studio design

[archive]

From: "Throatlatch Records" <ranjan@t...>
Date: Sun Feb 11, 2001 5:13 pm
Subject: Re: [acoustics] can some one help me with a plan ,for a studio

> On the sides, a new wall on new studs in front of the masonry ... shoot
for a
> 5 to 6" inch (125 to 150 mm) dead air gap. put a bit of insulation in
> between the new studs, and caulk the new wall up so that it is air tight

Could I make another plastered brick wall with an air gap of 2"-3" for
isolation from the adjoining shops?

Check out the diffusion sketchs at Dan's page and figure out what you can
most easily build (polys are easy
> but not super effective) ... you need lots of diffusion to artificially
> increase the acoustic size of the tracking room, try to do this without
> taking out all of the reverb time.

When its coming to compromise, should I compromise on the control room or
the tracking room?
I can make the diffusers shown in Dan's site (the black one) . But I'll need
dimensions for that. How deep are the various sections? Should they be from
floor to ceiling or at an intermediate place? What is the funda of bass
traps? Do they increase or decrease the Low frequencies? Will they also be
required here? Do you suggest that both my rooms will require more of
diffusers and less of absorbers? If I mount a diffuser panel, on the wall,
does the wall have absorption material on it too. ie. Does the diffuser
panel sit on top of the absorption treatment, or on top of plastered
masonry?

> It would be a great improvement if you could obtain a space with twice the
> width ... example: a 20' wide, 27' deep, 11.5' tall space is just over
6,000
> cubic feet. Such a space could make a nice little tracking room ... you
are
> at half that size and the laws of physics are working against you.

I'd love to have that ...... but this is all I have!
Thanx a lot for your advice.

Ranjan

[archive]

From: "Throatlatch Records" <ranjan@t...>
Date: Sun Feb 11, 2001 5:20 pm
Subject: Re: [acoustics] studio design

> The Everest books would be a good start.

I'm trying to get these bboks. Amazon takes at least 2 weeks to ship to
India,a nd the local book stalls don't keep these books. I've told them to
arrange them for me. Lets see....

> Treatments need not be based on any fancy materials .... burlap, plywood,
> upholstery batting .... simple common materials will suffice.

Burlap- Is this the same as Jute cloth?
Upholstery batting- What does that mean actually? The polyster cloth
normally used for curtains etc., or something more specific?

> Corning 703 is a compressed fiberglass board approximately 3.5 lbs. per
cubic
> foot in density. Cotton balls stuffed in a burlap feed sack, or hay bales
> stacked against a wall would work just as well, but fiberglass board comes
in
> convenient sizes and shapes, bugs and mice don't find it appealing, and
its
> fireproof ... so its generally preferred .. nothing magic about it though.
.

How is glasswool as compared to fiberglass? It is readily available here,
but I've not seen its absorption specs in any of the articles on acoustics!
Could you enlighten me?

Thanx.
Ranjan

[archive]

From: "Dave Martin" <dave.martin@n...>
Date: Sun Feb 11, 2001 7:24 pm
Subject: Re: [acoustics] studio design

----- Original Message -----
From: "Throatlatch Records" <ranjan@t...>
:
: > Treatments need not be based on any fancy materials .... burlap,
plywood,
: > upholstery batting .... simple common materials will suffice.
:
: Burlap- Is this the same as Jute cloth?
: Upholstery batting- What does that mean actually? The polyster cloth
: normally used for curtains etc., or something more specific?

Burpal and Jute are the same thing (or close enough to make no appreaciable
difference). Upholstery batting is the material they use to stuff couches
and easy chairs. It's usually a fluffy white poly that looks very much like
a cotton ball, but larger, of course.

Dave Martin
DMA, Inc.
Nashville, TN

[archive]

From: "Arjan Sinnige" <pro-found@m...>
Date: Sun Feb 11, 2001 8:17 pm
Subject: Re: [acoustics] studio design

Scott wrote in reply to me :

> > Never confirmed it myself but hey, if it smells like a cat, looks like a
cat
> > and
> > miauws like a cat, it probably is a cat.
> >
> > Arjan Sinnige
>
>
> I thought it was a duck?
>
> Scott.

