The Quadratic Tight-Budget Workshop-Studio Challenge

Started by Linus Leonard on 17 May 2010. 2 replies.

Originally posted at johnlsayers.com, topic 14388.

Dear all, My name is Linus Leonard, I'm a hobby musician and composer living in Sweden. Been lurking here a while, and I think it's amazing the amount of knowledge you all possess. Wish I had more time to explore the subjects in this forum, but for the moment this is all just a hobby. I'm working daytime as a systems architect, and my spare time is thus a bit limited. That's why I am giving you, the people possessing a lot more knowledge about these subjects than I, a challenge! It's the Quadratic Tight-Budget Workshop-Studio Challenge (henceforth referenced as "the Challange"). Yeah, I know, it's a silly name, and there is no award exept the spiritual fulfillment of helping a fellow man and possibly some pictures of the project if it all goes well. Last year I moved to a newly built rental apartment. This apartment has a spare room which I would like to convert into a combined music workshop and studio. As can be seen in the 3D Sketchup schematic (which I couldn't upload due to file size restrictions, thus I put it on my web page instead: http://linusleonard.com/etc/QTBWSC-Room.zip), the room measures an almost quadratic space (uh-oh!) of 3610mm by 3645mm. The height of the room is 2490mm. The Challenge aims to achieve the following:
  • Identify the major problems regarding the acoustic properties of the room and how it will influence the work being performed in it. Some of the problems might not be easy to fix, or their solution might cost way to much to be worth it, but at least I will be aware of them and how to compensate for them (if at all possible). Other problems might be less important to address with regards to the type of work being performed in the room (defined below).
  • Identify the top 3 (or top 5, top 10, or whatever is neccessary) recommended courses of action, i.e. what to buy, what to build, where to place, etc.
The Challenge has a few constraints and a few wishes. All these are to be considered before submitting suggestions, but I am always open to sensible alternatives. Of course I recognize your superior knowledge in these matters, i.e. I am more than willing to accept other suggestions if some of the constraints are totally unreasonable or simply cannot be fullfilled. The following list enumerates the constraints of the Challenge. I am guessing that some of them are crippling and in conflict with proper acoustic treatment theory. Sorry 'bout that, but there is really nothing I can do about it.
  • I've realized two things about mixing and mastring. The first one is that, sadly, my knowledge regarding these fields are limited at best, and I will probably never be able to conjure up an audio track that is even close to sounding professional. The second one is that mixing and mastring-related issues effectively kills all my inspiration. In essence, I've given up the dream of being an independent artist and finalizing my music on my own. I accept these issues as a personal limitation, and will thus eventually pay others to help me. Of course, this has a direct effect on the Challenge. The focus should be on the Workshop part of the Challange, not the Studio part. I.e. the first priority is to eliminate as much as possible of the extremely annoying echo in the room, and also prevent it from entering my microphones when recording voice, acoustic guitar, harmonica etc. The second priority is related to the Studio part of the Challange, in which I am fully satisfied with sub-par standards. I'd like to be able to produce decent-sounding demo tracks, in order to show my potential as a composer to some record company. That's all.
  • The budget is tight. I can probably conjure up about US $1000-1500 this year. I can most definitely add more stuff as time goes by, but I feel that there is a cash-to-usefulness ratio to consider, given the other constraints in this list. I.e. I cannot plow loads and loads of cash into this project knowing that it will probably never be even nearing "perfect". If the circumstances were different, say that I had several rooms to mess around with, in a house that I own... well... in that case, money wouldn't be an issue.
  • This is, as mentioned earlier, a rental apartment, which means there can be no serious alterings of walls, floor, ceiling, door or window, at least not any alterings that cannot be attributed to "normal wear and tear". If changes has to be made to any of these elements, it must be done in such a way that it doesn't inflict irreparable damage. I would guess a "modular" approach would be best, i.e. whatever I need to put in this room to improve the acoustic properties, should if possible be somewhat easy to move around and not require large bolts in the walls and such. I'ms not prevented to drill a few screw holes in the walls of course, but not overly many.
  • The window stays unblocked. That window is the single most aesthetically pleasing property of the room. It provides with a very nice view, it lets in the sun, and most important of all, the view is inspiring. It simply must stay as unblocked as possible. Perhaps 5-10 centimeters on each side is an acceptable compromise, or, some kind of portable solution to use in critical recording or mixing moments (i.e. heavy curtains or some type of insulated portable inset).
