Room EQ and treatments

While working yesterday, i came across a store that sells foam products
My question is- Is there really a big difference between these products offered here and those that cost much more?
I understand there is a fire ****ant issue, but from a sound quality point of view will these work?
is any one out there using these products?
They're being advertised as acoustical treatment.

http://www.foamforyou.com...Control%20Products.htm

sorry if this is too OT for the Sonar board
thanks
Ron

Goodness, Me and an CJ in 100% agreement... this must be a good day to go for a bicycle ride. CJ hows your leg doing? I hope it's healing well.

One thing to add:

 703 = 4lbs/cu ft and 705 = 8lbs/cu ft

Not all insulation vendors sell the Corning brand. I use a rock wool substitute that I can buy at a cash and carry counter in the industrial part of Tampa. I always ask for the Corning and then take what they suggest as the substitute.

best,
mike

Is there really a big difference between these products offered here and those that cost much more?

There are many kinds of foam products, most of which are unsuitable for audio applications. Some folks try to use packing foam, for instance, because it's very cheap. Unfortunately, it does more harm than good as an acoustical treatment because it affects a too-narrow band of frequencies. Even the expensive stuff marketed as acoustical treatment material is only marginally effective, because it's not dense enough.

In order to effectively absorb sound, the material needs to be dense. Rigid fiberglass (or "rockwool") is the best bang for the buck. It's relatively cheap, easy to work with and when used in the appropriate thickness quite effective and broadband.

Corning 703 and 705 are the most popular, although other brands make comparable products. The difference between the two is density: 705 is denser and therefore more effective, but it's also more expensive than 703. Either one will work.

They are available with and without paper coverings. If you get the paper-covered stuff, rip off the paper from one side and leave the paper facing outward. This acts as a reflector so that the 703/705 does not soak up as much of the high frequencies and helps (moderately) to keep the room from getting overly dead in the high end. The effect is modest so it's not worth paying a premium for the paper-backed product, but if that's the only type your local supplier carries it will work.

703 can be difficult to find, especially if you're not in a big city. It's not something most home-improvement big box stores stock. However, any of them can order it for you. If you can't find it, open the yellow pages and call an insulation contractor. They'll be able to order it for you.

Good advice here - some of which I have just learned recently myself!

Avoid just putting cheap "foam" on the walls - go for effective inexpensive bass traps of the Owens Corning 703/705 variety.

I just ordered mine . . .

I had my rep Gavin at Auralex do a free room analays.

 
I did this too (probably not with gavin) and then built my own panels with OC 703 and roughly followed their suggestions.  My room is pretty darn flat.

Thanks to all for the insight-i will investigate a little more.
the OC productsmay be be just the ticket-trying to keep the cost to a minimum-but want to get the derired
result

This is the method I used: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyYUpkpL0gw

I made 9 panels in all with 3 of them being 4" thick for bass trapping.  The others are 2" thick.  I think I did it all for around $300.  Not a bad price and they work!

Foam doesn't work. Real Traps do. I made some 2x4x4" panels from Owens Corning 703. They help. I have Real Traps too, they do work.
 
DaveT

btw-
when i searched rock wool-it looks the be a blown in or roll type of isulation rather than sheets  like the 703 or 705.
Does anyone know if it is available in a sheet form?

CJaysMusic


703 or 705 is better than rockwool. If your going to do it it, do it the right way the 1st time
Cj

I guess you got it wrong the first time also CJ, seeing you have so much foam for sale. Lol

If I'm not mistaken, I beleive Rockwool is more of a UK thing and the OC 703 & 705 is more of a US thing.

The critical factor to consider in making a choice in sound absorption material (whether purchasing "rockwool" or "fiberglas") is the bulk density of the material. Owens Corning 703 and 705 are not the same thing in this respect. 703 has a bulk density of 3 pounds per cubic foot (pcf), whereas 705 is 6 pcf. Roxul Rockboard 60 is a "rockwool" product from Roxul also rated at 6 pcf. They also make a product which is 8 pcf. If you assume a 4" thickness, 703 will be less effective at the same thickness than either OC 705 or Roxul 60 in trapping low frequency waves. Thinner panels, lower density, or lighter materials will all be less effective in trapping low frequency sound waves.
I agree with Mike, in that whether the material is listed by the manufacturer as being "Rockwool" or "Fiberglas" has nothing whatsoever to do with its sound absorption capabilities.
<EDIT> On re-reading this - much is way over-simplified. For example, 703 makes an excellent broadband absorber if you use a thickness of 4". Best bet is to check a good website resource, like Ethan Winer's Realtraps site.

A panel of this type will absorb a broad range of frequencies - in general you focus on removing low frequencies by treating the tri-corners of the room. This will also help to tame a broader range of frequencies - then selectively add thinner/lighter panels to the rest of the room - walls and ceiling to take care of any remaining issues with higher frequencies.
Visit Ethan's site for a considerable wealth of information on this subject - http://www.realtraps.com/info.htm

I guess you got it wrong the first time also CJ, seeing you have so much foam for sale. Lol

It never hung on my walls. It was given too my by my brother in law who owned a recording studio and a radio station. He was going to throw it out and i said i would take it. I have space in my house.
Cj

on a budget, with time not being a factor, then the rockwool/703/705 is the ticket. 4" to do bass trapping, as recommended above. most non-professional rooms can benefit from bass trapping so it's a no-brainer pretty much.

if time and flammability are issues then ATSAcoustics (http://www.atsacoustics.com/) makes decent panels at a very reasonable price. i would not put them up against realtraps, but they do work and they have flame-****ant ones.

some other factors to consider are what you hope to achieve with these panels - for example, if you want better sounding vocal/instrument takes, then you might consider a portable vocal booth, as this will make an even more distinct difference in quality. if it's for monitoring your mixes, make sure your monitors are as far away from the walls as is practical so you make the most of your bass trapping. Auralex Mopads for your monitors will also make a noticeable difference, if like me, they sit on a wooden desk.

not saying you shouldn't do the panels - just stating some additional factors to consider based on what your goals are. but the panels will help regardless of what you are doing.