Low-cost sound control for a new home studio?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tuco
  • Start date Start date
I did a room with this stuff

http://www.markertek.com/SearchProduct.asp?item=MF%2D3&off=44&sort=prod&skuonly=0&search=Foam&pagesize=20

Stupid cheap and flame retardant. You can click a link on the page to see the coefficients of absorption. I did several hanging panels that were away from the walls but slightly splayed plus a panel on a chrome blackboard stand. USE THE 3" stuff.

I just used some cheap, lossy plywood and glued the stuff right on there. That and some hanging hardware and I had several excellent abfusers that could be hung or not hung for various acoustical environments. Total cost for 4 54 x 54 height-adjustable panels as right around US $225. Decorate as you will, fabric covers to taste (sheets, tie-dye, whatever floats your boat) but painting them probably isn't a good idea.
 
I did a room with this stuff

http://www.markertek.com/SearchProduct.asp?item=MF%2D3&off=44&sort=prod&skuonly=0&search=Foam&pagesize=20

Stupid cheap and flame retardant. You can click a link on the page to see the coefficients of absorption. I did several hanging panels that were away from the walls but slightly splayed plus a panel on a chrome blackboard stand. USE THE 3" stuff.

I just used some cheap, lossy plywood and glued the stuff right on there. That and some hanging hardware and I had several excellent abfusers that could be hung or not hung for various acoustical environments. Total cost for 4 54 x 54 height-adjustable panels as right around US $225. Decorate as you will, fabric covers to taste (sheets, tie-dye, whatever floats your boat) but painting them probably isn't a good idea.
You're going to have serious bass problems, even with the 3" stuff. You could have made 8 703/rigid fiberglass panels cheaper(maybe even 4 4" bass traps and 5 2" normal, which is the minimum i'd suggest for a control room, for a similar price), and they'd have been a lot more effective. I wouldn't suggest getting rid of those, too much just to throw away, but i would suggest building some rigid fiberglass bass traps.
 
I did a room with this stuff

http://www.markertek.com/SearchProduct.asp?item=MF%2D3&off=44&sort=prod&skuonly=0&search=Foam&pagesize=20

Stupid cheap and flame retardant. You can click a link on the page to see the coefficients of absorption. I did several hanging panels that were away from the walls but slightly splayed plus a panel on a chrome blackboard stand. USE THE 3" stuff.

I just used some cheap, lossy plywood and glued the stuff right on there. That and some hanging hardware and I had several excellent abfusers that could be hung or not hung for various acoustical environments. Total cost for 4 54 x 54 height-adjustable panels as right around US $225. Decorate as you will, fabric covers to taste (sheets, tie-dye, whatever floats your boat) but painting them probably isn't a good idea.


This is not good advice IMHO. I'd stay the heck away from foam. It will make your problems worse........
 
This is not good advice IMHO. I'd stay the heck away from foam. It will make your problems worse........
Some foam is ok, auralex, but generally, foam isn't great.
 
I wouldn't use Auralex myself.......but that's just me.
Neither do I. Looks quite cheap, imo, and you can build rf panels a lot cheaper which are almost/just as effective.
 
Yes, this is what I've read so far as well. Foam just doesn't have the density to be as effective as other materials, especially at low frequencies.
 
Yes, this is what I've read so far as well. Foam just doesn't have the density to be as effective as other materials, especially at low frequencies.
Most foam*. Auralex is a great foam company, but their products are expensive and, imo, looks quite cheap.
 
How about straw bales?

For those that have the room, or that are building new construction, straw bales may be a good alternative. About 14" thick and 7 lbs. / cu. foot--denser than rigid fiberglas and the like. Readily available and cheap in many agricultural areas. A green solution, no industrial materials or toxins (that I know of). Wrapping bales in fabric probably wouldn't work, but you could always stand-off a wood frame to stretch the fabric around if that was important to you. I happen to know about these because I'm looking into building a straw-bale house at some point. I haven't checked into the acoustic properties of bales, but I do know they offer excellent thermal insulation and contrary to what might be supposed, they are extremely fire-resistant.

