Angled walls: How Important?

Jack Russell

Jack Russell

I smell home cookin!
I'm at last beginning the build of a basement studio. The 2x4s are coming this week as a matter of fact. I still have the option of revising my design, and I'm mulling over the pros and cons of angled walls versus a rectangular box. [I've read a lot of posts on this site about angled walls, but it seems to be a matter of taste.]

My dimensions for the main space are 15' x 19.5'; the ceiling is 8 ft. 10". This main room will double for recording and mixing. I plan on building a vocal isolation booth adjacent to this room which will be 5' x 7', with the same 8 ft 10" ceiling. The main room will not be an exact rectangle. It will have a large soffit for duct work and a furnace and water heater, unfortunately, will have to be dealt with at one corner of the layout. I plan on building a double wall to isolate that as best as I can. Thus, one end of the rectangle will have a 15' wall, the other end will have a 13' wall, where the mechanical stuff encroaches.

So, how critical is it that I angle one or more of the walls? As I understand it, the worst possible space I could build, as far as acoustics, is a cube with equal dimensions. How do the dimensions look above?

Sorry I can't provide a layout. If someone can suggest a program, maybe I could download it and provide a layout.
 
I suppose I can answer my own question. Angled walls prevent sound waves bouncing back and forth creating the so-called 'standing waves', right?

But so what? Is that really critical? I can easily change my plan at this point of the design to make one wall angled. Might cost a smidge more, but I can do it.

I'm just trying to find out if the added change really makes an impact on the sound or not.

[Perhaps the fact that I'll have a bigger problem in isolating the furnace/water heater just a few feet away makes the gain of the angled wall sort of a moot point? I hope not.]
 
Last edited:
Yeah you kind of answered your own question. Standing waves are bad news to serious audio enthusiasts. If I were you, I'd angle the walls. This way you won't have to heavily treat the rectangular room. Try something like this. I just did a quick sketch. Dimensions can be found at Ethan Winer's website.

Chris
 

Attachments

  • sketch.JPG
    sketch.JPG
    10.4 KB · Views: 136
Jack,

The walls being splayed help a lot - however I would point out to you - if the room is going to serve dual purpose - you really want it to be symmetrical.

This is pretty critical for a control room -

Rod
 
Of course they'd need to look more like a John Sayers designed space but if you're looking for a minimalist design to help keep the waves at bay, this one would do OK. You'll still have to treat the interior some, but not as much I wouldn't think. It's just a sketch BTW. Rod is right though, if you got the money and can make it symmetrical, do that instead.

Chris
 
I have a tiny room with no angled walls, and I had to completely cover it with rigid fiberglass. I knew all of this in advance, but I really had no choice--slanted walls would make the space even smaller, and in my tiny house it was all the space I could spare.

So if you can, slant. It looks really cool too. There are too many right angles in life, enjoy obtuse angles where you can get them.
 
Thanks everyone for the tips! Chris's rough layout is exactly what I'm thinking about. it might make it a little bit more cramped, but doable.

Correct me if I'm wrong: the triangles at the top two corners are bass traps, yes? What are the triangles at the bottom (mixing) end?

I have a follow-up question. If I angle the walls as Chris suggests, are the angles of each wall critical? Or as long as I make it symetrical, is any degree of angle o.k.?

I suppose you could go nuts with precise trigonometry to get a perfect shape, but then whatever you design might end up being corrupted as soon as you put people and instruments in the space.

Thanks,
JR
 
Hmmm. I just had an idea. I've done some calculations, and to achieve the symetrical shape as in Chris's layout, my dimensions would be 14.5' at the back wall, 8.5' at the mixing end, and the distance from the back wall to the front wall would be 18'. This might make the space for a band of 5 people or more rather cramped in the performance end of the space.

Now, suppose I angle the walls but only halfway down each side from the mixing end, and then, use a sliding partition which would cut off the room into two spaces? With the partition across the space, the mixing area would then be 11.5' (partition), then 8.5' at the front wall (where speakers are mounted), and 8.5' from the partition to the front wall. This would allow me to leave the performance part of the space as a rectangle. When recording, I'd leave the partition open; when mixing, I'd close it.

Is this a crazy idea? It probably is....[in other words, the shape would be a rectangle attached to a trapezoid. I tried to draw it, but the file was too big to upload. :-( ]
 
Jack,

> how critical is it that I angle one or more of the walls? <

You already got lots of good advice so, for your convenience, I'll just add this direct link to the article Chris mentioned:

www.realtraps.com/art_studio.htm

As explained in the article, if you don't have enough room for the full 21 foot length, you can scale all of the dimensions down a little.

--Ethan
 
Hello Jack. The idea of splayed wall was incorporated originly to disrupt resonance via standing waves and room modes. However it is next to impossible to predict modal spacing in rooms with splayed walls so rectangular rooms fell into popularity because of the ability to predict modes. Then another benifit of splayed walls and ceilings were discovered. It is called RFZ, or Reflection free zone, which in effect means the engineering position is free of early reflections. This paradyme was first used in Live End/Dead End rooms whereby the Dead end contained the monitors which were surrounded by absorption devices, and the Live End made use of quadratic residue diffusers. This dead end also made use of splayed walls and ceilings to create the RFZ. Actually, in LEDE rooms, wall and ceiling angles were a combination of splayed surfaces that were actually quite complex, as the use of reflection "image" control was the method used for correctly directing these early reflections.
Simple splayed side walls and ceilings do not acheive true RFZ by virtue of being angled. They must also recieve absorption treatment to be successful to a degree.
However, the LEDE concept was licensed, and as other types of designs evolved other concepts became popular, one of which is a control room whereby the front end, which uses splayed walls and or cielings of 12 degrees or more to direct early reflections to a rear wall where they encounter to a variety of absorption devices, such as Slot resonators, hanger bass traps, panel traps and broadband absorbers. Some designers still use diffusers although there is a conflict of opinion as to thier usefullness in small rooms. Actually, the whole control room design philosophy thing is still evolving as other acoustical and audio engineering "experts" bend to the popular sonic recording paradymes of the moment, of which "squashed" or "loud" mastering is the predominant force driving producers today. Its no wonder, that recordings receiving this treatment require very little of the acoustic philosophys described above, as the popular music "consumers" of today simply doesn't GIVE A DAMN about sonic quality ;) :D
Of course, thats only my personal .02. fitZ
 
Thanks for the info on the RFZ.

And thanks very much to you, Ethan. You know your stuff, obviously, and I should get your autograph. Yes, I've read the article, and the design just almost will fit in my space. But not quite! Ugh! My ceiling would end up being 7 ft and 3 in.

I'll have to try something else, but thanks all the same!
JR
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top