John Sayers' Recording Studio Design Forum Archive

Ok here is one more version (mirrored from the last one)...I like it better than "layout 7" because the live room has a better feel to it...however it still seems awkward in comparison to "layout 4" plus I have no idea how to predict the acoustics of such a room (any input here?)...

Ok here is one more version (mirrored from the last one)

Nice!

I like it better than "layout 7" because the live room has a better feel to it...

Me too! Much better.

however it still seems awkward in comparison to "layout 4" plus I have no idea how to predict the acoustics of such a room (any input here?)...

My input: you don't need to predict anything about it! It's a live room, it has plenty of non-parallel angled surfaces, and it is a decent size. Looks good to me!

You don't need to calculate anything, for two reasons: 1) It's a live room, not control room! So it SHOULD have some "character" and coloration to it, and 2) You will still treat it acoustically, as needed, after it is built!

On that last point, you'll measure the acoustic response of the room once the shell is in place (using REW), to see how bad it is, and based on that you'll install some acoustic treatment, then measure again, install more treatment, measure more, install more, etc. You can make it sound any way you want. Maybe even install variable panels, gobos or other things that you can use to CHANGE the acoustic response of the room, as needed for each session. No matter how well you calculate and predict the response of the room in advance, it will never behave exactly as predicted, and you will always need to measure how it is really responding anyway.

Besides, calculating the response of that room is just as hard as calculating the response on your original shape: they are both impossible to calculate by hand, and they'd both need FEM/FEA software and a good operator to calculate. That = $$$$! Probably not what you want to spend your money on.

I reckon that's not a bad shape. There's still some room for improvement (and your bathroom is back in the cavity again! ), but I think overall it's not a bad layout.

Others might have different opinions, though. That's just what I think about it...

- Stuart -

Great! That's good to know about the live room. I wasn't sure how much it mattered to know the acoustics of a room like that going into construction. I realize now why it is nowhere near as critical as understanding the acoustics of the control room...at least on the front end. That being said, I think I'm going to start working on two different 3D models based on layouts 4 and 8. I love the drum booth in layout 8 but I love the live room in layout 4. It would be a trade off.

Does anybody else have any input on the floor plans? I know Stuart would probably love to have some help in guiding a newb!! haha

Here is Layout 8 with the added concrete on the left (like what I had to do for layout 4)...this makes the live room now only 20sq ft short of my goal and allows for a more "useable" left side. What do you all think of the sight lines from the drum booth? Are they satisfactory? I could angle the walls more but I don't really want to sacrifice any more of the live room.

As if you even want to see another design...I made another one lol. This is basically layout 4 but with some modifications to the bathroom that allow for a larger ISO booth. Plus I changed the control room walls a bit and added another ISO in the top right. I really like the feel of the live room in this layout in comparison to layout 8.1 and I gotta say I, I like the idea of having two ISO booths vs. one drum booth. I tend to like big room sounds for drums, so this would allow for some added amp isolation.

I tried to rough in some sight lines between the control room and top right ISO booth based on the mix position. In the virtual tour of the space, there was a clear visual path, given the control room doors are glass (even though it's hard to tell in the drawing).

What are your thoughts on this one versus layout 8.1?

Currently working on the 3D models...it's just taking me awhile.

Trevor

Any thoughts?

Hey everybody, I'm back again... it has been a crazy month to say the least. I adopted a stray pup, my house had a random electrical fire, I've gone camping and to Bonnaroo, and my roommate is finally all moved in... Lots going on. Anyways my new neighbors finally moved in so I can't have anymore late night jams!! ahhh time to get moving on this studio! A couple quick questions before I post my 3D model...

since I am looking for about 70db of isolation between the studio and the outside, how much of an air gap should I provide between my double walls?

And since I can't put drywall on the outer leaf for the outer walls (or can I????) ...what should I do to add more mass? Stuart had mentioned extra plywood...is that really enough?

at this point I was thinking this for wall assembly (listed from inside out):

drywall - green glue - drywall / studs with insulation - air gap (1-3" ???) - studs with insulation / plywood (1 or two layers?) - hardy plank


and then for the inner walls it would be the same except the second leaf would be just like the first with double drywall and green glue.

Thanks!!!
Trevor

Here is the layout I have become pretty much set on at this point...I've begun the 3D model based on this design. I love every aspect except for the minimal visibility between the booth and live room (glass doors), however this is the least of my concerns considering I will mostly be using it to iso amps while the musicians all stand together in the live room. It is the only design where I have been able to achieve my primary goal: a huge live room with a good sized control room that maintains good visibility.

