Help modifying my drum room's sound- pictures and sound clip

Dear forum, Please see below for a sound clip and pictures. This room is approximately 10'Wx13'Lx7'H. I like the way it sounds currently, but I have two goals currently remaining: #1. Finish the room so it doesn't look like a disaster. #2. In the finishing process, make the sound a little brighter without shortening the reverb decay. If anything, I'd like a little longer high frequency ambience to play with. Again I like the basic room tone as it is. I added pictures and a sound clip for detail. The kick is facing one of the long walls which is torn up plaster over concrete. the floor is torn up tile over concrete. the other walls and ceiling are double layer 1/2" drywall on RC channel with insulation inside. As you can see, the paper is pretty torn up from a previous acoustic treatment. Any suggestions on how to finish this room out economically and still keep the sound plus a little more brightness? I'm pretty sure at this point all surfaces need a makeover. I've considered pine siding or plaster over the drywall surfaces and concrete wall, and pine or tile flooring. Maybe a coat of shellac over the surfaces for added brightness? Of course, I'm open to other opinions, based on my sound clip, that would improve the sound, given that I discovered that I really like this super live sound on my drums, and I much prefer this to a deadish room. Been there done that and don't care for it. Thanks in advance for suggestions. Sincerely, Dean Mitchell

Maybe this might help you: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=11881

Thanks for this. Really, I have treated the room like your link shows before. It's way too dead. In my opinion, what is acoustically "correct" in many peoples eyes sounds really bad for recorded music- especially drums. With drums, what is lost in the room is lost in the heart of the instrument. Electronic reverb can't save it. I'm mostly looking for any tips on finishing the room to actually make it a little more live without altering the current sound drastically. The title of my thread seems a little misleading, in hindsight.

Really, I have treated the room like your link shows before. It's way too dead.

Then you didn't do it right! :) Your room right now is a resonant cave, with modal issues at several frequencies in the kick, tom and snare range (but with large gaps in the spread at the low end, due to the tiny dimensions), and specular issues up where the cymbals live (and the snare attack). Plus, the room has a REALLY low ceiling that will splatter your overheads with major comb filtering artefacts, making your cymbals sound tinny and harsh. The room ratio is OK, almost right on Louden's best ratio, but that's about the only good thing about the room: the walls look to be parallel so you must be having major issues with flutter echo, too, and it is VERY small. At a guess, I'd say its really, really hard to track cleanly in that room right now. The recording you provided isn't much use as a sample, since it is purely kick and snare (no toms, hat or cymbals). A recording of the full kit, played both fast and slow, loud and soft, would help to get a better idea of what is going on in there. But even from that recording you already provided the problems are grossly evident: the long clangy tails on the snare, the dullness of the kick attack, and the general lack of clarity already indicate what huge issues you have with that room! (Of course, some of that might just be the poor mic placement technique). Personally, I'd follow Ro's advice for the basic modal treatment, then put full floor-to-ceiling angled broadband slot walls on at least two of the side walls to keep it nice and live, and maybe some checkerboarded 703 panels on parts of the other two walls, to deal with the flutter. And a thick layer of 703 on the ceiling, directly above the kit, to make it possible to use overheads without suffering too badly from comb filtering. That would help a lot, but that room is never going to be really good for drums: it is way too small. - Stuart -

Another thing might be to get those drums facing the long dimension of the room, with the drummers back against the wall rather then the drums shooting into the wall like it is right now.

Soundman2020 wrote:

Really, I have treated the room like your link shows before. It's way too dead.

