jsykes
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 631
- Joined: 2004/04/26 23:37:58
- Location: N.C.
- Status: offline
Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
Greetings forum members. I have a humble DAW in a spare room in my home. I am trying to work on improving the acoustics. My question is will square pieces of flat foam (about 2" thick) work in place of acoustic tiles for treating the walls? I have unlimited access to the foam squares via my job in the shipping industry. Does the material need to be ridged like acoustic tiles or just on the wall? Also, will bubble wrap mounted to the walls do anything? I appreciate the advice, as I can acquire these materials for little or no cost. Is this an acceptable solution for a novice/part timer, or just a waste of time? Thanks. Jeff
Sonar Homestudio XL Dell laptop Echo Layla Takamine EAN-15C Ibanez Artcore Electoharmonix, Digitech, Tubescreamer, AdrennaLinn Advice from forum members
|
lazarous
Max Output Level: -61 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1461
- Joined: 2005/09/15 11:55:42
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/17 16:12:59
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: jsykes Greetings forum members. I have a humble DAW in a spare room in my home. I am trying to work on improving the acoustics. My question is will square pieces of flat foam (about 2" thick) work in place of acoustic tiles for treating the walls? I have unlimited access to the foam squares via my job in the shipping industry. Does the material need to be ridged like acoustic tiles or just on the wall? Also, will bubble wrap mounted to the walls do anything? I appreciate the advice, as I can acquire these materials for little or no cost. Is this an acceptable solution for a novice/part timer, or just a waste of time? Thanks. Jeff Wrong kind of foam, Jeff. Sorry, man! Check www.auralex.com for information about acoustic foam, but www.realtraps.com and www.ethanwiner.com are both even better. Owens-Corning 703 or 705 is better than foam anyway... but you have to fabric to cover it. Corey
|
wogg
Max Output Level: -57 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1819
- Joined: 2003/11/14 16:07:44
- Location: Columbus, OH
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/17 16:33:12
(permalink)
Generally shipping foam is very low density and won't do much if anything, except maybe up in the 10's of kHz. If you've got a variety of foam types to choose from feel for the thicker, heavier variety that doesn't crush easily and you may get some results, but don't count on much. Bubble wrap won't do a thing, except maybe be a bit of a crappy looking diffuser. http://www.realtraps.com/ has some good acoustics info. Edit: I guess I didn't look at Corey's post too closely... same link...
post edited by wogg - 2007/10/17 16:44:52
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/17 17:04:37
(permalink)
Owens-Corning 703 or 705 is better than foam +10! And it's a LOT cheaper than the Auralex stuff! It's usually not stocked at your local home improvement store, but they will order it for you. Or you can go to the yellow pages and call an insulation company, which is how I got mine. 705 is heavier (which is better) than 703, but either will work OK. Either type can be purchased with or without paper backing. If you get the stuff with paper, remove the paper from one side and have the paper side face the room. This will let it reflect some high frequencies. But if you have a small room, the non-paper stuff is better, IMO. 703 and 705 come in various thicknesses, from 1" to 6". It doesn't really matter which one you get, you just double them up until you get the desired thickness. You'll want 4" to 6" for corner traps, 3" or 4" for walls, 2" or 3" for ceiling clouds. Don't attach them directly to the wall -- space them out from the wall at least the same distance as the thickness of the fiberglass. What I did was build free-standing gobos (just frames made out of 1x4s), two feet wide and six feet tall. This avoided having to permanently mount them (my wife vetoed the numerous holes in the wall that would be necessary for that) plus it allows me to reposition them for different situations. Five of them are used to form a vocal booth. Two more are situated behind the mix position. Two more hang from the ceiling. And to answer the question "is this a waste of time?" -- no, it's not. It's probably the single most important thing you can do to improve the quality of your product, and the cheapest to boot. I'd also recommend taking some measurements of your room so that you can identify where the problems are and see the improvement after installing treatments. Get Ethan Winer's 1Hz-step SONAR project. And while you're on Ethan's website, read all the good info he's provided there. One Auralex product I do heartily recommend are MoPads, dense foam wedges that go under your speakers to decouple them from your desk. Forty bucks seems a lot for what looks like a chunk of packing foam, but they really do work well. One last bit of advice, in the vein of cheap/free improvements you can make: improperly-placed monitors can cause a lot of acoustical anomalies. Make sure your monitors are at least 6" out from the wall (more if you can manage it), and that they are 3 feet or more from the nearest corner, and they are equidistant from their respective flanking walls.