Ehhr, wrong again, aren't I ? Damn that darn English. You sure the cat wasn't
the one you can eat ? <G>

[archive]

From: SRF7@a...
Date: Sun Feb 11, 2001 8:33 pm
Subject: Re: [acoustics] studio design

In a message dated 2/11/01 12:24:34 PM Eastern Standard Time,
ranjan@t... writes:

> Burlap- Is this the same as Jute cloth?

Yes

> Upholstery batting- What does that mean actually? The polyster cloth
> normally used for curtains etc., or something more specific?
>
>

Whatever one might stuff upholstery with I guess ... foam, horse hair, straw,
you name it .... its the intersticies (litlle holes and crevices) and the
density that matter.

[archive]

From: SRF7@a...
Date: Sun Feb 11, 2001 9:18 pm
Subject: Re: [acoustics] can some one help me with a plan ,for a studio

In a message dated 2/11/01 12:27:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
ranjan@t... writes:

> Could I make another plastered brick wall with an air gap of 2"-3" for
> isolation from the adjoining shops?
>

Absolutely ... how noisy is it next door? Maybe build the front and back
walls first and see what you are dealing with, then plan the side walls to be
as massive as needed.

> Check out the diffusion sketchs at Dan's page and figure out what you can
> most easily build (polys are easy
> > but not super effective) ... you need lots of diffusion to artificially
> > increase the acoustic size of the tracking room, try to do this without
> > taking out all of the reverb time.
>
>

> When its coming to compromise, should I compromise on the control room or
> the tracking room?

There are two schools of thought ....

You need a big control room to conduct critical listening

You need a bigger studio tracking room to get acoustic instruments to sound
their best.

The sad truth is you need both.

Maybe you should have one big room (with a small closet to monitor tracking
levels). Track in the big room, then move the mixer and effects rack and mix
in the big room ... doesn't sound like you have that much gear ... with a a
couple of rack/equipment stands on casters and a clever wiring scheme and
you might get moving down to a 20 to 30 minute chore .... track from the
control closet till you have all of a project's tracks down .... then move to
the big room for mix down.

If nothing else you can always add and interior wall later if you find it
impossible to work that way.

> I can make the diffusers shown in Dan's site (the black one) . But I'll need
> dimensions for that. How deep are the various sections? Should they be from
> floor to ceiling or at an intermediate place?

There is a spreadsheet for calculating that type of diffuser on Dan's site...
you should set the size to fit the target LF - HF limits and commonly
available materials. Generally the taller the better, but well depth and
width set LF and HF limts which need to match the job at hand.

My $0.02 is skip anything this complicated ... go with something simple.

What is the funda of bass

> traps? Do they increase or decrease the Low frequencies? Will they also be
> required here? Do you suggest that both my rooms will require more of
> diffusers and less of absorbers? If I mount a diffuser panel, on the wall,
> does the wall have absorption material on it too. ie. Does the diffuser
> panel sit on top of the absorption treatment, or on top of plastered
> masonry?
>

A bass trap is generally a sealed vessel tuned to a frequency you want to
"trap" ... go to the library and look up "Helmholtz bottle". If you have a
single known problem freq., and can't tame it with diffusion then the bass
trap is an excellent tool. There is a plan for a Honeycomb port resonator
that looks pretty effective ... you can also make these out of peg board. If
you make a pegboard one for the wall you can also use the pegboared as
pegboard (hang your cables on them). If you curve the pegboard as you hang
it you have a polycylindrical helmholtz array cable hanger, or what I call a
PHACH ... and when people ask you: "What, the PHACH is that?", you can simply
reply "Yes".

