DIY Acoustic Treatment

[PAN]

hey.. i just wonder:

what if i will make panels like guys do here:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jr5HQR8Ox54&feature=related[/ame]



does that cost ?... Or not

i live in that room and i need mobile solution. if i will surround cab with these panels - whether my sound from mic will be better ? i do complain onto - mud in lows, my mids are missing, totally thin guitar tone - anyway i dislike that.. (now my room is not in any acoustic Treatment) and problem 2 - whether my sound will be quiet for neighbours

thx

 

[vespiz]

Depending on what materials you use, they might cost anything from 0 - 100€ per panel, but roughly 10-30€ is the average I've seen (never calculated the cost per panel in our studio).
Ask your local supplier(s) about the prices and calculate accordingly. For instance, the rockwool I used came in a bale with 7 x 50mm slabs that costs roughly 35€ per bale and that makes 7 x 50mm (2") panels (or 3,5x100mm [4"]).
Plus wood, screws/nails/glue, fabric and of course work/time.

And no, acoustic treatment will do nothing to block the sound going to your neighbours. For that you need isolation and that means mass. Lots of it.

 

[tenebre]

If you are mic'ing a typical guitar cab style i doubt this would "improve" your mic sound. Accoustic treatments generally improve motoring and mixing process audio (if that makes sense).

On question 2 - probably not. this is to decrease sound reflections etc so you han hear a more accurate picture. Sound proofing is entirely different from Acoustic treatment.

on 1 you may just need to move your mic around. what mic are you using? what pre-amp?

 

[Jarkko Mattheiszen]

If you are mic'ing a typical guitar cab style i doubt this would "improve" your mic sound. Accoustic treatments generally improve motoring and mixing process audio (if that makes sense).

This isn't quite true. Basically a microphone works just like your ears, thus the microphone picks up reflections just as well. Now, a cardioid mic, for example, naturally picks up less reflections when placed close to the source, but it doesn't completely ignore them. Placing absorbers around the mic can definitely alter the recorded sound just like an amp miced in a great room sounds different than one miced in a horrible room. Whether the effect of the treatment is a pleasant one depends completely on the situation, so it's up to experimenting to see if it improves the tone.

 

[John_C]

normal acoustic treatment WILL make a difference to sound travelling to your neighbours. Just probably not very much. However, if you completely cover your walls with 4" of rockwool then you'll see quite a serious reduction noise levels going through those walls, especially if combined with limp mass sheeting (some form of lead replacement) behind the rockwool.

I don't know why people are convinced that acoustic treatment and soundproofing are completely unrelated things...one of the main soundproofing techniques is to use broadband absorption in the walls, rockwool panels for example. The same rockwool that is used for broadband absorption in acoustic treatment, often mounted on the walls.

 

[drew_drummer]

I put my monitors on stands, and took them off my desk. My neighbour has complained much less about the bass frequencies.

 

[vespiz]

True, if you cover all the walls, floors and ceilings with wool then it does have a soundproofing effect, to some extent. Mass mass mass..
Sound has a tendency to go around obstacles (flanking effect) and lower frequencies go through thin treatment (less than 4-6") like a knife through butter.
So just adding panels here and there will "only" affect the sound inside the room, but everyone outside will still be enjoying the sounds coming from within.

I'm willing to defer to the experts on this, since everyone of them say that they're two different things.
Yes, they can be mutually beneficial and when building a professional studio from the ground up, the treatment can be built into the soundproofing.
(This is simplified but you know what I mean..) But when we're talking about an average room, the soundproofing part can be a little.. difficult.

But I'm here to learn so if I'm talking out of my arse, please correct me!

 

[John_C]

True, if you cover all the walls, floors and ceilings with wool then it does have a soundproofing effect, to some extent. Mass mass mass..
Sound has a tendency to go around obstacles (flanking effect) and lower frequencies go through thin treatment (less than 4-6") like a knife through butter.
So just adding panels here and there will "only" affect the sound inside the room, but everyone outside will still be enjoying the sounds coming from within.

I'm willing to defer to the experts on this, since everyone of them say that they're two different things.
Yes, they can be mutually beneficial and when building a professional studio from the ground up, the treatment can be built into the soundproofing.
(This is simplified but you know what I mean..) But when we're talking about an average room, the soundproofing part can be a little.. difficult.

But I'm here to learn so if I'm talking out of my arse, please correct me!

No you've got the right idea. I think the experts are generally being over zealous about it in order for people not to get confused. Stopping your room being a resonant chamber can make a lot of difference to the sound levels outside a room. A drum is a good example of this, if you place a load of rockwool inside a drum, it sounds quite a bit quieter.

The problem is in the low frequencies, most people never manage to treat the really low end of a room, and hence (from an outside perspecitve) the room can amplify those frequencies through resonance.

