Studio design in Fremantle, Western Australia.

Hi everyone. My band has bought a warehouse and we're in the planning stage of our studio build. We have employed a designer, but he doesn't finish his current project for another 2 weeks. I'm providing him with as detailed a plan as I can, so that he can get straight into the fine tuning. I have drawn up our initial plan, it's still in the embryonic stages, and I am not the most knowledgeable of designers. I thought I'd post it here to see if there's anyone out there who could offer me some useful criticism and/or pointers. We're an Australian band, we've recorded 2 EPs and 4 albums over the last 12 years. We've always been avid studiophiles, and self produced our most successful album to date. However, we're keen to work at home and save some money on studio hire in the process. Hence, the new studio. We write rock/pop tunes, with fairly loud tracking volumes. We tend to track pretty much everything separately, so full band live takes are rare. Separation is rarely an issue. The warehouse we have purchased is in a heavy industrial area, but there is no heavy machinery in the surrounding areas. The most noise we get is trucks driving on the opposite side of our block. Our street is a closed road, so our traffic is almost non existent. As it is heavy industrial zoning, any noise we make is not an issue. The warehouse is basically four 8 inch thick concrete walls 17m x 8m, a solid factory concrete floor, and a 6 meter ceiling. So we have a lot of headroom. I've attached the plan as it stands right now. There is a kitchen and bathroom off to the left, not shown. There is a mezzanine above these rooms to the left, also not shown. The mezzanine will most likely be used as a rehearsal space, or a studio b. (At a later date) The staircase, shown in light grey, leads up to this mezzanine. We have a budget of AU$80000 for the fitout. We're floating the floors and hanging the ceiling, and are doing as much of the work as we can ourselves to come within budget. There will be a contractor on site most of the time, and we'll be hiring specialists for the glass and doors. All rooms are made to recommended ratios to minimise modal activity on the bottom end. More specifically, the control room is 1/1.4/1.9; the Main room is 1/1.5/2.1; the 2nd tracking room is 1/1.4/1.9; the vocal booth is 1/1.14/1.39 This will be more important in the smaller rooms, I am guessing. Walls in all the rooms are skewed at 6 degrees from parallel to counter flutter echos. The control room is symmetrical to help with stereo imaging, with a raked ceiling from front to back. In regards to construction, the walls will consist of: Minimum 20mm air gap from existing wall. 90mm x 45mm wall stud. Rockwool. 19mm yellowtongue chipboard. 16mm gyprock. That's about it for now... Any advice on potential problems this design may cause will be gladly welcomed. So here it is, thanks y'all, stu

Hi y'all. I've posted on another forum at MusicPlayer and got the response that a longer control room might be better, rather than such a wide one. So, I've been working on a new sketch, with the control room reworked. I've used the same dimensions, so the ratio is the same as well, I've just made it long rather than wide. I've had to shuffle the whole studio around, but managed to keep pretty much everything the same dimensions. Lost a bit of room in the lounge, but also have a more compact airlock, and some storage too. Does this strike you as a better design overall? Thanks again for your input. Cheers, stu

We're floating the floors and hanging the ceiling,

I'm wondering why you need to float the floors, especially since you say that you track instruments separately and bleed is not an issue. You could save a huge amount of money by not floating them. Are you sure you need to do that? Floating floors is not for the feint of heart... viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8173

... and hanging the ceiling,

It might be easier, and better for isolation, to build proper MSM ceilings on top of your MSM walls. Or maybe I'm misunderstanding what yo mean by "hanging" the ceilings?

All rooms are made to recommended ratios to minimise modal activity on the bottom end.

Ratios do not "minimize modal activity": they just spread it around more evenly. Room dimensions set the modal frequencies, not room ratios. For any given dimensions the modes will always be there: there is nothing you can do about that. What you can do is choose a ratio that spaces out the modes as evenly as possibly, so that they don't overlap in bunches with large gaps between.