Generally absorbtion (a bass trap or otherwise) is installed to reduce reverb
time ... zero reverb time is dead ... dead is bad. Take drums for example,
they sound good with a bit of reverb ... snappy and big .... but too much
reverb and they sound like mud. Its the Goldilocks syndrome ... not too hot,
and not too cold, but rather, just right. You can calculate a reasonable
target reverb time for a room, there is a spreadsheet on Dan's site.

In a 6,000 cubic foot room, for acoustic music you will want a RT60 (reverb
time till original sound drops 60 dB) of about 3/4 of a second ... for loud
rock-n-roll more like 1/2 of a second. Building movable absorbent panels
while allow you to adjust the reverb time.

Optimum reverb time is a function of source signal loudness, room Sabine
content (hoe reflective thje room's surfaces are, and room volume ... small
rooms have fewer resonant modes and long reverbs sound very colored (just a
few frequencies ringing). This is bad. You want all the frrequencies
ringing and then dying out more or less together ... this is good.

Diffusion artificially adds modes by spreading the direction of the
reflections ... the room seems less reflective by seeming larger
(acoustically). A highly reflective 3,000 cubic foot room with lots of
diffusion will sound like a much larger less reflective room.

Diffusion does not eliminate the need for absorbtive elements it just
diminishes the need ... you will likely need both. The polycylindrical does
both and they are easy to build ... you could line both side walls - near the
floor to near the ceiling - with vaious sizes (widths) and stuff their
interiors with absorbent. This would be an inexpensive but clever way to
make the room bigger acoustically for Mids and Highs while reducing Lows.

Get in there, cut some hits and use the money to get a bigger building.

Scott R. Foster

[archive]

From: SRF7@a...
Date: Sun Feb 11, 2001 9:19 pm
Subject: Re: [acoustics] can some one help me with a plan ,for a studio

In a message dated 2/11/01 12:27:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
ranjan@t... writes:

> Could I make another plastered brick wall with an air gap of 2"-3" for
> isolation from the adjoining shops?
>

Absolutely ... how noisy is it next door? Maybe build the front and back
walls first and see what you are dealing with, then plan the side walls to be
as massive as needed.

> Check out the diffusion sketchs at Dan's page and figure out what you can
> most easily build (polys are easy
> > but not super effective) ... you need lots of diffusion to artificially
> > increase the acoustic size of the tracking room, try to do this without
> > taking out all of the reverb time.
>
>

> When its coming to compromise, should I compromise on the control room or
> the tracking room?

There are two schools of thought ....

You need a big control room to conduct critical listening

You need a bigger studio tracking room to get acoustic instruments to sound
their best.

The sad truth is you need both.

Maybe you should have one big room (with a small closet to monitor tracking
levels). Track in the big room, then move the mixer and effects rack and mix
in the big room ... doesn't sound like you have that much gear ... with a a
couple of rack/equipment stands on casters and a clever wiring scheme and
you might get moving down to a 20 to 30 minute chore .... track from the
control closet till you have all of a project's tracks down .... then move to
the big room for mix down.

If nothing else you can always add and interior wall later if you find it
impossible to work that way.

> I can make the diffusers shown in Dan's site (the black one) . But I'll need
> dimensions for that. How deep are the various sections? Should they be from
> floor to ceiling or at an intermediate place?

There is a spreadsheet for calculating that type of diffuser on Dan's site...
you should set the size to fit the target LF - HF limits and commonly
available materials. Generally the taller the better, but well depth and
width set LF and HF limts which need to match the job at hand.

My $0.02 is skip anything this complicated ... go with something simple.

