Questions about small home recording studio

[GIK Acoustics]

both are WAY CHEAPER and the performance specs are the same.

I would like to comment here that this is NOT TRUE. While most foam is similar in that it sucks up high end well enough, most companies I've seen literally rip the technical data FROM Auralex's tests that they paid good money to have conducted by a certified lab. If a company shows you "test results" that ARE NOT the official scanned reports from a laboratory - they are a sham. One of those links does provide test results from a certified lab, but the other one doesn't. Not all foam is the same by any means. Not trying to say the other one is bad, just saying there is no guarantee you are getting the same performance (or anywhere near at all) and care should be exercised to be sure you're getting better performance than a blanket hanging on a wall.

Also, foam can stop flutter echo but for real bass absorption I think tests speak for themselves: Comparing Foam to GIK 244 Bass Traps

----

As to the earlier question, of course you can hang panels from a door! Likewise you can get/build traps similar to our Soffit Traps or TriTraps that are freestanding and can be moved out of the way easily if need be.

 

[JimmyS1969]

I think he was just talking about the Mopads. Using foam for decoupling of monitors from desk.

 

[jdchess]

On the issue of bass traps...

With a 4" trap, I know that it's beneficial to leave an air gap between them and the wall. Would there be any benefit to building an air gap into the trap itself? For example, instead of using a 1" x 4" frame with 4" insulation, using a 1" x 6" frame with the same 4" insulation mounted toward the front (non-wall) side of the frame, thereby leaving a 2" air gap in the back of the trap itself that would be enclosed in the surrounding fabric.

I hope that question makes sense. GIK, I was hoping you might weigh in on this as well.

 

[fetuslasvegas]

I think he was just talking about the Mopads. Using foam for decoupling of monitors from desk.

Indeed I was referring to the MoPads, sorry for any confusion, and thank you jimmy.

Also GIK, my fault... I meant to say that the tech specs differences are negligible NOT the same. What a difference one word can make. I have to agree that any company that claims the same exact specs as another should be treated as suspect at best less they use the same factory. To the defense of both of the links that I posted, although they were posted with the decouplers in mind, as far as their acoustical foam goes the foam factory does have pdfs on the site with the lab results as you stated. Foam for you requests that you email them for technical specs (and I'm assuming lab test results). I have not emailed them as of yet, so I can't say whether they are legit or not.

I will be looking forward to insight from you on a future post when I will be ready to treat a new room.

 

[Chili]

On the issue of bass traps...

With a 4" trap, I know that it's beneficial to leave an air gap between them and the wall. Would there be any benefit to building an air gap into the trap itself? For example, instead of using a 1" x 4" frame with 4" insulation, using a 1" x 6" frame with the same 4" insulation mounted toward the front (non-wall) side of the frame, thereby leaving a 2" air gap in the back of the trap itself that would be enclosed in the surrounding fabric.

I hope that question makes sense. GIK, I was hoping you might weigh in on this as well.

That sounds like a plan to me.

There are two schools of thought on panel design. Frame it with hard material around the periphery (I like that word) or leave as much of the panel open as possible. The difference is whether you're allowing sound waves to penetrate the trap from the sides or not. In a home studio, I honestly don't think it makes a lot of difference. Maybe a high-end studio would hear something amiss (another word I like!!).

I opted for a completely open design. I did not build frames for my panels. Just covered them and attached them to the wall. I did this because I didn't want to spend money on framing. I am cheap (this word I really like!!! )

 

[ashcat_lt]

You could put panels across the wall-ceiling corner. Probably move that smoke detector. You could remove the closet doors and put traps in their back corners.

 

[GIK Acoustics]

Would there be any benefit to building an air gap into the trap itself? For example, instead of using a 1" x 4" frame with 4" insulation, using a 1" x 6" frame with the same 4" insulation mounted toward the front (non-wall) side of the frame, thereby leaving a 2" air gap in the back of the trap itself that would be enclosed in the surrounding fabric.

Yes, all of our bass traps have a similar air gap built in to the back.

 

[GIK Acoustics]

Indeed I was referring to the MoPads, sorry for any confusion, and thank you jimmy.

In that case, yes they will work fine I'm sure. However - a lot of people don't know understand decoupling well so I'll add that while MoPads may work great for some size/weight speakers (I have a pair of MoPads), they aren't a one size fits all solution. Any foam padding, or neoprene or sorbothane for that matter, can ever be a one size fits all solution. Decoupling needs a specific amount of compression to work properly, so different sizes and thicknesses are needed for different size and weighted speakers.

Also GIK, my fault... I meant to say that the tech specs differences are negligible NOT the same. What a difference one word can make.

Yes - a big difference! I didn't mean to be nit-picky, but there really is more than a couple companies that literally publish Auralex's same specs which is definitely not acceptable in my book, so you've got to be careful.

