bennychico11
...
I posted this a few weeks back trying to find out if a wider bass trap of 4' across (2 panels wide) is better off than a 2' wide panel.
Ethan suggested just to test it, however my room is already treated and I don't want to tear out what was already done. But doing some research I came across this test done by a guy over at studiotips.com
Looking at his waterfall graphs he came up with this (both panels are 4" thick)
Empty corner
2' corner
4' corner
It appears the wider he makes it, the more nulls it gets in the 100-200Hz range. Even with 3, 2" panels the dips become more prominent.
Unless I'm totally misunderstanding these tests (which wouldn't be the first time)...I would think the more absorption in the corner, the more even the dips would have been smoothed out.
It isn't until he adds some air gaps or alternate material (R-31) in between does it start to look more like the 2' wide version.
Maybe it's just those tests are hard to reproduce when only testing a single trapped corner. Perhaps all four corners at 4' wide is going to yield much better results...compounding the treatment of the entire room (but of course I'm not debating treating one corner versus four)
Reason I'm asking all this is because, again, I'm planning on redoing the studio soon. I inherited this one from a former engineer who built wide corner traps. A couple of them as large as 6'. I'd love to reclaim some of the square footage of the room back by reducing the corner traps to 2' (and treating the walls of course) but not at the cost of worsening the acoustics. But might a 2' corner actually show an improvement....?!
I did the first room test today, and assuming I did it correctly...it came out like this:
Comments? Decay times seem to be far less than 300ms and there aren't any extreme peaks or nulls. I'm definitely not disappointed in the room as it is now, I just want to plan what I should do when the redesigning starts.
Hopefully I'll remember to document/photograph the entire process for everyone here.
Ethan suggested just to test it, however my room is already treated and I don't want to tear out what was already done. But doing some research I came across this test done by a guy over at studiotips.com
Looking at his waterfall graphs he came up with this (both panels are 4" thick)
Empty corner
2' corner
4' corner
It appears the wider he makes it, the more nulls it gets in the 100-200Hz range. Even with 3, 2" panels the dips become more prominent.
Unless I'm totally misunderstanding these tests (which wouldn't be the first time)...I would think the more absorption in the corner, the more even the dips would have been smoothed out.
It isn't until he adds some air gaps or alternate material (R-31) in between does it start to look more like the 2' wide version.
Maybe it's just those tests are hard to reproduce when only testing a single trapped corner. Perhaps all four corners at 4' wide is going to yield much better results...compounding the treatment of the entire room (but of course I'm not debating treating one corner versus four)
Reason I'm asking all this is because, again, I'm planning on redoing the studio soon. I inherited this one from a former engineer who built wide corner traps. A couple of them as large as 6'. I'd love to reclaim some of the square footage of the room back by reducing the corner traps to 2' (and treating the walls of course) but not at the cost of worsening the acoustics. But might a 2' corner actually show an improvement....?!
I did the first room test today, and assuming I did it correctly...it came out like this:
Comments? Decay times seem to be far less than 300ms and there aren't any extreme peaks or nulls. I'm definitely not disappointed in the room as it is now, I just want to plan what I should do when the redesigning starts.
Hopefully I'll remember to document/photograph the entire process for everyone here.
Last edited:
