John Sayers' Recording Studio Design Forum Archive

About 45%

Sounds about right for that room. For some reason, it seemed like more than that when I added it up mentally...

That will have to be balanced, of course, by using some type of foil or wood strips over part of it, to keep the highs in the room.


- Stuart -

Why does john use such a large hole in the bottom of his flush mount baffle? In his plans it shows a 12" hole for the cold air intake. Is that necessary? I was only plannimg on a 15" x 5" hole at the floor as i figured that would draw in enough air through convection. Or is it for the hangers? If its for the hangers, does he exppse the entire bottom foot across the width of the baffle, or just under the speaker?

Just some health check perspectives......

Mode Calculators are based on fully reflective boundaries. Am I correct in thinking that only your floor is hard?
I recommend basing decisions on Measurements rather than Predictions.
Do you wish to increase TL from the current? Your first post suggests not.
Note a deadened room will in effect radiate about 3-6dB less than a lively one.
Skimming I notice quite a bit of void above that plasterboard ceiling.
This ceiling is one of the two biggest areas, the other one being hard.
Let's think about that. Could we have a whole absorbent ceiling inside out?
If needed could the loss of TL be made up above the absorbent?

DD

In his plans it shows a 12" hole for the cold air intake.

... That's not the cold air intake! That's to expose the hangers to the room, so they can do their job of bass trapping. It ALSO allows cold air in, yes, but that's not the primary purpose.

I sometimes use larger areas when I can afford it. 12" is minimum.

- Stuart -

Soundman2020 wrote:

In his plans it shows a 12" hole for the cold air intake.

... That's not the cold air intake! That's to expose the hangers to the room, so they can do their job of bass trapping. It ALSO allows cold air in, yes, but that's not the primary purpose.

I sometimes use larger areas when I can afford it. 12" is minimum.

- Stuart -

Gotcha! I was just getting ready to close my baffles and put on the fabric. So glad i checked!!! I had a feeling it was for the absorbtion and not the venting. I'll cut a bigger hole. Thanks man!

DanDan wrote:Just some health check perspectives......

Mode Calculators are based on fully reflective boundaries. Am I correct in thinking that only your floor is hard?
I recommend basing decisions on Measurements rather than Predictions.
Do you wish to increase TL from the current? Your first post suggests not.
Note a deadened room will in effect radiate about 3-6dB less than a lively one.
Skimming I notice quite a bit of void above that plasterboard ceiling.
This ceiling is one of the two biggest areas, the other one being hard.
Let's think about that. Could we have a whole absorbent ceiling inside out?
If needed could the loss of TL be made up above the absorbent?

DD

Hi DD, the floor, "infinite" baffle, and a small area of ceiling in the back of the room is reflective. I'll be putting up some t-fusors stuffed with fiber or pressure traps in the bare area, depending on how things measure. TL is not a huge concern. I should be done with the buildout in a month or so. I'll post pics, mdats, and sketchup files for all when im done.

Again, the mode calculators are based on the entire surface area being fully reflective, down to the lowest LF. Concrete bunker.
There are other issues. Most calculators treat all modes equally, which is nonsensical.
Furthermore many of the classic ratios are suited to Concert Halls and do not scale at all.
I may seem a bit emphatic here, but Stuart is also cautioning you. One experience in particular, I optimised a green field studio room to the nth degree using this fascinating tool. http://forum.studiotips.com/viewtopic.php?t=2235
I got every square centimetre up to the planning limit. My dimension passed all 4 different criteria.
The resulting build had a dominant 50Hz boom. Ouch!

I am curious as to the angled cloud? I guess a slight benefit in angles of incidence, a slightly varied depth. Visually nice to get away from the right angles too.
Given that is is nearly full width, I would suggest going full width. There is a lot of LF absorption to be had at those wall ceiling corners.
Given that you are going the full fibre route, I would too, I recommend a skim through boggy's pictures of builds in progress. You might get some framing tips.

DD

I understand that good ratios mean little. This thread is over 2 years old. I'm almost done with the build and unless its just god aweful, im not ripping anything out. Dirac will hopefully ice my cake. The only corners not burried in at least 12" of fiber, most are 36" deep, are the floor/wall corners on the side walls.

Gotcha! I was just getting ready to close my baffles and put on the fabric. So glad i checked!!! I had a feeling it was for the absorbtion and not the venting. I'll cut a bigger hole. Thanks man!

Photos!!!

I'm dying to see photos of how your place is coming along! And maybe offer some constructive suggestions on how to improve it even more!


- Stuart -

Looking nice! Have you run any REW tests yet?

http://www.johnlsayers.com/phpBB2/viewt ... =3&t=21122 .

- Stuart -

Not yet, im putting up all the basic treatment first, and ill evaluate from there. Im also integrating dual 10" subs/ddrc-88a mimidsp. I'm hoping i can smooth out the LF response at LP with sub placement and then let dirac help with alignment and any other hiccups.

It would be good to run REW right now, to get an idea of where you are with the treatment, so you can still change it if it is not doing what needs to be done. It would have been great to have an initial "baseline" REW test with the empty room, so you could compare the results at each stage in the treatment process. Sometimes a treatment does not produce the effect you were expecting, or it does produce it, but then it does other things too that you were not expecting... If you don't have that "baseline", all is not lost! ... It's still not too late to stat testing as you build: that can often show up things that you were not expecting. Digital tuning can only help if the acoustic problems are already taken care of, fully. You cannot EQ anything that has a phase problem, for example....


- Stuart -

I must start checking the dates on these threads. Those photos show a very 'Pro' look. Well done.
What speakers are you going for? Have you bought them and the subs and minidsp already?
DD

Yes, i already bought everything. 2 x eve audio sc208, 2 x krk krk10s, 1 x ddrc-88a BM minidsp. I dont really want to install speakers till construction is done. Its a tight space and i dont want to damage anything. I could clean everything out, install speakers, test, and remove, but thats a HUGE pita. I'll roll the dice and trust physics and the advice/knowledge Ive received from all my smart friends. I think it'll be good.