More specifically, the control room is 1/1.4/1.9;

That is Louden's fifth-best ratio. Any particular reason for choosing that particular ratio? There are a few others in the same general ballpark.

the Main room is 1/1.5/2.1; the 2nd tracking room is 1/1.4/1.9; the vocal booth is 1/1.14/1.39

Louden's thrid, Louden's fifth, and Sepmeyer's second. Any reason for those specific ratios? I'm also wondering why you also want ratios for your live rooms?

Walls in all the rooms are skewed at 6 degrees from parallel to counter flutter echos.

Once again, 6 degree splaying (minimum) and symmetry are exactly what you need for your control room, but why stick with that for your live rooms? Have you also considered going with more random angles in those rooms. And since you are splaying your walls, ratios become somewhat of a moot point, since calculation of the modal spread gets to be rather complex for non-rectangular rooms.

The control room is symmetrical to help with stereo imaging, with a raked ceiling from front to back.

What angle? It needs to be at least 12 degrees, and perhaps more if you are also planning on an RFZ design.

So, I've been working on a new sketch, with the control room reworked. I've used the same dimensions, so the ratio is the same as well, I've just made it long rather than wide.

But it is backwards!!!! You have the widest part at the FRONT, when it should be at the BACK. You need to turn it around. The speakers go on the shortest wall, where the ceiling is lowest, facing down the long axis of the room, towards the rear wall, where the ceiling is highest.

Lost a bit of room in the lounge, but also have a more compact airlock,

Get rid of it! That airlock is basically useless, the way it is designed now, since your MSM wall does not completely enclose the entire CR. You need to extend that wall all around the CR, which means your airlock will disappear, and you probably don't need it anyway since you already have two doors into each of the rooms. If you rearrange the CR, get rid of the airlock, and complete the MSM wall, then you should have more space available once again for your lounge and storage. You could even move the storage to the space behind the CR at present: Makes more sense, and gives you a much bigger lounge. You also seem to be wasting a lot of space around the vocal booth: both the right wall and the rear wall can move out, much closer to the outer leaf. More space in a vocal booth can only be a good thing! - Stuart -

Hi Stuart, thanks for your suggestions. I'm wondering why you need to float the floors, especially since you say that you track instruments separately and bleed is not an issue. You could save a huge amount of money by not floating them. Are you sure you need to do that? Floating floors is not for the feint of heart..." Been reading a whole lot of stuff about floating floors, and it's definitely interesting reading. Especially this thread: http://forum.studiotips.com/viewtopic.p ... 4&start=40 We have a huge concrete slab of heavy industrial thickness, so it should be a fairly decent base to work from. Do you think the best course of action would be to get an acoustic engineer in to take some measurements, see if we actually need a floated floor? At this stage, the walls are not super heavy, so it may very well be that the floor has the higher TL at most frequencies, right? Do we put more money into making the walls heavier, and disregard the floating floor? I read a thread where one guy was recommending a cheap option to be rockwool tiles under two layers of T&G floor plates. Thread is here: http://www.soundonsound.com/forum/showf ... t=1#126863 Sounds a little strange, wouldn't it make it quite difficult to get a level floor? "Ratios do not "minimize modal activity": they just spread it around more evenly. Room dimensions set the modal frequencies, not room ratios. For any given dimensions the modes will always be there: there is nothing you can do about that. What you can do is choose a ratio that spaces out the modes as evenly as possibly, so that they don't overlap in bunches with large gaps between." " In regards to the room ratios, do they not matter as much when walls are splayed, or is it just that it is so difficult to calculate that it's more trouble than it's worth? "That is Louden's fifth-best ratio. Any particular reason for choosing that particular ratio? There are a few others in the same general ballpark." I got the ratios from Rod Gervais' book, Home Recording Studios, Build It Like The Pros. In that book, he says that 1/1.4/1.9 is Louden's best ratio, and that 1/1.4/1.39 is Sepmeyer's best. That's primarily why I chose them. the 1/1.5/2.1 I chose simply because it was the best fit for the room. "Louden's thrid, Louden's fifth, and Sepmeyer's second. Any reason for those specific ratios? I'm also wondering why you also want ratios for your live rooms?" Are you saying that ratios aren't as important in live rooms? Why is that? I apologise for all the questions, but I feel I really need to have a grasp of as much knowledge as I can, going into this project. "Once again, 6 degree splaying (minimum) and symmetry are exactly what you need for your control room, but why stick with that for your live rooms? Have you also considered going with more random angles in those rooms. And since you are splaying your walls, ratios become somewhat of a moot point, since calculation of the modal spread gets to be rather complex for non-rectangular rooms." I went with similar angles in all the rooms, just so that construction would be a little easier. As for the control room ceiling, I'm not sure what we're considering yet, from what I've read, it seems that ESS would be best, but diffusors could get pricey, huh? AAAAND yes, I do have the control room backwards... I'm still in the process of trying to fix that up, it makes for some random bits of wasted space, however... I'll work on it tonight once the kids are asleep. I kept the walls in the vocal booth back a little form the perimeter wall just to adhere to the ratio, as the room was so small. would this not matter as much with the walls splayed? Thanks again for your input, really appreciate it. Cheers, stu