Then you didn't do it right! :) Your room right now is a resonant cave, with modal issues at several frequencies in the kick, tom and snare range (but with large gaps in the spread at the low end, due to the tiny dimensions), and specular issues up where the cymbals live (and the snare attack). Plus, the room has a REALLY low ceiling that will splatter your overheads with major comb filtering artefacts, making your cymbals sound tinny and harsh. The room ratio is OK, almost right on Louden's best ratio, but that's about the only good thing about the room: the walls look to be parallel so you must be having major issues with flutter echo, too, and it is VERY small. At a guess, I'd say its really, really hard to track cleanly in that room right now. The recording you provided isn't much use as a sample, since it is purely kick and snare (no toms, hat or cymbals). A recording of the full kit, played both fast and slow, loud and soft, would help to get a better idea of what is going on in there. But even from that recording you already provided the problems are grossly evident: the long clangy tails on the snare, the dullness of the kick attack, and the general lack of clarity already indicate what huge issues you have with that room! (Of course, some of that might just be the poor mic placement technique). Personally, I'd follow Ro's advice for the basic modal treatment, then put full floor-to-ceiling angled broadband slot walls on at least two of the side walls to keep it nice and live, and maybe some checkerboarded 703 panels on parts of the other two walls, to deal with the flutter. And a thick layer of 703 on the ceiling, directly above the kit, to make it possible to use overheads without suffering too badly from comb filtering. That would help a lot, but that room is never going to be really good for drums: it is way too small. - Stuart -

:finger: :blah: Stuart, you are just super rude and condescending. Aside from that, thank you for the reply. It's clear to me that you don't like the sound as I do, and as others do. http://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much- ... -clip.html Oh well- there's no accounting for taste! :) It appears that my response to Ro has perhaps somehow scuffed your huge ego a bit. Your extreme treatment suggestions would reduce the liveness of the room far too much for my taste. I'd really like some advice on my original question about finishing the room without altering the existing sound too much, and possibly making it a little more live. Stuart, maybe you could try to step back from your conventional thinking a bit. But something tells me that you are going to struggle with that. :horse:

Dean Mitchell wrote:

Soundman2020 wrote:

- Stuart -

:finger: :blah: Stuart, you are just super rude and condescending. Aside from that, thank you for the reply. It's clear to me that you don't like the sound as I do, and as others do. http://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much- ... -clip.html Oh well- there's no accounting for taste! :) It appears that my response to Ro has perhaps somehow scuffed your huge ego a bit. Your extreme treatment suggestions would reduce the liveness of the room far too much for my taste. I'd really like some advice on my original question about finishing the room without altering the existing sound too much, and possibly making it a little more live. Stuart, maybe you could try to step back from your conventional thinking a bit. But something tells me that you are going to struggle with that. :horse:

Maybe on gearsluzt thats how you guys talk to each other, but not welcome here. The little birdy emoticon is for fun, not insult. If I listen to your tracks on my PC desktop speakers at my office it sounds great. But if I listen in my studio I can already hear my mastering guy saying what do you want me to do with those drums. But with that said, its your personal preference. Stuart was simply trying to help with your sound and how it will translate in a mix enviroment. Obviously thats not what you were asking but treatment is a big issue in a studio. To answer your initial question directly...Concrete is about the brightest most reflective material you can get. As far as how to make it look nice maybe you should get an interior designer to look at your space and give you some ideas for colors. Most of what we do here is proper layout, construction and acoustics. We ususally leave it up to the owner on how he/she wants it to look when its finished. Peace Tom

You came for advice (or maybe not) on how to make your room sound the best it possibly can. You got it. You didn't like it. That's YOUR problem, not MINE, so I won't be missing any sleep over it. :) The only thing you can do to make your room more "live" than it already is ( :shock: ), is to coat all the walls with a thick layer of extremely dense concrete all around, while trying to make the shape of the room as spherical as possible. Then seal the surface with paint, for that final touch of extreme brightness. Then move your drums as close as possible to the geometric center of the room, place all your mics up against the walls at random locations, and enjoy! :lol: (Maybe you could also add glue some carpet on the ceiling, and egg crates on the walls, for the final edge.) That's all the advice you'll get from me. If you prefer the acoustic advice you get at Gearslutz ( :shock: :!: :? ), then go for it! I'm sure yo will undoubtedly find many like-minded folks over there, who will gush ecstatically over your drum sounds. But over here, most of us prefer the professional approach, the one that real studios use, to capture the kind of true drum sounds that you hear on actual, real albums that people actually go out and buy, and listen to, and love... Bye. Have fun in your cave... - Stuart -