What is the funda of bass

> traps? Do they increase or decrease the Low frequencies? Will they also be
> required here? Do you suggest that both my rooms will require more of
> diffusers and less of absorbers? If I mount a diffuser panel, on the wall,
> does the wall have absorption material on it too. ie. Does the diffuser
> panel sit on top of the absorption treatment, or on top of plastered
> masonry?
>

A bass trap is generally a sealed vessel tuned to a frequency you want to
"trap" ... go to the library and look up "Helmholtz bottle". If you have a
single known problem freq., and can't tame it with diffusion then the bass
trap is an excellent tool. There is a plan for a Honeycomb port resonator
that looks pretty effective ... you can also make these out of peg board. If
you make a pegboard one for the wall you can also use the pegboared as
pegboard (hang your cables on them). If you curve the pegboard as you hang
it you have a polycylindrical helmholtz array cable hanger, or what I call a
PHACH ... and when people ask you: "What, the PHACH is that?", you can simply
reply "Yes".

Generally absorbtion (a bass trap or otherwise) is installed to reduce reverb
time ... zero reverb time is dead ... dead is bad. Take drums for example,
they sound good with a bit of reverb ... snappy and big .... but too much
reverb and they sound like mud. Its the Goldilocks syndrome ... not too hot,
and not too cold, but rather, just right. You can calculate a reasonable
target reverb time for a room, there is a spreadsheet on Dan's site.

In a 6,000 cubic foot room, for acoustic music you will want a RT60 (reverb
time till original sound drops 60 dB) of about 3/4 of a second ... for loud
rock-n-roll more like 1/2 of a second. Building movable absorbent panels
while allow you to adjust the reverb time.

Optimum reverb time is a function of source signal loudness, room Sabine
content (hoe reflective thje room's surfaces are, and room volume ... small
rooms have fewer resonant modes and long reverbs sound very colored (just a
few frequencies ringing). This is bad. You want all the frrequencies
ringing and then dying out more or less together ... this is good.

Diffusion artificially adds modes by spreading the direction of the
reflections ... the room seems less reflective by seeming larger
(acoustically). A highly reflective 3,000 cubic foot room with lots of
diffusion will sound like a much larger less reflective room.

Diffusion does not eliminate the need for absorbtive elements it just
diminishes the need ... you will likely need both. The polycylindrical does
both and they are easy to build ... you could line both side walls - near the
floor to near the ceiling - with vaious sizes (widths) and stuff their
interiors with absorbent. This would be an inexpensive but clever way to
make the room bigger acoustically for Mids and Highs while reducing Lows.

Get in there, cut some hits and use the money to get a bigger building.

Scott R. Foster

[archive]

From: SRF7@a...
Date: Sun Feb 11, 2001 9:28 pm
Subject: Re: [acoustics] studio design

In a message dated 2/11/01 3:27:39 PM Eastern Standard Time,
pro-found@m... writes:

> .
>
> Ehhr, wrong again, aren't I ? Damn that darn English. You sure the cat
> wasn't
> the one you can eat ? <G>

Aww come on English isn't so hard ... easy as cake ... piece of pie.

Scott

[archive]

From: "Danny Stinnett" <danny@p...>
Date: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:30 am
Subject: Re: [acoustics] can some one help me with a plan ,for a studio

Ranjan, Hope you can get something working for you. I am at the limit of my
(very small) experience. The suggestion, to try and use the same room to
track and mix, does have merit. What you might have to do is set up one
large room, with as neutral acoustics as possible, to mix and track in. By
using gobos etc, you can deaden certain areas, and have other areas where it
is live. Good luck. Danny

[archive]

From: "John C. Griggs" <johng@c...>
Date: Mon Feb 12, 2001 10:52 am
Subject: Re: [acoustics] studio design

Arjan Sinnige wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > BTW, for my money, the book to get on surround sound is "Surround Sound:
> > Up and Running" by Tomlinson Holman (someone told me he's the "TH" in
> > THX from Lucas Films, but I think that's actually just a coincidence -
>
> You are not incorrect, at least AFAIK, they teach at SAE that THX stands for :
>
> Tomlinson Holman eXperiment
>
Well, I knew there was a coincidence there somewhere - Lucas directed a
film called "THX 1138" in 1970, long before the THX technology was even
conceived. I guess I just got the coincidence backwards!