More information: http://www.buildinggreen.com/auth/article.cfm/ID/1080/
 
For those that have the room, or that are building new construction, straw bales may be a good alternative. About 14" thick and 7 lbs. / cu. foot--denser than rigid fiberglas and the like. Readily available and cheap in many agricultural areas. A green solution, no industrial materials or toxins (that I know of). Wrapping bales in fabric probably wouldn't work, but you could always stand-off a wood frame to stretch the fabric around if that was important to you. I happen to know about these because I'm looking into building a straw-bale house at some point. I haven't checked into the acoustic properties of bales, but I do know they offer excellent thermal insulation and contrary to what might be supposed, they are extremely fire-resistant.

More information: http://www.buildinggreen.com/auth/article.cfm/ID/1080/
They'd need to be tested for their acoustic properties...
 
If it was me, I wouldn't build splayed walls. With 10' x 20' you'd lose a ton of floor space to acheive the 12 degrees.


If that were my space, I would buy a ton of 4" mineral wool. I would fill each wall stud cavity with a sheet, along the top row. This would funcion as a corner bass trap, as well as kill flutter echo and reflections that are at ear level I would use a nice fabric to cover the studs overall so you wouldn't see the insulation or space below it.
For the ceiling, I would place the same insulation over tracking and mixing positions creating clouds all about the room. This would tame the floor to ceiling reflections some, but leave enought liveliness in the room for a good time.

If the room became a little too dead, I would add back some diffusers along the far walls.
 
For those that have the room, or that are building new construction, straw bales may be a good alternative. About 14" thick and 7 lbs. / cu. foot--denser than rigid fiberglas and the like. Readily available and cheap in many agricultural areas. A green solution, no industrial materials or toxins (that I know of). Wrapping bales in fabric probably wouldn't work, but you could always stand-off a wood frame to stretch the fabric around if that was important to you. I happen to know about these because I'm looking into building a straw-bale house at some point. I haven't checked into the acoustic properties of bales, but I do know they offer excellent thermal insulation and contrary to what might be supposed, they are extremely fire-resistant.

More information: http://www.buildinggreen.com/auth/article.cfm/ID/1080/


huh.. thats the first time I've heard to use that. Interesting, and very cost effective.
 
Fine ideas. There really isn't enough space to get into splayed surfaces; something close to what you describe will most likely be what I end up doing.
 
Yes, we need acoustic testing of the straw bales.

Here's another alternative: I've discovered there are manufacturers of straw panels, typically made from rice or wheat straw, and specifically intended as a commerical and residential building material.

The STC (sound transmission class) of these averages about 35, meaning they cut 35 dB of sound, but no specific information on the frequencies attenuated. Here is one of the manufacturers:

http://www.agriboard.com/
 
Yes, we need acoustic testing of the straw bales.

Here's another alternative: I've discovered there are manufacturers of straw panels, typically made from rice or wheat straw, and specifically intended as a commerical and residential building material.

The STC (sound transmission class) of these averages about 35, meaning they cut 35 dB of sound, but no specific information on the frequencies attenuated. Here is one of the manufacturers:

http://www.agriboard.com/
35dB. That's about the same as a typical uninsulated stud wall.

We really need coefficients though.
 
Fine ideas. There really isn't enough space to get into splayed surfaces; something close to what you describe will most likely be what I end up doing.

I did it in a much smaller space. It's the easiest way to get rid of bass problems if you have the opportunity to do it. Any "designed" studio will be made with un-parallel surfaces. Check out my build thread in this section.

You really would only lose about 15 sq. ft total. Much less than your straw bales would take up.
 
I did it in a much smaller space. It's the easiest way to get rid of bass problems if you have the opportunity to do it. Any "designed" studio will be made with un-parallel surfaces. Check out my build thread in this section.

You really would only lose about 15 sq. ft total. Much less than your straw bales would take up.
Really? Doesn't it just reduce bass problems? Can anything completely get rid of bass problems?
 
Really? Doesn't it just reduce bass problems? Can anything completely get rid of bass problems?

You are correct - I meant "get rid of bass problems" in the sense that the problems will be reduced to a point of no longer being a problem - just as any bass treatment is designed to "get rid of bass problems". Like I said, it is amazing the difference. I have never seen a designed room with parallel surfaces, and I've worked in a $5 million dollar Russ Berger designed room. If you can do it, I can so no reason not too. It is the cheapest and most effect way to treat room nodes. If I remember my acoustics correctly, a rectangular room has 3 huge nodes, while non parallel room has thousands of tiny ones - giving a MUCH flatter response.

Again, the BEST thing I have ever done for my studio is to go here - http://www.johnlsayers.com/phpBB2/index.php
 
Back
Top