Fella told me once, "never argue with an idiot, they will pull you down to their level and beat you with experience". That said, Stuart you do have an overbearing way that new folks take offense to. The balls in your court...don't beat people over the head with it ;)

Dean - unfortunately drywall is not a very good reflector - I'd line the room in angled timber - by angled I mean break the wall into sections with angular shapes on the walls and ceiling and in the corners - have no absorption in the room at all just shiny wood surfaces - add some tile/stone surfaces if you have it. That will extend the reverbtime in the highs as you suggested.

John Sayers wrote:

Dean - unfortunately drywall is not a very good reflector - I'd line the room in angled timber - by angled I mean break the wall into sections with angular shapes on the walls and ceiling and in the corners - have no absorption in the room at all just shiny wood surfaces - add some tile/stone surfaces if you have it. That will extend the reverbtime in the highs as you suggested.

Dear John, Thanks for this. Just so I'm clear here, you are talking about mounting the wood flat on the wall surface, in two dimensional angled patterns, right? And I take what you mean by "in the corners" again to be varied angular patterns of wood installed flat on the walls and ceiling in proximity to the corners, not actually cutting across the corner of the room's floorplan at an angle, correct? Lastly, "shiny wood" refers to a shellac finish or something similar? I appreciate your patience in confirming this. Sincerely, Dean

yes - cutting across the wall corners to create more angles - add angles to the ceiling instead of being flat - the idea is to make the room more diffuse - by shiny I mean varnish!

John Sayers wrote:

yes - cutting across the wall corners to create more angles - add angles to the ceiling instead of being flat - the idea is to make the room more diffuse - by shiny I mean varnish!

Ahh yes, I get it now- thanks very much!

John Sayers wrote:

Dean - unfortunately drywall is not a very good reflector - I'd line the room in angled timber - by angled I mean break the wall into sections with angular shapes on the walls and ceiling and in the corners - have no absorption in the room at all just shiny wood surfaces - add some tile/stone surfaces if you have it. That will extend the reverbtime in the highs as you suggested.

With all due respect John All consdering, if that will bring up his 400 to 18K ( flat lined ) plus bring up his 40 to 50 hz (lacking) Plus reduce the phase correlation I can totally agree with your assement. But not knowing how the ( Shiny ) wood will react I have no response to that analogy. My undestanding was "NOT" to diffuse in that small of a room. :?: These are levels that can be handled properly by good acoustics and mic placement in your room. The simple fact that Stuart was trying to explain, but that was side tracked by the misunderstanding of his post, and the mudd slinging there after. :wink: The "basic wall configuration" ( squared room) 10'x13'x7' ? has varied effects on recordings, but one must keep in mind that mic placement and over all engineering skills have much more to do with the sound you end up with. What we all try to say is that the room dimensions are the end all....thats not necessarily true.!!!.... Obviously compression/limiting meet another criteria......... in the end it's an engineers knowledge that drive the final sound. But back to the basics... you need a good room, (live or dead or somewhere in the middle) great pre-amps and someone at the helm that can guide the ship. OK I'm done Sorry John if I stepped side ways :) Peace Tom

fair enough Tom - also i have no problem with what Stuart suggested - I just offered a solution I used back in the 80s where I built a room in a studio that was totally lined in wood - it was no bigger than Dean's room but we tried to add as much angular reflection in the room by angling corners (all of them). Just the other day I was talking with a drummer and that room came up as he's lived in the same town and recorded in it. He loved the room - said it was one of the best sounding rooms for his drum kit.

John Sayers wrote:

fair enough Tom - also i have no problem with what Stuart suggested - I just offered a solution I used back in the 80s where I built a room in a studio that was totally lined in wood - it was no bigger than Dean's room but we tried to add as much angular reflection in the room by angling corners (all of them). Just the other day I was talking with a drummer and that room came up as he's lived in the same town and recorded in it. He loved the room - said it was one of the best sounding rooms for his drum kit.

