More pix, floor joists, deck, window, finished flooring

  • Thread starter Thread starter jonothon
  • Start date Start date
here's another ...
 

Attachments

  • control room 2.webp
    control room 2.webp
    48 KB · Views: 189
and another ...
 

Attachments

  • studio window 1.webp
    studio window 1.webp
    20.4 KB · Views: 183
and one more ...
 

Attachments

  • studio window 2.webp
    studio window 2.webp
    37.2 KB · Views: 181
If I am not mistaken you've floated the floors but not the walls, right? (looks like walls are attached to the concrete floor)

Are the cable conduits on the walls for audio cables too?

Also, what made you choose the non-square room design over the square one? Does not that sort of complicate the room tuning process? I am referring to the Auralex website where they say it's much simpler to stay "square" ... Now it seems John Sayers has a diff. opinion ... confused ... I
am currently digging through the forum archives for more info, please bare with me and my newbie questions.

It looks so good already, i (and a couple of others here for sure!) am jealous :)
Please keep posting more pics and info, thanks again.

RaGe
 
Last edited:
Everything I've ever read regarding room design says to avoid parallel surfaces, to splay the walls. I'd actually be surprised if the auralex people suggest square rooms. The idea is to avoid standing waves. These oddly shaped rooms have a really nice diffuse reverberation right now, of course we're going to put up some deadening and some diffusive treatments to get them under control.

The walls are not floated, but sitting on neoprene pads. that was the best thing i could think of.

For the audio cables, I'm just going to go down through the floor into the basement and back up into the control room. The wire molding on the walls is just for AC.

thanks for your interest
 
Thanks for your reply Jonothon. Actually Auralex warns against angled walls here: http://www.acoustics101.com/room_itself_gateway.htm#The Room Itself Don't know exactly what to make of it since they give a room model at the bottom that shows angled walls ...

Anyways, on your 1st pic I could not figure how you would run the cables thru the 2x4s. Sorry if I missed it completely and I hope you don't mind my questions. Thanks.
 
interesting. I hadn't read that passage before, although I have skimmed that Acoustics 101 document they have there. I get their point. Most of the world is trying to put project studios into existing square or rectangle areas. I've had a busy studio for many years in a rectangle room i took over in my house. And oddly enough, my mixes translate pretty well into the real world. Their (auralex) point is that it's possible and practical to acoustically treat square-ish rooms and make them work well.

I'm not clear on what they're referring to -- "If you try to build an out-of-square room and get it wrong, you're going to be in a world of hurt" --- because they don't explain what the world of hurt is.

Master guru Sayers, any comments on this?

I designed the room myself, not to any mathematical formula, but after looking and many other studio plans and figuring out the most efficient use of space that i could come up with. Lots of people on this site said the plan looked good. And the rooms sound nice, but live right now. I'm planning on a dead front end, and diffusion on the back end, but hey, mainly i'm just a dumb musician with an ear for musical mixing, producing and engineering in a way that people seem to like. and 'm building a new bigger mid level commercial studio avoiding some the mistakes of my old small in-home one.

Hope I'm not in a world of hurt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top