Superchunk question

[MGB]

Hi, I would like to place superchunks in the four corners of my room.
I'm considering to just cut the 2" by 4" slabs in half and place them in the corners, more mass is more absorbtion?
Is this more effective than cutting them in half and then diagonal as most often described, or is it just a waste of material and space?

MGB

[Rod Gervais]

I noticed that you asked this same question at Studiotips - and seeing as those were the folks who helped to develope and test this concept - they are really the people to ask.

Without testing the best answer you could every hope for would be an opinion - and we all understand the value of those.. Although an opinion formulated by the poepl who helped test the product might be of more value than just some Joe sitting here.

Sincerely,

Rod

[RICK FITZPATRICK]

I'm considering to just cut the 2" by 4" s

Even as a non expert, I'd submit that even full 2 INCH by 4 INCH slabs won't do much.
fitZ

[Rod Gervais]

Originally Posted by RICK FITZPATRICK

Even as a non expert, I'd submit that even full 2 INCH by 4 INCH slabs won't do much.
fitZ

Rick,

the superchuncks are actually triangular cut pieces of rigid fiberglass that are stacked in a corner until it fills up.

His 2" x 4" is a typo - he means 2' x 4' - his question is "what would he gain by installing squares in he corner instead of the triangles".......

the real answer is unknown - but the gut feeling is "not enough to make it worthwhile - just go for the gain of the superchunk that HAS been tested.

Rod

[MGB]

Hi Rod and Rick.

Thanks for reacting.

Yes it was a typo, inches and feet aren't my expertise, I'm used to the metric system.
It's true I asked the same question on the studiotips forum, and on the sound on sound forum ( was hoping for a quick answer ).
That was not my smartest move because now I have three threads going about the same subject.

I think it would be wise ( without being unpolite I hope ) to continue on just one forum and considering having allready posted on the studiotips forum I think it's best to continue over there.
You're very welcome to chime in over there of course.

MGB

[RICK FITZPATRICK]

Rick,

the superchuncks are actually triangular cut pieces of rigid fiberglass that are stacked in a corner until it fills up.

I know rod. In fact, take a look at this thread and see what "I'm" doing with LINEAR chunks at the ceiling. I've drawn the "trangle thing", many times on threads at various sites.
http://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=250359

His 2" x 4" is a typo

I was just kidding. Gotta have some fun here once in a while. Hence the ..

Yes it was a typo, inches and feet aren't my expertise, I'm used to the metric system.

Ah so.

That was not my smartest move because now I have three threads going about the same subject.

I wouldn't feel bad. I've posted many of the same threads on various sites, only to recieve CONTRIDICTING replys, which is why I've become an acoustics agnostic. Try to get a concensus on DIFFUSION devices. Ha! That one will REALLY show you what I mean. And if you dig deep enough, it might even piss you off. But it will iillustrate what I mean. Over multiple sites, you might get enough contridiction to suck you in the rabbit hole. However, on this subject, Rod is correct.

You're very welcome to chime in over there of course.

I'd love to, but unfortunately because of my "political" viewpoints, I've been banned. They can't handle "off subject" threads, even though "they" do it all the time. Hmmmmm. It tells me something. The owner even closed registration there for a long time just to keep it "one happy family"
fitZ

[MGB]

Originally Posted by RICK FITZPATRICK

I wouldn't feel bad. I've posted many of the same threads on various sites, only to recieve CONTRIDICTING replys, which is why I've become an acoustics agnostic. family"

That's exactly why I thought it would be best to just keep the thread going on just one forum.
I've done a lot of reading on the different forums and it's amazing how people can have totally opposite opinions both with valid reasons and measurements to prove they're right.
So for my own peace of mind I'll just concentrate on one forum for now

MGB

[Ethan Winer]

Originally Posted by Rod Gervais

the real answer is unknown - but the gut feeling is "not enough to make it worthwhile

You think? I'd expect twice as much material to make a fairly large improvement. But you're right that without testing it's anyone's guess.

--Ethan

[RICK FITZPATRICK]

You think? I'd expect twice as much material to make a fairly large improvement.

The real question is "how much absorption at what frequency do you really need...and how much does it cost?" I don' think I've ever read anything that actually "defines" or can define how much absorption a given space requires, or how to calculate it. Other than "as much LF absorption as you can afford." Any thoughts Ethan?
fitZ

[Rod Gervais]

Originally Posted by RICK FITZPATRICK

The real question is "how much absorption at what frequency do you really need...and how much does it cost?" I don' think I've ever read anything that actually "defines" or can define how much absorption a given space requires, or how to calculate it. Other than "as much LF absorption as you can afford." Any thoughts Ethan?
fitZ

fitZy,

there are (for sure) calculations -
for critical listening/control rooms at least - quite a few different ways to get there.......

Check out ITU-R BS.1116-1

http://www.itu.int/rec/R-REC-BS.1116-1-199710-I/e

Sincerely,

Rod

[fitZ08]

Check out ITU-R BS.1116-1

Thanks Rod. Unfortunately Standards cost moola, and I've blown the last wad of dough for what absorption I could afford for this damn studio, regardless if it meets ITU-R BS.1116-1 criteria or not. Now, if they were free, I'd read it, but since I'm not a pro studio designer, acoustician, engineer, I'm afraid I'll have to pass.

BTW, your the first person to address me by the correct pronouniation of my nick name. My friends call me that.
Thanks again Rod.
fitZ