Stuart's Insanity Studio: Design phase

[WayneD]

That's definitely a question for the experts Stuart. I know the stuff you are talking about, they use it to put tile on walls here in the states. There is also Greenboard that is also used for tiling walls. It is basically a more water resistant form of drywall. Hmmm, good question man.

W

[Ro]

Hai Stuart,

As the mantra goes: "Mmmmmmmmaaaaaaassss", I'd say "sure, that'll work". If it's fire resistant (at some level) and easy to work with I'm sure to say "yeah". If it's even doable within your budget I'd say "yeah, dude!"

GB is great value for low money (relative); good mass, low cost, easy to work with and can stand a serious amount of heat/fire. If another product has the same props, go for it.

If my budget would allow it, I would use lead sheets all around... but you know... sigh.

[Soundman2020]

Cool! Thanks for the comments, guys. I'll take that as my permission slip to use this stuff, at least on the front and back walls, where space is the tightest. I might still go with drywall on the sides, where I have a little more room.

And just to keep you all with your thinking caps on, I had another idea:

How about if I borrow from the "beef up between the outer leaf studs" plan, and also the "inside out inner leaf" plan, so that I just put ONE layer of this Duraboard stuff on the studs, then put the other layer(s) between the studs of the inside-out inner leaf? That way, I save another half inch on each end. Once again, a half inch doesn't seem like much, but for me it is a lot. This space is so tiny....

So I'd have a layer of 8mm Duraboard on the outside of the inner-leaf studs (the side that is "inside" the wall, directly facing the air gap), then another two (or maybe 3) layers of Duraboard cut to shape fitted between the studs, in the normal "veefing up" manner, caulked and cleated.

Does that make any sense? Too much work to save a half inch? Worthwhile?

I'm really trying to milk every last millimeter out of this matchbox...

- Stuart -

[Ro]

To start with; beefing up the outer wall is always good.
Placing MASS is one thing, placing it on the right location is another. As long as it's 2 leaf, disconnected and with some absorbent material in-between.. .you got my blessing.

In-side-out-walls; seems like a nice idea altho I've always had the feeling it's gonna end-up with too much wool exposed (too much absorption). I'm not a fan of those... and just to save an inch or two.. hmm. But hell, if it works for you, once again; go for it, dude!

[Soundman2020]

Thanks, Ro! Another permission slip! Thanks!

I'm re-designing as we speak, based on "Duraboard" for critical dimensions, with beefing up inside the inside-out wall...

In-side-out-walls; seems like a nice idea altho I've always had the feeling it's gonna end-up with too much wool exposed (too much absorption).

I'm a bit concerned about that too, but I figure I can always deal with that by covering it with something to recover the highs, and particularly I'm thinking of using John's "slot resonator wall", which should do the job of both dealing with problematic frequencies (I can tune the slots) and keeping reflecting surfaces on the room. In the worst case, I can always take some wool back out of the wall, and cover the empty gap with something.

But I doubt it will come to that: Don't forget this is a really tiny space: My longest dimension is barely 2.8 meters! In such a small room, I figure that more absorption can only help. If I ask Ethan, I bet he'll say that I don't have enough!

My biggest concern is the ratio, right now. I'm trying really hard to move it away from being a cube (it nearly was, a while back), towards some semblance of a usable ratio, but that's hard too: Getting close to a half-decent ration means that I have to shrink the room, and it's already so tiny!

AAAAARRRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!! How I wish I could change the laws of physics, but only for my studio!


- Stuart -

[Soundman2020]

ROOM RATIO QUESTION FOR THE ACOUSTIC GURUS:

I'm having a real hard time adjusting my room dimensions to be both practical and also matching a good ratio. I'm aiming for Sepmeyer's first ratio, since that's the closest fit to the almost-cubed dimensions of my control room. The goal is therefore 1 : 1.14 : 1.39. I'm getting close by nudging things here and there, but I'm still a bit off in the length dimension, and I cannot extend that any more as I'm right up against the property line.

I'm also swapping "Height" for "Width", otherwise my ceiling would be so low as to be impractical and my CR would be so wide that it would eat into the LR space.

Right now, I'm at a ratio of 1 : 1.14 : 1.25 (or in centimeters, it is 226 (W), 257 (H), 282 (L) )

However, I'm at the stage where, in order to get any closer to Sepmeyer 1, I'd have to make the control room so narrow as to be uncomfortable and bring the ceiling height down to an impractical level. (OR knock a hole through the wall and "borrow" eight inches from the neighbors garage!!!!)

So my question is: How bad is that as a ratio? Do I really need to shrink the height and width more, or is this OK? If I have to, I will, but I'd really like to avoid that, as it is already so small...

One thing I could do (but would also like to avoid) is to eat another couple of cm out of my MSM air gap, but I'm already down to 3 1/4 inches (8.5cm). I guess I could drop that down to 6 cm (2 1/2"), which would improve my ratio by two entire whopping tenths of a decimal, to 1 : 1.14 : 1.27!!!! But is it really worth it?

Is this ratio terribly bad? Can I live with it? Any suggestions on what to do?


- Stuart -

[Ro]

I wouldn't worry about ratios too much. In an already tiny space, it's a shame to make it even tinier just to adhere to the ratio rules. If tiny is what you got, then that what you should/can use. And, ratios are not the holy grail. Making a room exactly like that is a VERY hard job to do.

Adjust the room with acoustic materials. (No, Ethan would say "you can't have enough BASS absorption" ).

[carsten_d]

Hey Stuart,

though I'm definitely not the one this question was adressed to but maybe this link (I guess you already checked your ratios with Bob Golds' Room Mode calculator...?!)
and/or at least the "Bonello"-curve at the bottom of the page will show you - theoretically - that your room won't become too bad...


From all I have read so far...I'd follow Ro's advice or read again Eric Desart's comments and thoughts about ratios...

Greetings,
Carsten

[jlemon]

I wouldn't worry about ratios too much...

I agree with Ro. Your room is already problematic due to its tiny size and any attempt to adjust the room's ratios to be on the spot would be pointless. You got them down close enough, I would stop worrying about them and turn my attention to more important issues that would actually determine the studio's functionality, isolation and acoustic treatment. Just my opinion...

Keep a cool head,

John

[Soundman2020]

Thanks guys! Your comments are very much appreciated.

That's three "permission slips" in three days! I'm on roll here: better go out and buy some lottery tickets...

You folks have confirmed what I suspected anyway: better to have a functional, practical room that is slightly off on the ratios, than an excellent ratio but impractical room.

Thanks for the link to the Bob Gold calculator. That thing is amazing! I'd been using another one (I think it was Eric Desart's spreadhseet? Not sure where I downloaded it from) which is also great, but I like the way the Bob Gold calculator displays and graphs the results. Based on that, I feeling really comfortable with my current dimensions, so I'm just gonna take your advice, stop fiddling around with millimeters, and get on with other, more important design details!

Once again, thanks to all of you guys for your input and "permission slips".

My next questions will probably be back on the subject of soffits...


- Stuart -

[Soundman2020]

I Finally Found It! (I think ? )

André, if you are around, this one is especially for you.

Regarding the tilt angle of speakers, I finally found the reference for the 10° number. It comes from the EBU paper titled "Subjective assessment of audio quality", which you can find here, if you are interested:

http://www.ebu.ch/en/technical/trev/trev_274-hoeg.pdf

Page 3, paragraph 2.3: "The height of the acoustical centre of the loudspeaker monitor should be at least 1.2 m above floor level and the inclination angle of its reference axis in relation to the horizontal plane should not exceed 10°."

Bingo!

Well, if its good enough for the EBU, then its good enough for me! So I'm sticking with my 7° angle for now, and I know I can take it to 9 or 10 if I really need to. I'm finally feeling comfortable with that! Whew! I can sleep again at nights, now....

ZZZZZZzzzzzzzz......

- Stuart -

[Ro]

well.... ain't that funny
dream on Stu (zzzzz)

[NativeLuv17]

Thanks 4 sharing Stuart!!!!!!!!!

[AVare]

I Finally Found It! (I think ? )

André, if you are around, this one is especially for you.

Thanks Stuart!

Andre

[Axiom Studio]

Greetings Stuart,

How's it going? Any updates?