What do you guys think?? Stuart has already put so much time in I would love to hear from some others... any takers? lol

Thanks again to whoever chimes in...and again and again and again to Stuart.

Trevor

Hi,

Following your design thread ... wish I could offer anything significant

Two things I'd question on.

The bathroom between the booth and the live room. You show only a single wall to
close in the bathroom. The concern I'd ask about ... is there sufficient isolation from
things like flushing water that would NOT cause issue when recording, say, in the booth
or live room.

2nd thing, and maybe minor at this design point, are the swing directions of the 'dual' doors.

I know it can be tough ... but the mantra that has been given by one of the 'Wise Ones' ... design/plan is 90% of the effort .... '

watching and still learning

The bathroom between the booth and the live room. You show only a single wall to
close in the bathroom. The concern I'd ask about ... is there sufficient isolation from
things like flushing water that would NOT cause issue when recording, say, in the booth
or live room.

Yep, that is a problem! Not only that, but the bathroom is actually in the "air" between the leaves of ALL the walls, so the bathroom noises will be heard in every room...

I'm also wondering if there isn't a better way of laying out the rear of the control room, to try to improve symmetry a bit. It isn't critical in the rear, but is still nice to have.

watching and still learning

That part NEVER ends! I have come to the conclusion that it is impossible to learn everything there is to know about acoustics, no matter how hard you try! I spend hours each day, been doing so for years, and I'm still just scratching the surface... But it sure is fun!

- Stuart -

Thanks for the replies guys!!

Been thinking over the design some more...tried a corner control room in the top left but I think it makes the live room too awkward.

In regards to the bathroom, I am not worried about people using it during recordings since it's not going to be a commercial studio. We just won't use it when the light is red! The single wall helps save space in the booth and honestly with a double wall around the bathroom, the doorway into the booth is too small for a door to fit, so I'm trying to accommodate for that issue as well.

Do you all have opinions regarding what I said in my second to last post about the wall assembly? ...how thick the gap should be for a desired goal of 70db reduction?

I'm still trying other floor plans for assurance purposes but I would be utterly speechless if I had a space like this in my back yard so I'm getting the itch to move onward with things...

Trevor

In regards to the bathroom, I am not worried about people using it during recordings since it's not going to be a commercial studio. We just won't use it when the light is red! The single wall helps save space in the booth and honestly with a double wall around the bathroom, the doorway into the booth is too small for a door to fit, so I'm trying to accommodate for that issue as well.

I think you aren't understanding the real problem here: It isn't about using the bathroom or not, but rather about the isolation plan itself. It's not that you have a single wall around the bathroom: you don't have any wall at all, acoustically! I also don't see any problem with the "the doorway into the booth is too small", since there is no doorway at all from the bathroom into the booth! The doorway goes to the live room, not the booth, and there is plenty of room for a second door there.

- Stuart -

Hey Stuart, I think I didn't explain it very well. In order to have a double wall around the bathroom, this would mean I'd be adding a second wall around the single wall that I already have drawn in. This would make the passageway between the booth and live room too skinny to add a doorway (it's already cutting it close as is). I wasn't referring to the bathroom doorway into the live room. The reason this is a problem is because the toilet is fixed in that particular location.

Does that make sense when looking at it?? I'm trying my best to explain this...I know it's weird.

maybe this layout helps? consider Stuart's comments on the exterior isolation layer needing to be beefed up to act as part of the isolation scheme and then only the inner set of walls is needed which in turn should give you reasonable space for connecting the rooms.

Wow Gullfo! Thanks for the great input! That's such a detailed drawing, is that sketchup?

Anyways, your drawing helps me see this a little more realistically...I keep forgetting how thick these walls are actually going to be with the drywall! And also how important it is to include that in my floor plan drawings ( ).

So I am wondering what it would look like without the booth in the top right...gonna test out some alternate versions. I really like the flow though...does the control room have enough depth? I guess I am confused by how the corner control rooms fit within the category of "good acoustic ratios" since they are so shallow.

gullfo wrote:consider Stuart's comments on the exterior isolation layer needing to be beefed up to act as part of the isolation scheme and then only the inner set of walls is needed which in turn should give you reasonable space for connecting the rooms.

Yea I guess my question is how much do I need to beef up the outer leaf (what materials?), how many layers of drywall do I need on the inner leaf, and how big of an air gap do I need between those two leafs in order to achieve the goal of 70dBs of isolation? The Rod Gervais book does not go into that much detail regarding STC ratings of wall assemblies and I can't seem to find literature online that is any more thorough. Actually...just found this which shows a lot more assemblies in detail but still does not provide examples of walls that have STC ratings of 70.

thanks again
Trevor