  • Current monitors are the mid-range KRK VXT8 (http://www.krksys.com/product_vxt.php). After many, many, MANY hours of listening and comparing to high-end Genelecs, Adams and Dynaudios, I settled for these beauties. They seem to suit my ears the most, and all of a sudden I can hear things both in my own music and my favourite artists' music that I haven't heard before. Music gear in Sweden is rather expensive; they set me back US $1200 (including sales taxes and such), so I won't buy other monitors anytime soon. They have a 3-way switch to adjust the low-frequency response to compensate for proximity to walls and corners.They also have a 3-way switch to adjust the high-frequency response. Range of this switch is +1dB, Flat, or -1dB shelving above 2kHz. I've mounted them on stands, and adjusted the height of the stands to perfectly match the monitors' acoustic centres to the height of my ears when I am sitting down. The monitors will be used not only for mixing and mastring, but also for the inspirational work (i.e. composing music and such) in order to get to know them intimately. I also have a few headphones and hi-fi speakers to play with of course.
The following list enumerates the wishes of the Challenge. This is simply a list of things that I wish to adhere to, but hey, I'm very much open for suggestions regarding these, especially if the suggestions can make a whole lot of difference in the long run.
  • I'm not trying to achieve the "perfect" studio nor the "perfect" workshop. It is my wish though that it will turn out "as good as possible" or "good enough", given the constraints and wishes.
  • The computer console table at which I work is a semi-homemade thing, made out of something that I believe is called particle board in English (http://www.plywoodnews.com/manual_image/Particle_Board2.jpg). It is adapted height-wise for my length and for my particular office chair so that I still have my feet on the ground, my arms perfectly resting upon the table to avoid strains, etc. I would really like to continue using this table, but I am as always open for suggestions. I am definitely willing to treat its surfaces with whatever material to reduce bouncing sound waves and such. Suggestions are welcome.
  • It would be great if it was in some way possible to build a little vocal booth (for singing) in this room, but I realize that the room is probably way to small (or otherwise not suited) for that kind of undertaking.
  • I'd like to have a bed or couch in the room. I understand that those types of furniture are somewhat benificiary with regards to absorption, and I do need to lie down sometimes and just... listen. I realize though that it might not be possible to fit it into the room, which is fine by me. There's always the floor. :)
  • Neighbours could be an issue. I wish not to disturb them. On the other hand I believe that the apartments in this particular house are all pretty soundproof. The house was built in 2008 and the building standards in Sweden are generally very high nowadays. In any case, all suggestions regarding sound proofing are welcome, especially if it can be combined with sound absorption. I understand low-frequencies are the most troublesome for neighbours (right?). This is low priority though. If sound proofing interfere too much with the more important acoustic treatment then I can do without sound proofing.
So far, I have identified the following problems regarding the acoustic properties of the room:
  • The room is almost quadratic, and from what I understand this is probably the most serious problem with regards to "standing waves". I also believe that the room is too small to wall off in order to make it more "rectangular" than quadratic, but if it can be combined with some type of singing booth then why not. What are your thoughts regarding this issue?
  • The room has a lot of concrete surfaces. Two walls are concrete with wallpaper on them, i.e. absorption coefficient is very poor (according to http://www.sae.edu/reference_material/audio/pages/Coefficient%20Chart.htm). Ceiling is made of concrete. Floor is wood parquet upon thin styrofoam (6mm I believe) and then concrete.
  • One wall, the one facing the livingroom, is gypsum and contains no insulation from what I can tell. It seems to be completely hollow except for some wood beams. The wall with the window is gypsum, contains wood beams and probably (not sure) some fiberglass insulation, and the outside wall is concrete. I am guessing that these hollow gypsum walls could pose a problem, correct?
  • Door is hollow, material is probably plywood or something similar. What can be done about this?
  • Monitors are placed near the corners of the room. From what I've understand this is a bad thing, but my monitors can compensate for it, at least according to claims from the monitor manufacturer (KRK). I am not familiar with how effective the compensation is, nor how to measure it.
These are the main questions:
  • In your opinion, professional or otherwise, is it even possible to acoustically treat this room and achieve something that could be considered "good enough", given the constraints, wishes, and problems stipulated above? If not, why? Is is that the room itself is a lost cause, or is it that the constraints and wishes are simply too much in conflict with the proper way to treat the room? If the latter, what constraint or wish do you suggest that I remove from the lists above?
  • Name the first few things that you would do to acoustically treat this room, i.e. what you would focus on given the constraints, wishes, and problems stipulated above.
