I am still drawing plans for my new studio.
I have managed to make most all walls nonparallel .
In treating the ceiling (which is the only large scale parallel problem) with aborber panels, I was wondering if hanging them parallel to the floor optimizes the amount of energy absorbed, or whether I should angle them to partally reflect sound and break up the the ceiling / floor parallel surfaces.
(geez... I dont think I have used the word "parallel" this much in my life!)
Thanks for your help.
Tom
Absorber placement
-
tmix
- Posts: 255
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 9:49 pm
- Location: Mansfield, Texas
- Contact:
Absorber placement
Tom Menikos
T-Mix Studios
Mansfield Tx
T-Mix Studios
Mansfield Tx
-
Ethan Winer
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1063
- Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 3:50 am
- Location: New Milford, CT, USA
- Contact:
Re: Absorber placement
Tom,
> ... aborber panels ... or whether I should angle them to partally reflect sound <
Absorbers don't reflect, they absorb. So put them parallel to the ceiling, and spaced away 2 to 6 inches (if you can) so they'll absorb to a lower frequency.
--Ethan
> ... aborber panels ... or whether I should angle them to partally reflect sound <
Absorbers don't reflect, they absorb. So put them parallel to the ceiling, and spaced away 2 to 6 inches (if you can) so they'll absorb to a lower frequency.
--Ethan
-
tmix
- Posts: 255
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 9:49 pm
- Location: Mansfield, Texas
- Contact:
Thanks
Thanks Ethan,
I figured that the Absorbers main function was to take the brunt of the acoustic energy thrown at it and absorb it. I had read some other articles about how some folks were using panels(on side walls mainly) more at an angle to the primary source of acoustic energy coming at it and the statement was made that panels absorb more if perpendicular to the energy source rather than the sound grazing at an angle where some sound would actually reflect off.
It got me to worrying a little was all. I'd had plans to suspend the panels about 6 to 8 inches off the ceiling pretty much across the whole ceiling.
the ceiling is 9 ft and the room is an "L " shaped room about 11 by 26 ft with a 11 by 9 ft jog to it. The floor presently is to be cement with some type of coating on it.
I had planned on 2" thick compressed fiberglass. Would thicker be of any significant improvement?
I figured that the Absorbers main function was to take the brunt of the acoustic energy thrown at it and absorb it. I had read some other articles about how some folks were using panels(on side walls mainly) more at an angle to the primary source of acoustic energy coming at it and the statement was made that panels absorb more if perpendicular to the energy source rather than the sound grazing at an angle where some sound would actually reflect off.
It got me to worrying a little was all. I'd had plans to suspend the panels about 6 to 8 inches off the ceiling pretty much across the whole ceiling.
the ceiling is 9 ft and the room is an "L " shaped room about 11 by 26 ft with a 11 by 9 ft jog to it. The floor presently is to be cement with some type of coating on it.
I had planned on 2" thick compressed fiberglass. Would thicker be of any significant improvement?
Tom Menikos
T-Mix Studios
Mansfield Tx
T-Mix Studios
Mansfield Tx
-
Ethan Winer
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1063
- Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 3:50 am
- Location: New Milford, CT, USA
- Contact:
Re: Thanks
Tom,
> the statement was made that panels absorb more if perpendicular to the energy source rather than the sound grazing at an angle where some sound would actually reflect off. <
This is true, but small angles probably don't do much. Better in that case is to use fluffy fiberglass or sculpted foam. Though I have to say even 705 at a shallow angle works very well.
> I had planned on 2" thick compressed fiberglass. Would thicker be of any significant improvement? <
Thicker is always better. Even at first reflection points that will add a little more bass trapping in the room, which is always welcome.
--Ethan
> the statement was made that panels absorb more if perpendicular to the energy source rather than the sound grazing at an angle where some sound would actually reflect off. <
This is true, but small angles probably don't do much. Better in that case is to use fluffy fiberglass or sculpted foam. Though I have to say even 705 at a shallow angle works very well.
> I had planned on 2" thick compressed fiberglass. Would thicker be of any significant improvement? <
Thicker is always better. Even at first reflection points that will add a little more bass trapping in the room, which is always welcome.
--Ethan
-
tmix
- Posts: 255
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 9:49 pm
- Location: Mansfield, Texas
- Contact: