Another (cheap?) Sound Dampening Idea!!

Ok, so I'm not one to speak much in terms of sound dampening and making rooms sound good. But I came up with this method:
 
Take a rather large, pretty flat bin with holes in it (like a flat basket) and fill it with insulation/dampening material... then wrap in fabric! Makes for a permanent OR mobile dampener that is lightweight and easy to hang.
 
Now like I said, I'm not a room-guy, and heck, my studio doesn't even HAVE any permanent solution, so I can't say much for if this thing would work... but I definitely would like to give it a shot.
I need to find a CHEAP, decent solution for reducing those reflections, and hopefully I can put some of these things tougher this summer.
 

It would probably dampen something, although without testing it and knowing more it's a shot in the dark to guess how effective it would be.I'm not sure if you mean a small vocal kind of dampener or are you talking about something that would handle the whole room?...because if you mean the latter then you probably don't have a prayer that it would do much for an entire room.
 
I have heard some of your recordings and it doesn't sound like a serious problem on my end. Some pretty well known mixers here don't use anything (as a vocal trap)...I guess it depends on your room...if you understand mic patterns and you know what a tight cardoid mic is....you might get away with it ok. One thing I sometimes do is put my back up against a big sound absorber i.e. a closet full of clothes will do. Whatever bounces off the wall in front of you will come back into the closet and should mostly be absorbed. If the mic is an effective cardoid, it should pick up little or nothing in front of you, but if you wanted to be doubly safe treat that too.

Another (cheap?) Sound Dampening Idea!!
 
"Two words?" Ball gag...

1. Be permeable (or resonant)
 
Keep in mind that this doesn't necessarily mean the container has to have holes in it. If the sound you want to absorb passes through the container's "shell" it can be absorbed by something inside the container. The container's shell will reflect some frequencies and pass other frequencies. 
 
2. Have significant mass (3+ lbs per square foot)
 
High quality furniture will often have 2.75 to 3 lbs per cubic foot cushion stuffing. You can have some good absorption and a nice comfortable place to sit at the same time.
 
3. Be physically as large in surface area as the longest wavelength you want to affect
 
The most effective absorption occurs at 1/4 and 3/4 wave lengths. The placement of an absorber with respect to the direct source and or the early reflections will have an impact on the respective frequencies it is effective at absorbing.
I make mention of this to highlight the idea that a chunk of absorbing furniture placed in the middle of a room can be very useful. In other words the absorbers don't just have been located up on a wall.
 
 
Additionally, it seems as if anything you can place in a corner to absorb the bass energy that collects in them will help make a noticeable difference in the clarity you hear in a room. It's a great place to start and it doesn't require too much thinking.
 
best regards,
mike
 
 
spelling

Ya know, Rob, you are totally right, I realized... I'm sure it's better to just do it right once and be done with it for years to come rather than have a temporary, not-even-complete solution. Guess I'll just have to do that, haha

mike_mccue
 
2. Have significant mass
 
3. Be physically as large in surface area as the longest wavelength you want to affect
 

So what your saying is that if I am sitting or standing in a room I am acting as my own bass trap.

quantumeffect
So what your saying is that if I am sitting or standing in a room I am acting as my own bass trap.

Yup. Better if you get somebody else to stand in the corner, though.
 
Everyone who's played live knows that the sound you get during the soundcheck will always be different than the sound you'll get that night with the room full of people. People do in fact make excellent acoustical absorbers. My own density is high enough that I should get a discount on concert tickets in recognition of my contribution to the room sound.
 
Here in Seattle is one of the finest acoustical spaces in the world, a concert hall named Benaroya Hall. Its design actually addresses the problem of varying absorption depending on how many human bodies are present. The absorption characteristics of each seat matches the absorption of a human body, so the room sounds the same whether it's empty or sold out.

best solution i've found, for damping early reflections:
 
http://www.audimutesoundp...proofing-blankets.aspx

Yowch. Those Audimute blankets are kinda pricey at 3 for $169. I'll stick with packing blankets from U-Haul.
 
At least the vendor is honest about their acoustical properties, promising only that they're as good as acoustical tile or foam.
 
 

I've tried a lot of them too, and wool outperforms cotton, pound for pound, any day of the week.
 
best regards,
mike

I'd probably be better off spending my time learning why Monster Cables are better than all the rest. 
 
 
 
 
There are two things a studious person will want to know about that product, but the website doesn't have the info available.
 
1) How many pounds does each blanket weigh? If they tell you what it weighs you can compare it to other blankets that are made out of the same cotton and wool stuffing and figure out how much each choice costs per pound.
 
2) Where is a list of absorption coefficients at 125Hz, 250Hz, 500Hz, 1000Hz, 200Hz, and 4000Hz. A NRC rating of 0.65 is a meaningless figure.
 
 
 
 
 
Studying absorption characteristics is fairly basic stuff. Blankets do absorb sound. In general, the heavier they are the more they absorb. In general, the more complex the fiber stuffing is the more they absorb sound. In general, the thickness of the material will coincide with the item's effectiveness at absorbing lower frequencies.  
 
One thing to keep in mind is that it is very easy to hear how a blanket deadens mid range and treble frequencies, but the frequencies that most often need to be deadened are the ones that pass right through the blanket. The point is that it is easy to make a room sound dead but not necessarily nice. 
 
Bob Golds has gone to the trouble of posting some detailed absorption info where you can see what frequencies are most often absorbed by various materials:
 
http://www.bobgolds.com/AbsorptionCoefficients.htm
 
 
A wonderful tidbit of wisdom can be found in the middle of Bob Olhssons' webpage:
 
"One thing that makes a room sound good is a reasonably flat reflected frequency response. When you treat a room, it’s really easy to have a lot less top-end and mids coming back than lower mids."
 
There is a lot of easily accessible info available for anyone who wants to study.
 
I think the most important thing is to maintain a focus towards determining which frequencies need treatment and which solutions will help you further that goal.
 
 
best regards,
mike

Yes, I agree.

i'm just trying to help mike.
 
i don't know about all the science
 
and frankly, i do not care.
 
i DO know, that i have used regular blankets, wool and cotton....
some have been heavy, some light weight.
 
i also know that i have used movers blankets.
 
and that this product (which i actively use) works much better than any of the above.
 
 
that is all.
 

You're right about moving blankets; for general acoustic treatment they're next to useless. I was actually making a joke referring to U-Haul blankets. They are, however, handy for draping over a kick drum or a guitar amp.
 
I was also making a perhaps too-subtle joke about the claim that Audimute blankets are as effective as acoustical foam. Acoustical foam isn't very effective. But if it meets your requirements, the Audimute products are less-expensive than Auralex foam.
 
Mike's point is that rigid fiberglass is a more efficient absorber at the frequencies that matter. It's also cheaper than any other equally-capable material.