  • Are there some cheap shortcuts worth taking, given the fact that I am on a tight budget and not aiming for the perfect room? For instance, when I hang up laundry in my bathroom (which is mostly tile and concrete) after it has been washed, I've noticed that the absorption is rather substantial (it seems to be a little better when the clothes are wet). The laundry normally takes up something like 25% of the bathroom, and I gather the effect would be the same in my future studio if I for instance fill the ceiling with pieces of cloth on some clothes-lines. It will look wierd but cost me practically nothing; my grandmother happens to be hording bed sheets and towels :)
I have considered solutions previously posted in these forums, such as this one http://www.johnlsayers.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5389&start=0, but it seems a bit too elaborate for what I am trying to achieve. It will take me forever to build such a behemoth of a studio, and dismantling it all if I need to move seems daunting. I'm looking for something lighter and easier, more in the lines of the "The Bedroom Studio" http://johnlsayers.com/Recmanual/Titles/Plans.htm. I'm not afraid of building stuff though, and I can get hold of building material as well as absorption material fairly easy. If I were to try to answer my own questions, I would say that the DYI Wall Units (http://www.johnlsayers.com/HR/index1.htm) are part of the answer, but I am wondering if it is applicable to the conditions I've described above. Perhaps there are more efficient solutions given what I am trying to achieve? I hope I have been clear enough on what I am trying to accomplish here. If not, please feel free to ask questions. I really appreciate any insights that you are willing to provide. Many thanks in advance. Sincerely, Linus Leonard
Image not preserved: QTBWSC-Room.jpg
Hi, the window on the side is bad because of early reflections. You need to cover the first reflection points with absorber. And I think - without measurering and sketching - you will have to cover the right side of your window. But since you like the window and the view, why not put the monitors on the window side? It seems the window is in the center of the wall, so symmetry is warranted. From my expiriences over the year in my old studio and during building the new studio I would follow these steps: 1. Realise symmetry in the front (as mentioned above) 2. Put broadband absorbers on he first reflections points on the side. Due to directionality the left monitor will reflected more on the right wall than the right one. 3. Cover the backwall at least on the reflections points with broadband absorbers. You could use commercial acoustic foam for this, but they are expensive and absorb only down to 1kHz or 500Hz. You will replace it more sooner than later. So 100mm (or more and with air gab) rockwool or rigid fiberglass will give you better perfomance. (donw to 200Hz and little absorbtion even in the 100Hz) Step 1 to 3 will give you a better stereo image and reverb impression, but for compostion and demo it can work for a while until you got more money. You will have a bad bass performance, though. 4. Superchunks in the 4 corners (easy to build, and very good perfomance) 5. Cloud on the first reflection points on the ceiling 6. Make the whole backwall absorband. Since you room is only 3.5m (my room is 4.5m) you cannot waste the space for 1m think absorbers (e.g. waveguide/hangers) absorbing down to the deepes basses and for diffussion it is to near. Go for another superchunk at the backwall-ceiling corner. Step 4-6 improve your bass performance and overall reverberation time. For more steps you have to hear and measure. You dont need your towels if you don't consider to hitchhike ...
ThomasT, Thank you for your insights. Sorry I haven't been able to reply earlier, I've been abroad for a while. Covering the right side of the window isn't much of a problem. The window is actually not one window but two. The leftmost windows is roughly 120 cm and the rightmost is 73cm. Blocking the rightmost window could be an adequate compromise. Will a block of rockwool/fiberglass suffice, or do I also need to put particle board on top of that (extend the wall, in essence)? Regarding putting the monitors on the window side: it seems to be a good idea in theory, but since the computer displays should go between the monitor speakers it will result in more or less direct sun light into my eyes. I have bad eyes as it is unfortunately, and it would probably result in considerable strain on my eyes to watch the displays in front of a bright light source. I gather the squinting will kill me. Overall though your suggestions seems to be very reasonable with regards to my budget, the available building time and non-interference with the appartment. Those superchunks are exactly what I'm looking for, and broadband absorbers seems to be very easy to build. Really appreciate it ThomasT. Regarding absorbing material it seems that "Paroc" rockwool gives the most bang for the buck here in Sweden. I've found forum posts indicating I should go for a density of at least 45 kg/m3, and that bigger numbers here are better. It also seems this kind of material can be used both for broadband absorbers and superchunks. I just wanted to verify if I am correct in assuming this? Are there any other general suggestions? Do you all agree with ThomasT's assessment? Again, thanks for the reply, and I appreciate any further insights into these matters. Sincerely, Linus Leonard