BTW, I flipped through the new edition of Everest's Master Handbook of
Acoustics this weekend - most of the new stuff seems related to
Schroeder diffusers and software for acoustical analysis. I didn't
notice anything new about surround sound, but I didn't pass it through a
fine toothed comb (There is some stuff about setting up a home theatre,
which I didn't look at in any detail.)

I still recommend the Holman book if surround sound is your interest,
but I think you'll need a decent grasp of the stuff Everest discusses in
the Master Handbook to get real value from Holman.

My $0.02 (Canadian)
John

[archive]

From: Dan Nelson <drnelson@s...>
Date: Mon Feb 12, 2001 8:24 pm
Subject: Re: [acoustics] can some one help me with a plan ,for a studio

I have finally upload file drawing to the studiotips site, forgive my slowness.
I
just started catching up on my weekend email.

Dan

[archive]

From: "Throatlatch Records" <ranjan@t...>
Date: Mon Mar 5, 2001 12:01 pm
Subject: Re: [acoustics] studio design

Hi Everybody!
Coming back to my studio design, after a break, let me tell you that I
followed the advice given to me by this forum and have decided to have one
room only, which will be used as the tracking room as well as the control
room.
So now the layout of my floorplan is somewhat like this....
The whole floor area is 38'x11.5'x13.5'
Entrance Door is 4'x8' which leads to the lobby/soundlock which is 11.5'x6'
In line with the entrance door is the next door on the next wall which leads
into the tracking room cum control room which is 11.5'x26'
The rest of the space ie the rest of the 6 ' has a bathroom 3.5' x6' and a
vocal booth/multipurpose recording booth 8'x6'

Could you give me your comments on what I've decided?

Now for the acoustics:
I hace shops on either side and offices on the top. The walls are 6'
brickwork+plaster and the ceiling is concrete.
What kind of soundproofing would I need , if any. I'm not worried so much
about the shops on the side, but the offices on top could get disturbed by
the sound created inside the studio.
Will building a double ceiling help? Or will the sound still travel through
the walls?
Please advice me on the kind of treatment pattern I should go for on the
ceiling.

I have plenty more questions to ask, but I'll start here only and then take
it from there.

Thanx,
Ranjan

[archive]

From: sjoerd@n...
Date: Mon Mar 5, 2001 8:14 pm
Subject: Re: studio design

--- In acoustics@y..., "Throatlatch Records" <ranjan@t...> wrote:

> Now for the acoustics:
> I hace shops on either side and offices on the top. The walls are 6'
> brickwork+plaster and the ceiling is concrete.
> What kind of soundproofing would I need , if any. I'm not worried so
much
> about the shops on the side, but the offices on top could get
disturbed by
> the sound created inside the studio.
> Will building a double ceiling help? Or will the sound still travel
through?

ranjan - a drawing of your proposed place would help a lot!
Unfortunately ... concrete floors are "somewhat special".
This is just about the only thing in structural / studio design where
I would shy away from doing anything prior to taking measurements
first. Some concrete floors, especially some pre-fab designs used in
continental europe and asia are so good that you could keep a heard of
cows on a floor and nobody would ever notice, others are just the
opposite and you need to go through great lengths to build an internal
structure that does not transmit any low frequencies.
Perhaps the best thing to do would be to get a tone generator and
transmit frequencies in your room, then go upstairs and take
measurements. Might save you a lot of money, time and hassle in the
long term.

[archive]

From: "Throatlatch Records" <ranjan@t...>
Date: Tue Mar 6, 2001 3:15 pm
Subject: Re: [acoustics] Re: studio design

Hi!
I've been asked this question before, without getting a very definite
answer...
Can someone please tell me the effectiveness of glasswool for acoustic
treatment, with figures for different frequencies if possible.
Thanx,
Ranjan

[archive]

From: SRF7@a...
Date: Tue Mar 6, 2001 5:00 pm
Subject: Re: [acoustics] Re: studio design

In a message dated 3/6/01 11:35:30 AM Eastern Standard Time,
ranjan@t... writes:

> Hi!
> I've been asked this question before, without getting a very definite
> answer...
> Can someone please tell me the effectiveness of glasswool for acoustic
> treatment, with figures for different frequencies if possible.
> Thanx,
> Ranjan
>

Probably will perform the same as fiberglass of the same density ... the
interstices (little holes) also play a role, but there are plenty of holes in
glass wool aren't there?