We have a huge concrete slab of heavy industrial thickness, so it should be a fairly decent base to work from.

To me it sounds like you don't really have too much of an isolation problem: Industrial area, no machinery, nearest traffic a block away, thick massive slab on grade, etc. I may be wrong, but it sounds to me like you don't need to float the floor at all.

At this stage, the walls are not super heavy,

They should be! You still need some isolation, and that implies heavy two-leaf walls, with a heavy two-leaf roof on top of them. Mass is the only practical way to stop sound.

Do we put more money into making the walls heavier, and disregard the floating floor?

I think that's the way I'd go, yes. You have a massive slab on grade. The entire planet is your damping. You have a stand-alone building, with nobody else on your slab. It sounds to me like you have a realy good floor in place, and your real issues are going to be walls and ceilings, doors and windows, electrical and HVAC.

I read a thread where one guy was recommending a cheap option to be rockwool tiles under two layers of T&G floor plates. Thread is here:

Paul Woodlock is also posting on that thread. Listen to him! Eric Desart also posted on that forum. Listen to him too!! Those two are right.

In regards to the room ratios, do they not matter as much when walls are splayed, or is it just that it is so difficult to calculate that it's more trouble than it's worth?

This gets complicated, and I'm still not 100% there myself, but here goes: THere are three types of modal issues that your room will have: axial modes, tangential modes, and oblique modes. Axial modes are the ones where a standing wave sets up between two opposite parallel walls, such as front/back walls, left/right walls, and ceiling/floor. Tangential modes involve two sets of parallel walls: for example, a standing wave that sets up between all four walls, or two walls plus the floor and the ceiling. In other word, the wave "bounces" around off four surfaces before it gets back to where it started from, going around in a circle, (OK; it isn't actually that simple, but it helps to think of it like that!). And oblique modes involve all six surfaces. The wave "bounces" off all six walls before it gets back where it started, and goes around again. So, if you splay your two side walls, for example, then you have not changed the front/back or ceiling/floor axials at all, and neither have you changed the front/ceiling/back/floor tangentials. They remain exactly the same. And all you have done to the obliques and the other tangentials is to change the path length: They now take a slightly different path to get back to the same point, but they still get there. Changing path length implies that you have change the frequency, which means you have moved the modes up or down the scale. The question is: which way and how much did you move it? That's what is harder to calculate. For parallel walls it is simple. For angled walls, not to simple. So, to answer your questions, splaying walls will shift around your modes, getting away from what is predicted by normal room mode calculators. There will still be a ratio-relationship between the modes, but now it is much harder to predict what the ratio is. And once again, some modes / ratios will remain unchanged, and some will not, depending on which surfaces you splayed. So far so good. And this is where I run out of useful advice. Obviously, if you have a ten meter long wall and you happen to build it just slightly wrong, splayed by merely 0.1 mm at one end, then the modal re-arrangement is minimal, hardly worth talking about. Normal calculators and room ratios still apply. But if you built that ten meter wall with a five meter splay, then that's a huge difference! Ratios and calculators are out the window. The question that has me stumped, and that nobody has answered yet in a way that I can understand it, is: how much does the wall have to be splayed before the modes are so far off that normal mode calculators and ratios no longer apply? If I could answer that, then I could answer your question too! (I guess that wasn't much help, was it???)