All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
johnsjam
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 232
- Joined: 2006/03/29 17:35:55
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/17 17:08:55
(permalink)
I guess all those egg crates on my college band's rehearsal space were for naught! ;-)
My music: http://www.johnmansfieldmusic.com/ 2009 Winner in Unisong's International Songwriting Contest with "Crazy"! Sonar 8.5.2 PE Les Paul Studio Fender Stratocaster Fender Telecaster American Deluxe Ash Takamine Acoustic Fender Jazz Bass Guitar Rig 3 Superior Drummer
|
lazarous
Max Output Level: -61 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1461
- Joined: 2005/09/15 11:55:42
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/18 16:08:44
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: johnsjam I guess all those egg crates on my college band's rehearsal space were for naught! ;-) Nah... they were GREAT for reducing the fire safety rating of your space! Corey
|
rumleymusic
Max Output Level: -60 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1533
- Joined: 2006/08/23 18:03:05
- Location: California
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/18 16:59:42
(permalink)
I use packing foam squares from a CD drive box to decouple my monitors from my desk (instead of paying $35 for Auralex pads). For this job, they work great, and were free. I doubt they would do much of anything on the wall, though.
|
themidiroom
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1170
- Joined: 2004/01/21 11:41:56
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/18 17:13:38
(permalink)
Don't forget about cotton fiber insulation. Slightly less expensive than 703 but performs more like 705. The only drawback is it isn't rigid and would need to be in a frame of some sort.
|
droddey
Max Output Level: -24 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5147
- Joined: 2007/02/09 03:44:49
- Location: Mountain View, CA
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/18 17:17:29
(permalink)
I've been buying from ReadyAcoustics, their DIY kits. About $200 will get you three 4" thick 2x4' traps, with 703 inside. You just have to put them together yourself. Or you can do 2 6" traps for about the same price. They also sell the 703 for a good enough price that it's not worth the work to go find another source probably, unless there's one close by that will let you avoid the shipping. It's fairly heavy and large to ship a 6 pack of the stuff. I have 4 6" traps so far, and I need to now pick up another 6 4" traps probably, but I need to wait until I can afford it.
|
jsykes
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 631
- Joined: 2004/04/26 23:37:58
- Location: N.C.
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/18 18:32:44
(permalink)
Thanks for all the input. I'm researching all the options you have brought up and will move ahead. I appreciate the responses. Jeff
Sonar Homestudio XL Dell laptop Echo Layla Takamine EAN-15C Ibanez Artcore Electoharmonix, Digitech, Tubescreamer, AdrennaLinn Advice from forum members
|
DonnyAir
Max Output Level: -66 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1201
- Joined: 2004/12/18 16:37:31
- Location: Akron, Ohio
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/19 09:25:36
(permalink)
Generally shipping foam is very low density and won't do much if anything, except maybe up in the 10's of kHz. If you've got a variety of foam types to choose from feel for the thicker, heavier variety that doesn't crush easily and you may get some results, but don't count on much. Bubble wrap won't do a thing, except maybe be a bit of a crappy looking diffuser. Also, the common poor man's substitute, like packing foam, mattress padding, etc, can be very flammable. Your best bet is to buy a dedicated acoustic correction material, or fabricate them yourself out of materials that aren't highly combustible. And, as Wogg mentioned, 2" thick packing foam, because of it's thickness and density, won't do anything for lower frequency issues. You might attenuate some upper end a bit, but not to where it would make much difference; and if the stuff you are using is flammable, you've just put a fuel source on your walls in the unlucky event that you would have a fire. There have been many in depth posts on this forum regarding acoustical correction. Look for posts by members like Nprime, Yep and Ohhey. These posts also touch upon the importance of diffusion as well as absorption; in that even if you did have enough commercial foam to cover every inch of your walls, this isn't necessarily the smart thing to do. You don't want to record or mix in an anechoic vacuum, either. general rule of thumb (and I stress the term "general" because no two rooms are alike in what they need or how they respond) is to look at a 50/50 ratio of absorption and diffusion. FWIW
http://www.donnythompson.com
|
jsykes
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 631
- Joined: 2004/04/26 23:37:58
- Location: N.C.