I will be looking forward to insight from you on a future post when I will be ready to treat a new room.

Just let us know! Don't hesitate to send any of us an e-mail either!

 

[jdchess]

Yes, all of our bass traps have a similar air gap built in to the back.

Is there any difference between this "built-in" air gap and air between the trap frame and the wall? For example, 4" inch insulation in a 4" frame set 4" inches off the wall versus 4" insulation in a 6" frame (2" built in air gap) set 2" off the wall. Both have 4" gaps between the insulation and the wall, but one has 2" inside and 2" outside. Do you believe this makes a difference in the effectiveness of the trap?

 

[GIK Acoustics]

Do you believe this makes a difference in the effectiveness of the trap?

Negligible. If you were to compare two traps where one had sides 100% affixed to the wall, then yes - but an air gap is an air gap for the most part.

 

[jdchess]

Negligible. If you were to compare two traps where one had sides 100% affixed to the wall, then yes - but an air gap is an air gap for the most part.

By 100% affixed to the wall, I assume you mean a situation where one trap's air gap was entirely enclosed in the back of the frame versus one with at least a portion of the air gap outside the frame. Correct?


On a different note, I'm currently trying to decide on my first set of studio monitors. Obviously, I plan to listen to as many as possible in my price range. Should I be looking for a certain woofer size / frequency range based on the size and dimensions of the room? Do I need to stay with a 5" or 6" since I'm in a fairly small room, or would an 8" inch still work well in such a small space? Or does this mainly depend on the material that I'm recording and/or mixing?

 

[GIK Acoustics]

By 100% affixed to the wall, I assume you mean a situation where one trap's air gap was entirely enclosed in the back of the frame versus one with at least a portion of the air gap outside the frame. Correct?

Yes, you've got it correct.

Should I be looking for a certain woofer size / frequency range based on the size and dimensions of the room? Do I need to stay with a 5" or 6" since I'm in a fairly small room

Not really. The difference is that an 8" speaker goes lower in frequency, so if you have problems that are at 40 Hz, you simply won't have 40 Hz issues unless your speaker goes down to 40 Hz. So one way, you don't hear 40 Hz well since the driver is only 5" and can't really mix it accurately. Or, you have an 8" driver that does go low enough and have problems at 40 Hz, so you can't mix it accurately. You still end at the same point. And if you need to treat 40 Hz it takes quite a few absorbers - even if they're tuned traps!

or would an 8" inch still work well in such a small space? Or does this mainly depend on the material that I'm recording and/or mixing?

The last part of this would be my decision maker. If the room was 100% treated to the best it could be, any speaker would work. I'm in a small 10' x 10' room that is treated pretty well and use a pair of three-way monitors with 7" low frequency woofers that go (apparently) to 38 Hz. Sounds great in here! This obviously depends on the room...I brought my speakers over to a friends partially DIY treated 8 x 12 room and it just sounded awful in there (he's stuck in an alcove built into the room next to a closet *facepalm* with two completely glass walls...cool place, terrible room for music..)

 

[jdchess]

I follow what you're saying. The best monitor in the world can't fix problems associated with an untreated or under-treated room. That completely makes sense. I'm working on plans to build traps and panels like we discussed above, so the room will be treated decently fairly soon. So if my budget will allow, there's no real downside to going with a good 8" monitor vs. a 5"? I was looking at the M-Audio BX5 and KRK Rokit RP5G2, but was wondering if I should consider the BX8 or KRK Rokit RP6 and RP8.

 

[GIK Acoustics]

Monitors are very personal so I'd go with what you like and think will be best for you.

I used the RP5G2s for a few years when I first got into production. They worked well for me at the time - I'll be honest and say I've never really heard a "better" or "worse" speaker in the same price range as those. They all suffer similar problems - and if you're just starting out, you probably won't notice until further down the road (nothing wrong with that). The 5's worked well for me, 6's would have been fine too. I would probably not go with the 8" KRKs as the mid-range is already scooped on Rokit series, and the 8" seems to widen the scoop. I would have to say my least favorite speakers in that range have to be the M-Audios. Not a fan.

 

[JimmyS1969]

I agree, monitor selection is a very personal preference.

I must say that in my opinion, the 8" Rockits are less 'scooped' than the 5". There is much more clarity in the midrange than the 5's. I have both.

I would agree though, as to the Rockit line being scooped in general. Definitely so, when compared to my Event TR8's. That being said, I find the Rockit 8's less fatiguing than the Events, and have learned what they are telling me. My mixes seem to translate best with them now.

My room is treated quite well, so that is not as much of a variable here. My next purchase will be in the $2000 range of monitors. I'm sure my whole set of opinions will change then.

 

[jdchess]

When you guys say scooped, do you mean a drop or a dip in the mids?

When I go to listen and test out several different monitors, what should I really be listening for to begin with, aside from one sounding "better?" Aside from taking some tracks that are similar to the style I plan to record/mix, are there any other particular tracks I should use as a part of a listening test?