the 1/1.5/2.1 I chose simply because it was the best fit for the room.

That's cool, and makes sense. As long as you got them from a good source and for a good reason!

Are you saying that ratios aren't as important in live rooms? Why is that?

Once again, it gets down to that question of "how much is tool much?". Live rooms usually have non-parallel walls, and are not rectangular, so ratios don't apply anyway. Rhetorical question: How do calculate the ratio for a room that is 4 meteres wide at the front, and six meters wide at the back? What number do you use for "width"? You can't use "4" or "6", since they only apply at the front and back. You can't average it ti "5" either, since that also only applies at one point. So what number do you use? That's the issue. If you are stuck with a perfectly rectangular live room and you cannot do anything about it, then sure, calculating ratios will help you understand the room better, and treat it accordingly. But if your room is no-rectangular, with randomly angled walls, then ratios just don't really apply. Having said all that, don't make too big a deal out of ratios: They are important in the sense that you mos definitely should stay away form "bad" ratios, and should aim to get close to "good" ratios, but don't tear out your hair or take out a second mortgage to buy the land next door, just so you can gain that extra 7 cm that you need to get the "perfect" ratio. Ballpark is good enough. Treatment is just as important. Perhaps more so...

I went with similar angles in all the rooms, just so that construction would be a little easier.

Makes sense! As long as you have a reason. that's my purpose in asking: to keep yo double-checking what you are doing, get you thinking, not just following "rules" blindly. Such as ratios....

from what I've read, it seems that ESS would be best, but diffusors could get pricey, huh?

It's a small room: diffusers won't be much use to you. Most diffusers having lobing issues close up, and it takes space for those to even out. diffusers make sense in big rooms, not so much in small rooms.

I kept the walls in the vocal booth back a little form the perimeter wall just to adhere to the ratio, as the room was so small. would this not matter as much with the walls splayed?

Correct! If the room had to be rectangular, then ratios matter more. But once you angle walls it gets complex, and "bigger is always better" in acoustics. I'd say use all the space you can, especially in a booth. Apart from anything else, it also gives you more space for interior treatment without cramping the artist! And don't forget HVAC. Musicians and engineers need to breath occasionally.... :) - Stuart -

Thanks again, mate, you've been a huge help. I just need a spare minute to change the design around now... Got so much on my plate now, I need a bigger plate. I'll keep you posted on how it's going. Cheers, stu

"The question that has me stumped, and that nobody has answered yet in a way that I can understand it, is: how much does the wall have to be splayed before the modes are so far off that normal mode calculators and ratios no longer apply? " MHBofA Page - 281 Splaying Room Surfaces --------- Nonrectangular Rooms "If the decision is made to splay walls in an audio room, say 5%, a reasonable approximation would be to analyze the equivalent rectangular room having the same volume." I understand this to suggest that 5% is about all it takes to make things more unpredictable, from Mr. Everest experience. Like I said, not a direct answer but ends the search for me.

I built a studio where one ceiling section was at 12 degrees and the other was at 6. The 6 slapped back, the 12 didn't.