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/19 11:35:12
(permalink)
Donny: That's worth a lot. Thanks. I have learned lots from you in the various forums, and I spent some time last year watching your band's reunion concert. Thanks for the reply. Also, I am working on treating the rear of the room with a couch and a couple of bookshelves, which I've read help with the opposite of the wall treatments. I'm sorry for being an amatauer, but I can't remember which is which (diffusion/absorption). I'm reading about it this week and hope to have it memorized soon. Jeff
post edited by jsykes - 2007/10/19 11:49:29
Sonar Homestudio XL Dell laptop Echo Layla Takamine EAN-15C Ibanez Artcore Electoharmonix, Digitech, Tubescreamer, AdrennaLinn Advice from forum members
|
lazarous
Max Output Level: -61 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1461
- Joined: 2005/09/15 11:55:42
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/19 13:50:52
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: jsykes Donny: That's worth a lot. Thanks. I have learned lots from you in the various forums, and I spent some time last year watching your band's reunion concert. Thanks for the reply. Also, I am working on treating the rear of the room with a couch and a couple of bookshelves, which I've read help with the opposite of the wall treatments. I'm sorry for being an amatauer, but I can't remember which is which (diffusion/absorption). I'm reading about it this week and hope to have it memorized soon. Jeff Jeff: I should have mentioned in my first response: Look into Diffusion before you look into absorption, as well. You'll be surprised how close to 50/50 you need to be to get really good sound. You can make the room totally dead, but you won't be happy. You can make the room totally diffuse, but you won't be happy. If you do both, as well as make sure you have good bass trapping in the corners, you'll be in good shape! Best of luck! Corey
|
jsykes
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 631
- Joined: 2004/04/26 23:37:58
- Location: N.C.
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/19 15:48:54
(permalink)
Corey: Thanks for the tip. From the looks of your website, I ought to just use your studio!
Sonar Homestudio XL Dell laptop Echo Layla Takamine EAN-15C Ibanez Artcore Electoharmonix, Digitech, Tubescreamer, AdrennaLinn Advice from forum members
|
jacktheexcynic
Max Output Level: -44.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3069
- Joined: 2004/07/07 11:47:11
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/21 21:40:15
(permalink)
it hasn't been mentioned, but if you are on a budget you might want to consider real traps' portable mic booth (http://www.realtraps.com/p_pvb.htm). it's about $300, or you could probably build something like it using the 703/705/cotton fiber. the idea is that instead of treating your whole room, you just block reflections coming back at the mic. it wouldn't solve your monitoring problems but it might be a reasonable first step if you do some recording. if you are just going to mix then ignore what i said...
|
lazarous
Max Output Level: -61 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1461
- Joined: 2005/09/15 11:55:42
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/22 16:44:38
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: jsykes Corey: Thanks for the tip. From the looks of your website, I ought to just use your studio! Thanks for the compliment, jsykes! It's not bad. Sadly, those pictures are very out of date. It's actually MUCH nicer in there now! lol Corey
|
jsykes
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 631
- Joined: 2004/04/26 23:37:58
- Location: N.C.
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/22 16:57:02
(permalink)
Sonar Homestudio XL Dell laptop Echo Layla Takamine EAN-15C Ibanez Artcore Electoharmonix, Digitech, Tubescreamer, AdrennaLinn Advice from forum members
|
Rbh
Max Output Level: -52 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2349
- Joined: 2007/09/05 22:33:44
- Location: Indiana
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/28 13:56:22
(permalink)
Here is an other inexpensive absortion trick you can try if you have a few carppentry skills. It involves having some rubber roofing material, basic bat insulation, 1"x 4", and some 1/4" or 3/8 ths plywood. Make up a simple frame out of the 1" x 4". I like making a 3' x 5' or so...back the frame on one side with the 1/4 " plywood, staple the bat insulation to the plywood....vapor side down so that the insulation is exposed. Then lay the rubber roofing material over the frame and staple it along the top and one side of the frame. Then vary the tension as you staple the remaining sides of the material to the frame. It provides a non uniform dampening which will help absorb low frequencies in a wider bandwidth, as well as a general mid and high frequency absorbtion. Then maybe cover the rubber with low cost cotton or even a sheet to dress it up. Hang it or just lean it up against the wall and leave it mobile. Pretty inexpensive if you can get the rubber roofing material sourced cheaply... sometimes a roofing company or general carpenter will have scraps left over after a job that they will just throw away.
