I had a quick look there and to me it looks like they're trying a 'bit to hard' telling everyone how much better than GG they are. I'm not saying the data isn't accurate, but look on the GG website and you won't find them telling everyone how much better than quietglue they are. I can only tell you that the GG product works from my own personal experience. Maybe there's someone on here (or other forums) who has used quiet glue and can back up their claim in the real world. all the best, SteveMy understanding is that QuietGlue is the only genuine alternative to Green Glue and that performance is virtually identical. Worth checking out their site if you haven't already.
New Studio Build - Suburban House Extension
Originally posted at johnlsayers.com, topic 19992.
There is a whole history of competitive behaviour between these two companies, with both claiming their product is superior, even if by only a small margin this way or that. There is no doubt that Green Glue came on to the market first and that they weren't happy when a competitor finally arrived some years later. QuietGlue were the new kids on the block (10 years ago) so they had to openly compare themselves to Green Glue if they were to be taken seriously. Thus, they acknowledge the comparison openly on their website and still do. It's no surprise that you won't see any mention of QuietGlue on the GG website. They would rather not draw your attention to the fact that there is another product on the market that can do the same thing, usually for less money! By all accounts, GG is an effective product with loyal customers and high customer satisfaction. But they were never going to maintain a monopoly forever. Slowly but surely, through word of mouth on forums just like this, QuietGlue has been eating away at that monopoly. I've done quite a bit of research on this and all I can say is that all the recent test reports I've seen rate the two products more or less equal, and almost all the online discussions I've read reveal customer satisfaction with QG to be just as positive as it is with GG. I went looking for a definitive winner, and it can't be found as far as I'm concerned. Heck, I want the best for my studio like everyone else. If QuietGlue is a new discovery for you then I completely understand your wary eye, but the way I see it...Coke or Pepsi? :wink:I had a quick look there and to me it looks like they're trying a 'bit to hard' telling everyone how much better than GG they are. I'm not saying the data isn't accurate, but look on the GG website and you won't find them telling everyone how much better than quietglue they are.
A further question regarding insulation, this time for acoustic panels and bass traps. Given that OC703/705 is not readily available in Australia, I've been researching comparable products. While reading the following thread at Gearslutz (9 years old and going strong - https://www.gearslutz.com/board/bass-tr ... traps.html) I came across a product called Tontine Acoustisorb. The specs seem promising. They have 4 different densities, the highest being Acoustisorb 3 which is 48kg/m3. (Tech specs available here: http://www.tontineinsulation.com.au/technical-data) Bradford Ultratel is the only other Australian product I'm aware of with that particular density. But Ultratel is fiberglass and Tontine's Acoustisorb is polyester. Is there any significant difference between polyester and fiberglass insulation in terms of acoustic performance? The stats show both products as being relatively equal, but I'm not too familiar with these products so I seek further insight from those whom I call "Acoustiwise". In closing, may I say "Oh my Lord we get charged through the nose for this kind of insulation in Australia - literally 4 times the price of equivalent products in the USA."Stuart has said '30kg/m for fibre glass' and '50kg/m for mineral wool' (rockwool). You might have missed that bit. The two products are different and have different gas flow resistivity properties. Generaly in oz we use fibreglass or polyester insulation. Rockwool is available but I generally don't see it around as much, and I don't believe any one has the gas flow resistivity numbers for polyester. (but I could be wrong) You don't want low density (10-15kg/m) fibreglass for your cavity insulation (the pink or yellow stuff) as it doesn't have high enough gas flow resistivity, and conversly, you don't want 50kg/m fibre glass as it has too much (and acts like more of a solid wall). The best fibreglass product I found for cavity insulation in Oz is bradford soundscreen 110mm batts at 24 kg/m. You could also use Fletcher FI32 which is 32kg/m but if I remember right, the price basically doubles :shock: I did use FI32 for internl CR treatment though. .....and yeah, get ready to have a mild heart attack at how much money you'll spend on getting the right kind of insulation. You won't need supertel for the cavity, but soundscreen isn't cheap either :lol: all the best, Steve
As i understand it, Fletcher FI32 is the equal of OC703 and FI48 is the equal of OC705. I believe they are made under the same licence or something to that degree.....it's been a few years since I did the research.Given that OC703/705 is not readily available in Australia, I've been researching comparable products.
I did look at Acousrisorb, but I don't think they have gas-flow-resistivity numbers for polyester, or at least, didn't when I was looking at it. Just because it's the same density as the OC 705 fibreglass product in the 48kg/m range, doesn't men it has the same GFR.They have 4 different densities, the highest being Acoustisorb 3 which is 48kg/m3
again, gas flow resistivity. Not sure if there's a figure for polyester.....Is there any significant difference between polyester and fiberglass insulation in terms of acoustic performance?
.....tell me about it..... :roll: all the best, SteveIn closing, may I say "Oh my Lord we get charged through the nose for this kind of insulation in Australia - literally 4 times the price of equivalent products in the USA."
For posterity's sake, Fletcher FI132 is 32kg/m3, FI48 is 48kg/m3. OC703 is 3 pcf = 48 kg/m3. OC705 is 6.0 pcf = 96 kg/m3.As i understand it, Fletcher FI32 is the equal of OC703 and FI48 is the equal of OC705. I believe they are made under the same license or something to that degree.....it's been a few years since I did the research.
Had a feeling you might say that. Thanks mate!Just because it's the same density as the OC 705 fibreglass product in the 48kg/m range, doesn't men it has the same GFR.
good to see :) hopefully that information will help some other australian studio builders. maybe I'm thinking of OC 701 being the same as Fletcher FI32...... all the best, steveFor posterity's sake, Fletcher FI132 is 32kg/m3, FI48 is 48kg/m3. OC703 is 3 pcf = 48 kg/m3. OC705 is 6.0 pcf = 96 kg/m3.
As a guide, just 1 year ago I bought 16 sheets of FI FI48 Rigid Glasswool Sheets 2400x1200x25mm for $300.
I'd bought 50mm over 10 years ago, and think the current pricing is 'relatively' cheaper.
I've also seen Knauf have similar spec SemiRigid sheets, but don't know all the relevant specs, so went for Fletcher as it is for all intents the same as the OC7xx .