Ok, so... I have had another chat with our designer/builder, and I've asked about his floating floor method. It seems it's not as involved as I had imagined. His method seems to be not so much a design that is calculated based on the space it's for, but rather a design that he has used before that seemed to work well, and a design that his father before him used many times before to good success. His father, by the way, is Richard Priddle, a name most of you from Australia have probably heard in acoustic circles. He passed earlier this year, a huge loss to many people, including the acoustic design industry. Now, I'm no acoustician, so I'll just relay the method so you can possibly lay out the pluses and minuses. It involves: "Construct a grid using 90x45 lengths of pine, spacing each length at 600mm. Where the timbers cross at 600mm place 100x100 squares of 'Regupol' between the slab and the grid, every 300mm where there's an excessive load.. eg; walls.. Line the grid with Tontine Acoustisorb 2. Finish by laying down two layers of of 19mm 'Yellowtongue' chipboard, one layer following the length of the room and one the width." Any thoughts? This sounds like it would be fairly effective, the Acoustisorb, (which I believe is a ventilation sound absorber) would fill the air gap, minimising the air spring effect. Does that sound right? I had a look at the site yesterday, the concrete slab doesn't seem to connected to the walls anyway, as there is a thin line between the floor and the wall, about 1-2mm. I know it's not much, but perhaps it's already been slightly decoupled to assist with noise dampening. (It is zoned heavy industrial, but is also about 300 meters away from the nearest residential zoned block. I really think I need to get someone who knows a shiteload more than me to come check out the site... Like I said... Any thoughts? Cheers, stu

Did you read the one I linked you to, here? viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8173 That should answer all your questions about how to float the floor correctly. I always get a bit concerned when I see people say things like "it seems to have worked OK before"... There are basic principles of physics behind successfully floating a floor, which involve a whole series of calculations to ensure that each of the resilient supports is compressed exactly correctly, with the correct weight pressing on it, and the correct dimensions. Put too much weight on even one of those pads, and it bottoms out, short-circuiting the entire floor. Don't put enough weight on even one of those pads, and it will short-circuit in the exact same fashion. In other words, even one single pad without the exact correct weight distribution on it destroys the isolation of the entire floor. And since the floor is supporting different weights at each point, it isn't quite so easy as just doing a regular spaced grid with the same dimension of pad at each point.... Read through that thread, to get an idea of what is involved.

I had a look at the site yesterday, the concrete slab doesn't seem to connected to the walls anyway, as there is a thin line between the floor and the wall, about 1-2mm. I know it's not much, but perhaps it's already been slightly decoupled to assist with noise dampening.

It sounds like it might well be decoupled, in which case you do NOT need to float the floor! Why would you decouple it twice???? Then again, that gap might be something else. You should probably find out what it is. In any event, decoupling does not help damping: they are two different things. decoupling helps isolation, and damping also helps isolation, but they are not the same.

the Acoustisorb, (which I believe is a ventilation sound absorber) would fill the air gap, minimising the air spring effect. Does that sound right?

Not exactly! The spring is still there: all the absorption accomplishes is to damp resonance in the gap, not to reduce the spring effect. - Stuart -

"I had a look at the site yesterday, the concrete slab doesn't seem to connected to the walls anyway, as there is a thin line between the floor and the wall, about 1-2mm" Pretty standard building practice. The exterior structure goes up in your case concrete walls were poured and then expansion joint material is installed at grade around the perimeter of the interior and then the slab is poured. As always, everything matters. The exterior of the building has a separate footing and the interior slab may have no footer or may have a footer or but may have a turned down edge or not...can't tell without seeing it or demoing a part of it to tell. As an "if" one thing that could reconnect the slab with the exterior of the structure is "if" there is a footer on the interior slab that sits on the same earth...especially if it is rock or some type of material that basically flanks the two back together. "The most noise we get is trucks driving on the opposite side of our block." This can be coming from many areas, windows, doors, the roof...maybe the road is bridged to the wall footer that is also bridged to the interior slab? Do you have or can you get a stethoscope? This may go a long way in helping to determine if, when trucks go by, does the interior slab get excited, you can also tap on the structure walls and listen to the slab to see if it gets excited here as well. I guess I am saying that you can build a separate floor but if you do not have to then your monies would thank you so they can be better used in another area more deserving.