post edited by Rbh - 2007/10/28 14:10:36
|
droddey
Max Output Level: -24 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5147
- Joined: 2007/02/09 03:44:49
- Location: Mountain View, CA
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/28 14:14:13
(permalink)
Does anyone have an opinion on these products? I found them whilst googling "Owens Corning 703" Seems to be pretty much the same as Ready Traps. They also sell DIY kits with separate bags and insulation that you put together. They don't seem to really say anywhere whether their pre-done ones come with 703 or 705 or something else. At that price, I'd be concerned that they have something cheaper in them.
|
KenJr
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 742
- Joined: 2007/02/18 02:46:52
- Location: Austin, TX
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/28 15:49:24
(permalink)
|
KenJr
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 742
- Joined: 2007/02/18 02:46:52
- Location: Austin, TX
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/28 17:37:02
(permalink)
OK, so I just bought 96 sq/ft of 703 off eBay ($110 shipped to my door). I'm going to take about 36 sq/ft of it and build a particle board backed contraption to fit over a window that's right behind my mixing desk. I'm going to carve up the rest and spread it throughout my room. That said - I have a couple questions... 1) What kind of stuff do you cover this with? I've seen/felt the 'burlap' type stuff but have no idea where to find it. I'm assuming there are fabrics that do a better job than not to add to the absorption qualities of the device. 2) How do you hang these things? I haven't felt this 703 before so have no idea how rigid it is. I'm assuming that with some super tacky spray and whatever cloth it should at least adhere to one of those 'dig in' panels that attach to the wall with the brads sticking out that you can mount these types of panels to? 3) So, next question - where can you find those 'dig in' brad wall-mount devices? I've seen a couple that ship with pre-made panels but haven't been able to find any individual units. Thanks - any other recommendations?
|
droddey
Max Output Level: -24 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5147
- Joined: 2007/02/09 03:44:49
- Location: Mountain View, CA
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/28 19:05:58
(permalink)
It's quite rigid, but you need something to mount it with. Buy some of the DIY bags from Ready or the other places listed above and put it into those. On the window, if you are doing this to keep out noise, that will be a waste. You need other things for that. This stuff absorbs bass frequencies and it'll it obviously be quieter than just a bare window, but it won't stop the noise by any means. Something more solid would be necessary for that.
post edited by droddey - 2007/10/28 19:18:01
|
KenJr
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 742
- Joined: 2007/02/18 02:46:52
- Location: Austin, TX
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/28 21:05:57
(permalink)
Thanks droddey... nope - the window contraption is more for the absorbtion qualities INSIDE than keeping noise out. I think it will clean my mixing position up to have some absorbtion there behind and center of the speakers. I've got some curtains up, but it's not heavy stuff at all so it's pretty much a massive reflection point right now. $325 for 12 bags??? Jeez - I only paid $89 for 12 panels!!! WTF is this gold lined or what?? Is there anything else that's more cost effective?
post edited by KenJr - 2007/10/28 21:20:40
|
droddey
Max Output Level: -24 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5147
- Joined: 2007/02/09 03:44:49
- Location: Mountain View, CA
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/28 21:14:09
(permalink)
It's a low volume business, so the price is going to be higher. But if you want something that's going to keep them packaged up neatly and keep them from shedding fiberglass all over the place, but not prevent them from doing their job, you need something like that. Just putting the stuff on the wall is non-optimal. You wan it out from the wall a few inches so that it absorbs going in and coming out. So you need something that contains them fully and provides enough stability to keep them mounted out there. As I understand it, directly behind the speakers isn't much of a worry. Very little sound gets there. The corners on either side are important, but if you don't have enough to hit all of the really important points plus the windows, I'd skip the windows first. The important points are the wall corners, the wall/ceiling corners between the speakers and the listening position, and all the points of first reflection (side walls and ceiling) between the speakers and listening position, and the rear wall where the sound hits and reflects back to you.