Anyway, I think the ubiquitous Corning 703 fiberglass board is 3.5 lbs. per
cubic foot .. if you used a compressed glass wool panel of similar weight per
cubic measure I doubt you could tell the difference acousticaly ... for that
matter compressed pine straw would probably do about the same thing ... and
you'd get a free air freshener!

Scott R. Foster

Scott R. Foster

[archive]

From: "Throatlatch Records" <ranjan@t...>
Date: Tue Mar 6, 2001 5:39 pm
Subject: Re: studio design

Hi Sjoerd!
I am posting my paln to Dan .
Everything is on paper right now, except the outer 4 walls and ceiling, and
can be changed upon your advice.
I am also very impressed by the article you posted on the acoustics group
site about using natural stuff for treatment. I would like to use the same,
so could you also advice on what and how to use for this space of mine.
The music I'll be recording will be mainly Rock, with acoustic drums going
in first, guitars /Bass/Vocals taken after wards.

thanx.

ranjan

[archive]

From: sjoerd@n...
Date: Tue Mar 6, 2001 7:23 pm
Subject: Re: studio design

--- In acoustics@y..., "Throatlatch Records" <ranjan@t...> wrote:
> Hi!
> I've been asked this question before, without getting a very definite
> answer...
> Can someone please tell me the effectiveness of glasswool for acoustic
> treatment, with figures for different frequencies if possible.
> Thanx,
> Ranjan

Ranjan,
I would suggest you find out what make of glasswool you can obtain
locally, then go to the manufacturers website. Most of them have
complete specs on their products, including STC ratings and ratings
accross the frequency spectrum. If they don't, email them and they
will send you details.

Thanks for your drawing, but it doesn't show any dimensions, can you
send some?

[archive]

From: "Throatlatch Records" <ranjan@t...>
Date: Wed Mar 7, 2001 2:17 pm
Subject: Re: [acoustics] Re: studio design

Hi!
Unfortunately, all the galsswool available here is produced locally, and the
selleres have no idea of the specs we are looking for. I guess we'll just
have to weigh it and get the densities ourselves. Thats about all we can do.
What is your view on using coir for sound treatment? Do you have any idea
about its absorption characteristics?

The dimesnsions as I mentioned in my earlier mail, are :
Overall volume : 11' x 38' x 13.5'
Entrance lobby: 11' x 6' x 13.5'
Control room cum tracking room: 11' x 26' x 13.5'
vocal booth : 8' x 6' 13.5'

Hope this will be of help.
Please ask me if you need any more info...

Ranjan

[archive]

From: SRF7@a...
Date: Wed Mar 7, 2001 6:28 pm
Subject: Re: [acoustics] Re: studio design

In a message dated 3/7/01 9:16:57 AM Eastern Standard Time,
ranjan@t... writes:

> Control room cum tracking room: 11' x 26' x 13.5'

Might want to shrink that 26' to 25' to spread the modes out a bit.

Every other reflection of the 13.5 mode lines up less than 5% off the 26'
mode. Shrinking to 25' brings this up difference up to 8% which is more in
line with conventional wisdom.

I put a spreadsheet up on Doug's site you can use to play around with these
numbers. Let me know if you need any help with it.

Good Luck

Scott R. Foster

[archive]

From: Dan Nelson <drnelson@s...>
Date: Thu Mar 8, 2001 1:44 am
Subject: Re: [acoustics] Re: studio design

The drawing is up in the file area of the studiotips website.

Dan

I did it yesterday i just found out my original email bounced