Absorption/calculating room modes of non rectangular rooms

[SloppyJo]

All the room mode calculators I've seen assume that your room is a square/rectangular shape. However my room specifically is more of a weird L shaped room.

As far as my knowledge of room modes is concerned, the distance between any two parallel walls will create a "mode" at a frequency with that same wavelength (and subsequent octaves)

Given that, can an L shaped room be approached the same way as a regular rectangular shaped room?

I feel like there's more to it than just slapping on foam/mineral wool in strategic locations...

 

[GIK Acoustics]

Mode calculators are at best, calculators. Even if you have a rectangular room, calculators assume an infinitely rigid boundary. Your walls are not infinitely rigid, and the materials contained within can and will change the frequencies upon which your room reacts. So, though they are fun to toy around with, when you can get a more true image of how your room actually sounds via measurement, it makes most sense to go that route.

To keep it simple, the easiest way to find out what problems your room DOES have is to measure it using a computer program like REW. REW is free - you can check out our video on it here: Room EQ Wizard Tutorial - GIK Acoustics

You can run tests, post the graphs here along with your dimensions, and I'll do my best to recommend treatment and placements of treatment. Though for the most part, first reflections and corners will typically get the most treatment in any room until you start trying to tackle a specific problem.

 

[Ethan Winer]

Room mode calculators are meant to help design a new room, not learn how to treat an existing space. As Alexander explained, the best way to know what problems you have is to measure your room.

I feel like there's more to it than just slapping on foam/mineral wool in strategic locations...

Actually, placing bass traps and other treatment at strategic locations is exactly how it's done.

This explains the method:

Acoustic Basics

--Ethan