And I totally respect your insight into knowledge of how to make a room sound better. Thats what your site is all about. :roll: All I ever want is the best drum sound I can get. ( the most difficult sound to get!!!!) And a solution is always better than an argument ...always :yahoo: Peace Tom

i would agree with the concept of adding as many angles as possible and keeping the room as live as possible and still treating for room response. you could add some scattered absorption later to give the room the final touches if needed.

Thanks gullfo, thats gives me some ideas. I like the concept of making the room totally live to begin with, and adding modular treatments for tuning. That way I can sneak up on the right sound.... Being so small, just a 4x12 guitar cabinet and small rack of gear brought in the room changed/shortened the reverb tail significantly. I didn't like it much. The room seems to sound best as empty as possible, so I'm curious to see how the angled wood treatments will affect things, given the overall volume they take away from the room. I'm leaning toward laminating 1/4" varnished plywood directly to all existing surfaces (3/4" on the floor) for a start- hopefully that will extend the hf tail a little and keep the current low and mid character roughly the same...then I can try some of these angled treatments a little at a time. Honestly, in its current state, this little room is giving me a drum sound that, to my ear, is musical and works nicely in a mix. Attached is the original clip mixed with some guitar and bass. Whatever else I can get is just gravy :D

"(3/4" on the floor) " Looks like you already have a vct (vinyl composite tile) floor, right? That's a fairly reflective surface, maybe clean and wax it might give you back a few extra high frequency rays bouncing around the room but adding plywood is redundant.

Yes, its something like vct...the thing is there's tiles broken and missing all over- maybe I could save it..but I thought if I glued down some 1/2" ply (maybe with a moisture barrier) and then bradded down a veneer of 1/4" ply parquet style to that I'd have a fairly cheap makeover with similar acoustics. I was thinking as the 1/4 ply wears out, I can just pry it up and replace it as needed...

gullfo wrote:

i would agree with the concept of adding as many angles as possible and keeping the room as live as possible and still treating for room response. you could add some scattered absorption later to give the room the final touches if needed.

Hi Glenn - welcome back :thu:

Dean Mitchell wrote:

Yes, its something like vct...the thing is there's tiles broken and missing all over- maybe I could save it..but I thought if I glued down some 1/2" ply (maybe with a moisture barrier) and then bradded down a veneer of 1/4" ply parquet style to that I'd have a fairly cheap makeover with similar acoustics. I was thinking as the 1/4 ply wears out, I can just pry it up and replace it as needed...

It is exactly like VCT...but directly underneath that is...concrete, a hard reflective surface. Redundant, spend your money in areas that need it and if you do not know what areas those are...read on...we all need more information in this area. Good to see you Glenn, I didn't know after our discussion last week it would be so soon a come back. I ran up on your e-book @ scribd.com: Recording Studio Construction Process Guide a few days after we talked. Good read and it is good to see your face in the place ( to quote my good friend).

xSpace wrote:

Dean Mitchell wrote:

Yes, its something like vct...the thing is there's tiles broken and missing all over- maybe I could save it..but I thought if I glued down some 1/2" ply (maybe with a moisture barrier) and then bradded down a veneer of 1/4" ply parquet style to that I'd have a fairly cheap makeover with similar acoustics. I was thinking as the 1/4 ply wears out, I can just pry it up and replace it as needed...

It is exactly like VCT...but directly underneath that is...concrete, a hard reflective surface. Redundant, spend your money in areas that need it and if you do not know what areas those are...read on...we all need more information in this area.

I'm really just not that into a concrete floor. It's also likely there's other issues surrounding the removal of this tile that complicate matters. That's probably what I should have said first, rather than "it's something like VCT".. Pardon me. But maybe I'll look into this idea a little more. It just seems like plywood is the next best/cheapest/attractive thing short of stripping the floor to concrete or retiling.

Thanks also for the great link!

I understand. I thought you were just looking for a more reflective surface but you want an "attractive" and reflective surface. Good answer ;)