post edited by droddey - 2007/10/28 21:26:42
|
KenJr
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 742
- Joined: 2007/02/18 02:46:52
- Location: Austin, TX
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/28 21:57:57
(permalink)
bah - I bit the bullet and ordered 10 bags (going to put 2 of the 2" 703's together and mount in the front corners of my room for a bass trap). They actually look pretty well made and come with plastic corners and some mounting hardware. I also like the 'loops' in the bags which will make them much easier to install from the cieling and in the corners as all I'll need is a few circle hooks. Just curious - for the bass trap - does where it's mounted in the corner (high/low/middle) make much of a difference? My ceiling is 9' and my listening position is at about 4 feet. My room is only 11.5' wide so the wall my desk is up against only has barely 3 feet from where the speakers are to the outside wall (and corner). I know ideally, you'd mount several and run them up the entire wall, but I don't want to do that.
|
droddey
Max Output Level: -24 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5147
- Joined: 2007/02/09 03:44:49
- Location: Mountain View, CA
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/28 22:01:07
(permalink)
There's plenty of good info here: http://www.realtraps.com/placing_mt.htm I have my rear wall corners (well, actually I guess in most discussions they are considered the front wall, since you are facing that way, i.e. behind the speakers), so that they cover my listening position and downwards. The sub is on the floor and is in the rear corner firing forward, so I wanted good coverage down lower. They aren't all the way on the floor since then they wouldn't be high enough to get up over my head a bit as seated in the mixing chair.
post edited by droddey - 2007/10/28 22:13:36
|
KenJr
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 742
- Joined: 2007/02/18 02:46:52
- Location: Austin, TX
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/28 23:24:26
(permalink)
Thanks! The unfortunate situation for me is that I find myself in this exact predicament: AVOIDING NULLS In all rectangular rooms the bass response is most lacking at the halfway points - halfway between the front and rear walls, halfway between the left and right sides, and halfway between the floor and ceiling. Therefore, the worst place to sit is exactly halfway back in the room, with your ears halfway between the floor and ceiling, or halfway between the left and right walls. You shouldn't put loudspeakers in those places either. Loudspeaker tweeters should be at ear level, but you should raise or lower them a few inches if needed to avoid having the woofer exactly halfway between the floor and ceiling. Likewise, while left-right symmetry is important for proper imaging, you should offset your listening position a few inches to either side to avoid being exactly halfway between the left and right side walls. I have the absolute worst listening environment per that statement. My room is almost a perfect square (11.5 x 12) with a 9 foot celing. My mixing desk sits against one wall and my 'work' desk against the wall directly behind it. The farthest I can get my speakers away from the wall is about a foot. They are both about 2.5 feet from the outside wall. Therefore, my listening position is pretty much right in the middle of the room. And, even there I'm really only about 3-4 feet from the monitors. I'm sure others have less ideal scenario's, but mine certainly isn't how someone would draw it up. My thought is to hang the 4" 703 about halfway up the wall - somewhat directly behind the speakers angled in the corner since their backs sort of point to the corner anyway the way I have them angled in. I'll put a couple 4' X 2' panels in the window directly in front of the mixing position, a couple on the outside walls at the early reflection points and a couple on the ceiling at the early reflection points. I can only stick a couple up high on the back wall since my desk is back there and the top part of the desk (which is basically a bookshelf) does 2/3 of the way up the wall. That desk covers pretty much the entire back wall so I won't be able to really put any treatment ON the desk - only have the option to go high. I'll figure out how to get the other panels in various spots in the room but hopefully that should clean things up and flatten the response of the room. I'm sure I can grab some free tools and 'see' the response, but acoustics is not my forte so I'm not sure I'll be able to read much into whatever results I get back. I'll just cross my fingers that following the 'rules' gets me better room results.
post edited by KenJr - 2007/10/28 23:37:08
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/10/29 02:02:24
(permalink)
In such a worst-case cube, you need to concentrate on corner traps. If you can, put 4-6" of 703 in each corner, floor to ceiling. If that's not possible because of windows, doors, or furniture, at least cover the top corners where walls meet the ceiling. And train yourself to mix at very low volume.
All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
Amazed
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 459
- Joined: 2006/11/04 22:25:35
- Location: Perth
- Status: offline
RE: Foam squares instead of acoustic tiles?
2007/11/02 22:03:22
(permalink)
|