How should I treat my room?

[drew_drummer]

Hey guys,

Now this is a fairly old image, but essentially its still the same. My monitors have changed though, and are on the desk at the moment.

I really want to de-clutter my room, and put up some acoustic treatment. I'm not too sure where to start - what would you advise?

If you see the lip around the top edge of the walls, that would be useful for hanging some bass-traps from. So I think I'm going to give that a good. Build some cheap DIY bass-traps and hang them around the room. But is there anything else I can/should do?

 

[Force666]

Bass trap the shit out of the corners. Then see where you stand.

 

[drew_drummer]

So what I'm thinking of getting for my bass-traps...

http://www.insulationexpress.co.uk/Multi-Purpose-Slabs/Rockwool-RWA45-Slab.htm

100mm x 1200mm x 600mm - pack of 4 slabs is about £50 though. So I want to be sure I'm getting the most appropriate and cost effective thing.

 

[SocialNumb]

Do what he said and then blast it with piss.

Yeah, that didn't help . . .

 

[Jarkko Mattheiszen]

Superchunk bass traps in all corners (from floor to ceiling) and broadband absorbers to the early reflection points (side walls, back wall, ceiling), and you're already pretty well off.

 

[drew_drummer]

Do what he said and then blast it with piss.

 

[Wisheraser]

Based on the density of RWA45, it should be good for either 24" face or 34" face Studiotips Superchunks, but if possible it's probably better to go with a type of insulation that has had its acoustic performance tested in a lab (ie: something on this page http://www.bobgolds.com/AbsorptionCoefficients.htm ). Then you will know you're not pissing your money away. The cheapest, lightest stuff you can find works best for deep SSCs, but will definitely need a frame to support it so it doesn't compress and become less effective over time. Slightly higher density stuff like 703 or RHT40 is better for broadband panel absorbers at first reflection points.


EDIT:

Here's a good design to follow for SSCs:

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/home-audio-acoustics/7758-corner-traps-finally-finished.html

He used 703, but the frame is the thing to focus on.

 

[MarcusGHedwig]

Superchunking just means cutting the panels into isosceles triangles and stacking em floor to ceiling, right? That's gotta get expensive...

 

[Wisheraser]

Yes that's right, but no it isn't necessarily any more expensive. Let's say you want to treat a corner in a room that has 8 feet (96 inch) ceilings. You're trying to decided to treat it with either a pair of 6 inch, 2x4 absorbers stacked on top of each other or a 24" face superchunk. If you have 2 inch insulation, you would need 6 panels to build a pair of 6 inch panel traps. For 24 inch face superchunks, there would be 8 triangles per panel (covering 16 inches when stacked) 96/16 = 6 panels needed to build these. If you build them like the superchunks in the link I posted, then these would actually use slightly less insulation and the frames would need less wood, screws, and fabric than 2 6 inch panel traps.

If you built 34 inch face superchunks, they would be about twice as expensive, but you could use cheaper, lighter insulation and they would be MUCH more effective and reach down to lower frequencies.

 

[colonel kurtz]

kind of a tangent, but has anyone ever seen/heard of anyone putting rigid insulation across a corner, and then cramming rockwool in behind it?

 

[SocialNumb]

Here's a good design to follow for SSCs:

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/home-audio-acoustics/7758-corner-traps-finally-finished.html

He used 703, but the frame is the thing to focus on.

That's pretty cool. I might try something like this. Looks easy enough.

 

[Wisheraser]

kind of a tangent, but has anyone ever seen/heard of anyone putting rigid insulation across a corner, and then cramming rockwool in behind it?

From what I've read, it's discouraged because there is no lab data showing how effective that would be. Differences in gas flow resistance between the 2 types of insulation would make it nearly impossible to predict how well that would work. It's probably best to stick to methods that have been proven to be effective.

That's pretty cool. I might try something like this. Looks easy enough.

Yeah, that's how I plan on building mine. One of the important things in that design is that there is some wood mounted half way up to:

1) Help secure the cover frame and

2) Reduce the weight being supported by the lower triangles, which reduces the likelihood of those lower triangles being compacted over time (ie: increasing their density and making them more reflective at the bottom)

 

[Boerboel666]

I made bass traps in frames using RW5 Rockwool 100kg per cubic metre .
It is the most hard core bass absorber I know of and can be straddled across
corners . The space behind the slabs when placed in the corner help low freq absorption . Trust me these fuckers work and I highly recommend .

 

[drew_drummer]

Superchunking seems expensive. Lowest I can get it down to with the RWA45 is £77 per corner!! Am I missing something?

My ceilings are 9ft high. The insulation boards are 4inches thick. So I need 27 triangles per-corner, which equals almost 7 boards. Does that sound right? Is there cheaper material I can buy that will do the job? I'm UK based.

 

[Mesa4x12er]

8ft. wall

6" 2'x'4 panels VS. 33" and 24" Super Chunks

At 2" panels you'll need 3 panels for each trap and 2 traps to go up the wall. 6 panels.

Super Chunk...

Each 2'x4' sheet will make 8(4) 24"(33")triangles 2" tall. 8 ft = 96".

96" / 2" = 48 triangles. 48 traingles / 8(4) per panel = 6(12) panels.

 

[Wisheraser]

Yes that's right, but no it isn't necessarily any more expensive. Let's say you want to treat a corner in a room that has 8 feet (96 inch) ceilings. You're trying to decided to treat it with either a pair of 6 inch, 2x4 absorbers stacked on top of each other or a 24" face superchunk. If you have 2 inch insulation, you would need 6 panels to build a pair of 6 inch panel traps. For 24 inch face superchunks, there would be 8 triangles per panel (covering 16 inches when stacked) 96/16 = 6 panels needed to build these. If you build them like the superchunks in the link I posted, then these would actually use slightly less insulation and the frames would need less wood, screws, and fabric than 2 6 inch panel traps.

If you built 34 inch face superchunks, they would be about twice as expensive, but you could use cheaper, lighter insulation and they would be MUCH more effective and reach down to lower frequencies.

8ft. wall

6" 2'x'4 panels VS. 33" and 24" Super Chunks

At 2" panels you'll need 3 panels for each trap and 2 traps to go up the wall. 6 panels.

Super Chunk...

Each 2'x4' sheet will make 8(4) 24"(33")triangles 2" tall. 8 ft = 96".

96" / 2" = 48 triangles. 48 traingles / 8(4) per panel = 6(12) panels.

Yup. Also, as you said you have 9 feet ceilings, you could stack enough triangles to cover the entire area. With two 6" 2'x4' straddling panels stacked on top of each other, you would be leaving 1 foot of the corner untrapped.