Before sharing this link, I feel it only fair to point out that ANY site where the primary focus is to SELL you things will do its best to convince you that theirs is the best, everybody else's stuff is garbage, and that you can't live without it. Caveat Emptor... (which, if your latin is as bad as mine, means Let the Buyer Beware, loosely paraphrased.
http://www.kineticsnoise.com/awcp.html
kinetics is a high-dollar company whose stuff probably actually works - they also make various brackets, hangars, absorbents, blankets, and floor/wall floating materials. If you have access to a CAD program that can read .DXF files, there are several diagrams that can be useful overall.
I've seen other places that sell pre-made "clouds", or ceiling absorbers, but making your own is several TIMES cheaper and can be as good or better.
I liked the washer idea, here is perhaps another version that eliminates the need for a torch and brazing skills - use the needle to thread a LOOP of either picture-hanging wire or other fairly stout cordage thru the fiberglas board BEFORE you glue on the cloth, then use fender washers (big washer, little hole) for stops on the underside (as the cloud will hang) and use a large finish nail (or a nail with the head clipped off) thru the loop so the loop can't pull through the fiberglas - a couple drops of quick-dry epoxy will hold the nail against the washer so the loop can't escape.
Then put the cloth on, and hook the other ends of the loops over your ceiling hooks.
Absorption of any kind is best put FIRST where you could see either of your monitor speakers in a mirror that replaced the absorber. This also applies to the ceiling, so that helps locate the cloud in the horizontal position.
Vertically, the farther off the ceiling the lower frequencies that will be absorbed. See my earlier post in this thread regarding wavelengths, etc.
Booksix - "What kind of effectiveness would this have flush mounted as ceiling tiles. Or maybe I could do everyother tile fiberglass, and others tile with a cloud a few inches down. Good idea?
So this stuff is litterally better than going out and buying auralex?!? What the best way to put it on walls? A frame? 4" inch air gap between fiberglass and wall? Anyhting in there, or strictly air gap?" -
Flush mounted as ceiling tiles - If mounted in a metal ceiling grid, such as the 2x2 and 2x4 foot types in office buildings, it would depend on the depth of air cavity BEHIND the ceiling grid, and how much insulation depth/mass was above the tiles. Could be VERY helpful to low-mid frequencies, if there was 1-2 feet of depth there.
Every other tile - see my answer to Laptoppop's #2 question about separating the clouds. Not good over the mix area, might be OK on certain walls if done right.
Few inches down, good idea. Lowers effective frequency absorbed.
Yeah, this stuff kicks Auralex, Sonex, Cheap-ex, every other ex, 6 ways from sunday. Unless you just have lots of money to spend building a second-rate room...
Keep in mind, the farther from the wall the sound encounters the absorption, the lower the frequency it works at. The THICKER the material, given that it's the SAME material, the MORE is absorbed. The DENSER the material, assuming it isn't CONCRETE, the LOWER the frequency it absorbs BUT the less HIGH freq it absorbs.
All this means that mounting and material, thickness, etc, depend on what you're trying to accomplish.
And, the only way to really KNOW what you need to accomplish, is to build the parts that you KNOW you need (sound PROOFING) then listen/test the room, and add the most obvious treatments first. When it sounds good, STOPPPPP...
There are people who will say, oh, you MUST have 6 of these, and 4 of these, no matter what - I don't believe that. There are too many methods of construction for walls/ceilings/floors for a blanket statement like that to work. Too many ways to inadvertantly CHANGE the performance of EXACTLY the same construction.
The only real downsidesof using rigid fiberglas board seem to be locating a local source and the possible shedding of possibly carcinogenic fibers (hence the cloth covering, to eliminate shedding) - other than that, you're looking at approximately TWICE the performance for same thickness, at approximately 1/3 the cost. Plus, it doesn't burn.
Frames, from a durability standpoint, make a lot of sense. Plus, they contain the boards easier. Un-framed, the edge absorption is a bonus which will actually give you MORE absorption than the specs call for (maybe, see previous comments on specs)
One way to make it easier to mount on walls is to glue firmer material (small pieces) to the back, so you can use ready-made angle brackets. If you use a full sheet of plywood on the back, though, you'll negate most of the advantage of air gap behind.
Running out of time for now, hope any of this was helpful... Steve