 

[PAN]

2 tenebre

i use sm 57 or md 421

cabs - mesa rectifier or marchall vintage 4*12
heads - 5150 or dual recto

//// 2 all
> acoustic treatment will do nothing to block the sound going to your neighbours. For that you need isolation and that means mass
but i do not understand - if rockwool reduces sound - why if i will do this:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5862637/cab.JPG

of course i forgot floor

1) it - will not make my sound more clean
2) it - will not reduce sound outside green box

i plan to make 20cm depth of each block (or i need more cm ?)

hmmmmmmm.....

or then should i make box without holes, with disassembly ability

just 6 linked blocks

may be something like that would be better than simply 6 unlinked walls around (with holes between)?

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=cab+iso+box&aq=f

 

[Wisheraser]

normal acoustic treatment WILL make a difference to sound travelling to your neighbours. Just probably not very much. However, if you completely cover your walls with 4" of rockwool then you'll see quite a serious reduction noise levels going through those walls, especially if combined with limp mass sheeting (some form of lead replacement) behind the rockwool.

Not trying to be a dick here, but I call bullshit on that one. I highly doubt 4" of broadband absorption on your walls, membrane or not, would provide much of any noticeable reduction in sound transmission (nevermind the fact that a room treated like that would have an absolutely fucked decay time across the frequency spectrum and would be unbearable to work in). The use of broadband absorption panels is only one small part of soundproofing. Saying 4" absorption can work by itself as soundproofing material is like saying somebody wearing nothing but socks is fully clothed.

Bass frequency transmission will always be the main issue with sound proofing, and pretty much your only options to reduce this are through mass and decoupling.

 

[John_C]

Not trying to be a dick here, but I call bullshit on that one. I highly doubt 4" of broadband absorption on your walls, membrane or not, would provide much of any noticeable reduction in sound transmission (nevermind the fact that a room treated like that would have an absolutely fucked decay time across the frequency spectrum and would be unbearable to work in). The use of broadband absorption panels is only one small part of soundproofing. Saying 4" absorption can work by itself as soundproofing material is like saying somebody wearing nothing but socks is fully clothed.

Bass frequency transmission will always be the main issue with sound proofing, and pretty much your only options to reduce this are through mass and decoupling.

I didn't say it would solve the problem, simply that it would make an impact. As I mentioned further down, much of the problem is indeed with the low end frequencies. No, 4" of rockwool ALONE will do barely anything under 100Hz. A really decent (and yes, i mean high effective mass) membrane, with absorption as well, if set up correctly can be very effective moderate sound proofing even at low frequencies. It's no substitute for decoupling or 4' of concrete, but it's a hell of a lot better than nothing

to the OP: decouple the cab from the floor. Also, guitar cabs are pretty directional (before anyone jumps on me, less and less so at lower and lower frequencies) so point the cab in a direction away from any neighbours, if possible. After that, you have to start spending serious money if you want half decent results (many hundreds of pounds/dollars/euros...etc) so you'll just have to settle for careful timing and low-ish volumes.

 

[PAN]

ok..

what can you advice - Besides full room altering

 

[The StabbinCabin]

I'm interested in some cheap solutions for decoupling a cabinet. Anything that may be cheaper than the Auralex route? Found only one thread on it but it didn't go too deep. May just go with cinder blocks with a 2" rubber matting and cheap carpet since I'm w/o casters...

 

[Wisheraser]

I didn't say it would solve the problem, simply that it would make an impact. As I mentioned further down, much of the problem is indeed with the low end frequencies. No, 4" of rockwool ALONE will do barely anything under 100Hz. A really decent (and yes, i mean high effective mass) membrane, with absorption as well, if set up correctly can be very effective moderate sound proofing even at low frequencies. It's no substitute for decoupling or 4' of concrete, but it's a hell of a lot better than nothing

This is a bit of a slippery slope kind of thing. I just don't want some noobie to stroll through here and take the suggestion that rockwool can work as moderate soundproofing as gospel, invest a bunch of cash, then find out it isn't very effective. I'd honestly be surprised if something like that would have much of any measurable SPL reduction outside of the room. Maybe 3 db if you're lucky. If you have some kind of proof to back up what you're saying, I wouldn't mind being proven wrong. It certainly wouldn't be the first time.

 

[Wisheraser]

To the OP, how big is your room? Also, does your amp sound good in the room? If it sounds good in the room, but not after you mic it up and record it, that sounds like a mic placement issue. If you don't really like how the amp sounds in the room, then try moving the amp around to different spots in the room and listening to how it sounds. You may eventually find a spot where it sounds really good.

If your neighbours are having a problem with how loud you are sometimes, maybe you could speak to them and organize a period of time when it's ok to be loud (like when they're at work for example).

 

[PAN]

my room is about 6*3m /// empty inside (just nude concrete walls)

if i get peavey 5150 - i can use that only on master volume 2///
it is complex task to know - if i do like amp sound or not... if i stay directly infront of speaker - it is shit (only high freq i hear)
and same on record..

if i stay near cabinet edge it is better, but mic sound too nasal and roomy - shit again from that position (where my body is)

///
anyway i do not know what to do - and isobox/// you think will not help me!