Ok, so I've been back to the drawing board. I've redesigned the control room so it's the right way round now, and ditched the airlock. I think it's looking pretty decent, I measured out the rooms with brickies string at the warehouse the other day, walked around. Felt pretty good in terms of size for what we're after. Now just have to figure the HVAC and get an engineer in to see if we really need to float these floors... BUT one thing at a time, how's this design looking? Cheers, stu

Much better! :) - Stuart -

I'd wear that sweater! Hope to see pics of the build, Stu.

For sure, I'll keep you posted. I'll have another million questions as I go, so have your opinions ready. ;)

Ok, quick question here. Rather important one too... When building the walls, I'm going for a {2G16, WS90, AIR25, WS90, 2G16} construction, (2 layers gyprock, 90mm wood studs stuffed with rockwool, 25mm air gap, more studs, 2 layers gyprock.) NOW, does this mean that EVERY wall must be of this construction? What I mean is, take the 3 pics I've uploaded. wall_1.png is the 1st scenario, whereby common walls are double walls, plus there is a 2nd "skin" wall around the entire complex. wall_2.png is the 2nd scenario, and the one I think is most likely, whereby common walls are double walls, but the 2nd "skin" wall is only applied where the studio is not backing onto the existing concrete walls, (as in the control room on my design, as posted before.) wall_3.png is the 3rd scenario, where EVERY single wall is a double wall, making common walls quadruple walls That seems like overkill. Ok, hope that makes sense... Probably a pretty obvious question for most of you, so please forgive my ignorance on this one, just want to get it right without wasting money needlessly. Cheers again, stu

#2 is correct. The others are both 3-leaf and even 4-leaf in places. :shock: - Stuart -

Thought so, but had to make sure. Thanks again! stu

]Hi y'all. So, I've downloaded SketchUp, been figuring out how to use it. I'm still pretty shabby with it, but overall it's a pretty intuitive program, if a little frustrating at times. I've attached some drawings of the plans as they stand so far, so you can see the elevation of the ceilings. The ceiling heights are: Control room: 2430mm - 3000mm Main room: 3000mm - 3500mm Smaller rooms: 2500mm - 3000mm Now, the angle in the control room is only 6 degrees at the moment. Stuart, I recall you mentioning that the angle should be at least 12 degrees. Is this absolutely critical? I read that as long as walls were splayed minimum 6 degrees it was satisfactory, but is it different for a ceiling? If it is, I could raise the back to 3500mm and lower the front to 2345mm, that would create a 12 degree angle, but it looks damn weird on the sketch, (see pic provided), I also thought I could peak the roof 3500m back from the front wall. The roof peak would be 3500m high, front wall 2750mm high, rear 3000mm high. This would give me a 12 degree angle too. (see pic attached) I'm not too keen to go to the trouble of peaking the roof unless it's necessary. Any thoughts everyone? Now, the peaked ceiling in the main room is currently 9 degrees. Is this angle as crucial as the control room? If I drop the walls at the edge by 150mm - 200mm I could get 12 degrees. I'd like to keep as much height as I could in that room though. The smaller rooms are at 6 degrees too. Again, I would ask if this is a crucial angle. Such small rooms, I guess each measurement is more important. So, again, any thoughts? Cheers, stu

Stuart, I recall you mentioning that the angle should be at least 12 degrees.

Yup. 12 degrees is optimal.

I read that as long as walls were splayed minimum 6 degrees it was satisfactory, but is it different for a ceiling?