 

[JimmyS1969]

Yes, scooped tends to describe a 'smiley face' type of eq curve. The Rockits tend to sound as if the low end/high end are accented. I find that much less on the 8" ones. Never heard the 6's however.

One thing to keep in mind while testing monitors, is that they will not sound the same in your room. Best to purchase from a local store that will allow you to return them, so that you can actually try them in your space. In a perfect world, you could try numerous models, but that is not likely, unless you know someone. I did just that, then purchased the monitors used from Craigslist.

You can hope for advice from others will lead you to the right purchase, but in the end, you will probably find your own opinion, and throw away a few bucks trying to find it.

Nice thing is, you can always sell them, or use them as an alternate pair, when you do find the ones that you work best with.

Also, keep in mind that places like Guitar Center, do not treat the rooms well. Even if they did, one pair is on one side of the room, another in the corner, etc. There can be no actually accurate comparison between them, if they are not set in the same location. Even then, it still is not your space. Monitors are only as good as the room itself allows them to be. One pair may be better than another for you, in your particular space/situation/style/preference. It is for you to decide. All we can do is give suggestions from our own experiences.

 

[sciencebase]

Stupidly threw away some polyurethane packaging foam the kind that they also, it now seems, use on microphone isolation screens. Could have built one myself and saved a few quid.

 

[jdchess]

Unfortunately, there are no local stores that carry a significant selection. I'm going out of town late next week and I'll be very close to a Guitar Center. I figured that would be a good opportunity to listen to several different monitors, but I definitely understand what you're saying about needing to hear them in your own space. I figure listening there has to at least be better than buying blind, then again, maybe not.

What are your opinions about front firing port vs. back firing? The M-Audio (among others) have round rear ports and the KRK have slotted front ports. Any thoughts on which is the better design? I would think that the KRK could sit closer to a back wall than the M-Audio without as much effect on bass response. Is this right?

Good news is that my budget has changed a little. I can probably invest around $450 in a pair of monitors if needed. In addition to the M-Audio and KRK, I was looking at the JBL LSR2325P and the Yamaha HS50M. I still can't afford the 8" versions of the JBL or Yamaha, but the 5" models are in reach. Anyone have any opinions about these? I've heard several folks talking about how much they love the Yamaha HS80M, but I haven't heard much about it's little brother.

Again, thanks for all the advice so far!

 

[JohnnyNowhere]

In regard to monitors, I'd go the JBLs. You won't regret it, especially monitoring keys. Low E on a bass guitar is around 42 Hz. 5"s won't get close to that and your keys go even lower. I'd suggest 8" drivers.

As for your room, early reflection won't be a big problem, but you can clap and whoop to find the resonances and the overtones you'll want to treat, or better yet, you can get physical:


At an air temperature of 64 degrees F, sound travels at 1123 feet per second, or 13.476 inches every thousandth of a second. If our room is 12' x 12' (144" x 144") with 9' (108") ceilings, and (for the sake of simplicity) we plop ourselves down perfectly in the centre of it and play a single, stacatto note, this is what will happen: The sound of the note will take 5.343 thousandths of a second to hit each of the four walls and take roughly as much to bounce back to the point of origin, that's 10.69 thousandths of a second, total. The same sound will reach the ceiling in 4.005 thousandths of a second and return in as much for a total of 8.01 thousandths. These return rates, being unequal, will be translated as room sound. Wall reflection 10.69 divided by ceiling reflection 8.01 is 1.3345817. All of those decimals mean that the reflections do not return to the microphone at an agreeable return rate.

Stay with me, because I'm really simplifying this for the example. The example assumes that we are sitting dead centre of the room...which will rarely be the case in reality. If we move in any direction, the return results will vary from several milliseconds sooner or later. And the speed of sound increases as air temperature rises, so at 70 degrees F it would be 1180 feet per second.

On top of that, a room of this size will actually resonate at two different fundamental frequencies: The distance from one wall to the next, and the distance from the floor to the ceiling. These two fundamental tones which the room dimensions correspond to will be accentuated, as well as the first and second overtones. In other words, most rooms are 'tuned' to at least a couple of tones because architects and builders have a tendency to work with 90 angles, meaning that the other walls are either perpendicular or parallel to one another. If the room is rectangular, rather than square, there will be three fundamental tones, each corresponding to the length, breadth, and depth of the room. Oh, crap!

Remaining on the subject of our example room, here's how we find those fundamentals:

Where ƒ represents the frequency in question, and C represents the speed of sound, merely divide the width of the room into C to arrive at ƒ. That is, 12 (room width in feet) divided into 1123 (s.o.s.) equals 93.58 Hz. That is close to F# below C3. Using the same formula, ceiling to floor measurements correspond to 124.77 Hz which is B below C3.




Hope that helps!