it either . I think "rigid" is just a by product of density when it comes to mineral wool and fiberglass. Acoustically is rigidity even a factor? Even density? Isn't it gas permeability what were really supposed to be looking at? But wait a second, lets back up. Honestly, I'm at a point where "good enough" is good enough. I mean, what do I expect from my investment? And how much do I want to invest? But that's just me everyone has their own goals and that's what were here for. If I were back in the days when I was building a studios, I would die for all the info we have at our fingertips today. For any one building a studio today, this is Nirvana! But back to rigid. I think most rigid Mineral wool will sag a little; it just depends how much. The frameless 4" thick clouds I made are suspended using a hardware cloth (heavy screen) section 12" x 18" at each end centered at the 1 foot and 3 foot points on the bottom (behind the black cloth). The four suspension wires attach at points where the sag is equal on both virtual ends and a fastened to the rods you can see near the ceiling (there are really two but you can only see one in the pict). The batt would sag without the support of the screen but not as much as if it were less rigid. The ones you see in the half frames only support are on the bottom half. BTW, I'm thinking about filling in the space below them to the floor, they were originally intended for moveable RFZ or vocal mic use but filling them in will be a little better for amps and drums. I also should have cut holes or slots in the frame...maybe later. Cheers, Rock
|
|
|
Post by rock on Aug 18, 2021 20:09:45 GMT
I think it would be considered a rigid batt because each batt should weigh 10.8 pounds according the specs on the Menards product web page where the net total weight for 5 batts is 54.24 pounds. These batts are 5.5 inches thick which is the depth you might find in the "floor" of an attic space but they are 23" wide for joists spaced O.C. 24" apart.
Anyway, I really didn't search that hard so if I were in the market to buy, I'd do a more thorough search.
Moveable panels are very handy! Go For It!
|
|
|
Post by rock on Aug 18, 2021 13:14:54 GMT
Oh, I just noticed I calculated price for cubic feet but Hexspa's prices were in square feet were you will need to consider different thicknesses. I suggest using cubic because it takes different thicknesses into account for price comparison purposes.
|
|
|
Post by rock on Aug 17, 2021 23:30:59 GMT
|
|
|
Post by rock on Aug 17, 2021 22:23:36 GMT
Hex, thanks for the FRK/membrane explanation!
So I'm understanding that what the OP (Mr. purtatoe) wants to do is to use Breathable fabric for his broadband absorbers but would like to use Non-breathable fabric for his dedicated "Bass traps" instead of using FRK. So if I'm correct, if non-breathable fabric will behave just like FRK does, his bass traps will work the way we all expect. This of course means the OP will have to source and buy two different covering materials. Do I have that right? Make sense so far?
OK, but I think the problem may be that it's very possible the non-breathable fabric may not work exactly the same as FRK...but I don't know so that's why I suggested testing. One reason is that we usually stretch fabric tightly over a wood frame. FRK is not stretched across the frame, that's a difference. Or maybe you need to lightly wrap the non-breathable fabric. If someone knows the non-breathable fabric will work like FRK, it would be great to hear the details and then the OP should be good to go.
I do believe the OP has a valid question but at some point I'm thinking "Just use FRK and breathable fabric." "If it works, don't fix it." If Ethan or someone has some useful insight, that would be great but in the end, is it that hard to find breathable fabric? You're gonna need it for your broadband units anyway? If you can't find FRK, you can use paper or plastic.
|
|
|
Post by rock on Aug 15, 2021 15:28:46 GMT
The one thing that stands out for me is the large volume of bass traps in only 3 locations. That's not a bad thing but in general, more even distribution is usually better use of bass trapping. You also have the ceiling/sidewall corners where you could locate bass traps. You also mention a cloud. If possible, treating the entire (or much of the) ceiling area can work really well for LF especially if your ceiling is not finished (or you have a suspended ceiling grid) and you can utilize the space between the ceiling joists.
The rectangular shape of the front traps is good for increased trap volume but since you ask about the parallel reflection with the back wall, a diagonal face from wall to wall solves that issue. I would not worry about lack of bass trap symmetry due to front window position.
Deep trap at the back wall is good but what's the deal with that partition wall at the back? It's not the worst thing in the world but it's not helping either. Can you remove it? If so, you'd open up the side now being blocked by the partition. Could you use thinner absorbers to fit behind the door? Thinner absorbers of course won't do a lot for the LF but it won't hurt either.
That's just my 2 cents. What you have there is not bad but if it's not built yet, you might start acoustic measuring and see where you are now and whatever direction you go, you can compare future results. I don't have any recommendations on measurement mics but you don't need super accuracy as you are really looking at the "big picture". My understanding is pretty much any mic designed for acoustic measurements will be fine for most list member's purposes.
|
|