Actually, it is the same! If you splay each wall by 6 degrees, then you have a 12 degree angle between them. The same with ceiling and floor, but since you probably don't want to slope your floor, then it all has to go on the ceiling.

If it is, I could raise the back to 3500mm and lower the front to 2345mm, that would create a 12 degree angle, but it looks damn weird on the sketch, (see pic provided),

The most critical area is the front half of the room, so you might be able to do a "dual angle" ceiling, where the front half rises at 12 degrees, and the rear half is much more gentle. But even so, if you can't get 12 degrees, then it's OK to go with whatever you can get. It will help some, just not as much as it could.

I also thought I could peak the roof 3500m back from the front wall. The roof peak would be 3500m high, front wall 2750mm high, rear 3000mm high. This would give me a 12 degree angle too. (see pic attached)

I wouldn't do that: That means the ceiling in the rear part of the room would be sloping DOWN again, and quite steeply, causing all kinds of reflections and other strange stuff. In the very worst case, I wouldn't let any part of the ceiling go beyond horizontal: sloping back down again is not a good idea. As long as you can get a reasonably good angle on the ceiling as far back as the mix position, then you can flatten it out beyond that. Or, you could even leave the entire ceiling flat, and just hang a hard-backed cloud over the mix position....

Now, the peaked ceiling in the main room is currently 9 degrees. Is this angle as crucial as the control room?

Once again, if that's what you can do, then that's fine. In the live room, I'd aim to get as much height as you can in the room, even if it means sacrificing angles.

The smaller rooms are at 6 degrees too. Again, I would ask if this is a crucial angle. Such small rooms, I guess each measurement is more important.

For side walls in booths and live rooms, you can do whatever angle you want, pretty much, and you don't need symmetry there, so you can basically move walls around at random. For example, you could angle just two of the walls, and leave the other two perpendicular. Or add an extra wall, to have five walls in the room. Or whatever makes sense to get the best possible size and height out of the available floor space. Overall, that seems to be what you are doing, and it looks fine from here! - Stuart -

Hi - really interested in your studio project looks very good. Do you have any more details on the room dimensions? Also what are your thoughts on air-conditioning? Would split systems be too noisy? You could just turn them off when recording I suppose. Whats the name of your band? Cheers, Sledge

Hey there. I've decided after much deliberation that this is the stage to really get it right, so I've hired John Sayer to do the final design. I must say, it's a relief to hand it over to someone who really knows what he's doing. I can actually sleep at night without dreaming of MAM wall construction, roof angles and control room shapes and the eternal question of whether to float the fricken floor... I've attached a couple of pics so you can all see what we're starting out with. Should be exciting to watch it grow into a studio. I'll keep you all posted. Hi Sledge, I've also attached a pic with more accurate dimensions. I'm not a full book on aircon, but I'll have more details for you once John has designed that aspect of the build. Our band is called Eskimo Joe. Stay tuned for more. Cheers, stu

so I've hired John Sayer to do the final design.

Smart move!!!! :D - Stuart -

eskimostu wrote:

Hi Sledge, I've also attached a pic with more accurate dimensions. I'm not a full book on aircon, but I'll have more details for you once John has designed that aspect of the build. Our band is called Eskimo Joe. Stay tuned for more. Cheers, stu

Thanks heaps for the info Stu! Eskimo Joe!!! I really like your music! Amazing who you will run into through your life! I'm looking to build my own studio in the next 12 months, currently i'm working at the Olympic Dam mine near Roxby Downs putting money aside specifically for the project. I play drums, bass and guitar and have always wanted to build an enviroment to work on my own and other peoples projects. The new Allen & Heath GS-R24 is due to be released soon which is the first desk I have in mind to put into the studio. Worth reading about if your looking at equipment http://www.allen-heath.com/UK/news_story.asp?view=601. I really hope your studio comes together as you wish and I look forward to hearing some new material from your band. Big fan!! All the best and good luck with the project, would really be interested in hearing about the progress. Cheers, Chris