Garage Studio Design

Archives of the acoustics mailing list

Garage Studio Design

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 5:04 am

From: David Chertock <ap412@x??x.xxxx
Date: Thu Dec 9, 1999 9:15 am
Subject: Garage Studio Design

A .jpg floor plan of the garage studio design I'm working on has been
uploaded to :

http://www.studiotips.com/files/chertock.jpg

I need to solicit bids from contractors, so I had an architect familiar
with soundproofing draw me up some plans. I gave him my own crude
drawing to work from, and while he got a few things wrong, this is
basically the floorplan I ordered. I was lucky because he had all the
complex details of studio building (wall, windows, doors, etc.) on file
in his computer from similiar projects. I wanted to present the design
to this list and perhaps an acoustician, and then have revisions made.

First off the dimensions got cropped off the scanned image. The inner
lengths of the side walls are 18'-7 1/2". The bottom inner wall length
is 22'-3 1/2 inches. As I drew in by hand, there will be a window on
both sides of the mix position, and the windows will be more toward the
center of the room that they are in the picture.

Some basic choices reflected spatial concerns as opposed to acoustical
concerns:

ïThe 7'-6 1/2" length of the sound lock/machine room and iso booth is
merely whats left over after you put a Hammond, a Rhodes, and an open
three foot door against the wall.

ïI'm going to mount a 32" TV to the front wall. My eyes need to be about
5' from the tv screen. There is my mix position.

ïI decided against a separate tracking room because there just isn't
enough space in a garage to make 2 rooms that work. Also, I basically
need a decent space for my audio post clients to sit down.

Here are my questions:

ï Can anyone tell what the optimum angle for the splayed walls might
be? As drawn, the walls just accomidate an existing door and the space
necessary for a new 3 foot door in the sound lock/machine room. This
angle could be cut in a little wider making the sound lock and iso booth
a little larger. The only way I can figure out of surely finding a good
angle is to make a mock up of the room with cardboard, and do the mirror
along the wall trick, moving the cardboard walls until I can't see the
speakers. I took geometry a long time ago and I didn't like it. Help.

ï Will the windows on the splayed walls give me trouble with early
reflections? The architect seemed to think they would be a problem, but
I thought if they were splayed correctly, highly reflective windows
would only screw up the sound for my clients behind me. Although the
architect drew 703 along the back wall, I actually want a diffuser on
the back wall, and 703 lining the front. That is the LEDE style, right?
If the windows are a problem, I want to build 703 inserts to plug the
windows with when I'm mixing.

ï The iso room is a bit wider than the sound lock. What this means is
that the back of the control room is not symetrical. It is 22" inches
deeper on the iso room side. Will this give me bad stereo imaging at the
mix position? Will it if the side walls are lined with 703? The walls
will already be lined with irregular shaped objects; the sound lock side
will have the Hammond and Rhodes, and the iso room side will have a wall
of guitar amps.

ï If the 22" deeper side poses a threat to my acoustical health, I have
considered building a 22" closet to make the room symetrical (see the
hand drawn lines). Its pretty valuable real estate to give up, but I
certainly do need the storage (foley props as well as general music
junk). On the other hand, a bass amp will just rattle that stuff all
over the place. So, do you think with this kind of Bozo design that I
really need to worry about assymetry? The props can go in a $160 shed
from Home Depot.

ï Should the side walls be offset to prevent standing waves? Even if
they are coated with 703? If so, how far do I need to skew them?

ï Do the doors of the sound lock and iso room have to be skewed to
prevent standing waves with the back wall? If so, would it be better to
have the back wall of the studio a little offset where the sound lock
and iso booth are (I was only planning a diffuser in the middle).

ï Will this room ever sound any good at all?

ï How did I ever have any fun in my untreated extra bedrooms?

Thank you for taking the time to look at this, and thanks in advance for
your help!

David
Venice, CA
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 5:18 am

From: Dan Nelson <dprimary@x??????xxxxx.xxxx
Date: Fri Dec 17, 1999 3:00 am
Subject: Re: Garage Studio Design

Sorry about taking so long to post I've just been swamped the last few
weeks

David Chertock wrote:

> From: David Chertock <ap412@l...>
>
> A .jpg floor plan of the garage studio design I'm working on has been
> uploaded to :
>
> http://www.studiotips.com/files/chertock.jpg
>
> I need to solicit bids from contractors, so I had an architect familiar
> with soundproofing draw me up some plans. I gave him my own crude
> drawing to work from, and while he got a few things wrong, this is
> basically the floorplan I ordered. I was lucky because he had all the
> complex details of studio building (wall, windows, doors, etc.) on file
> in his computer from similiar projects. I wanted to present the design
> to this list and perhaps an acoustician, and then have revisions made.
>
> First off the dimensions got cropped off the scanned image. The inner
> lengths of the side walls are 18'-7 1/2". The bottom inner wall length
> is 22'-3 1/2 inches. As I drew in by hand, there will be a window on
> both sides of the mix position, and the windows will be more toward the
> center of the room that they are in the picture.
>
> Some basic choices reflected spatial concerns as opposed to acoustical
> concerns:
>
> ïThe 7'-6 1/2" length of the sound lock/machine room and iso booth is
> merely whats left over after you put a Hammond, a Rhodes, and an open
> three foot door against the wall.
>
> ïI'm going to mount a 32" TV to the front wall. My eyes need to be about
> 5' from the tv screen. There is my mix position.
>
> ïI decided against a separate tracking room because there just isn't
> enough space in a garage to make 2 rooms that work. Also, I basically
> need a decent space for my audio post clients to sit down.
>
> Here are my questions:

The angle to prevent flutter echo is less then what you have. The Master
Handbook of Acoustics mentions it but, I can't find it right now. To
increase the ITD gap it is related the angle of incidence at which the
sound strikes the wall.
On the window close to the speaker it either just misses it or is very
close to missing it. For the far speaker the opposite window may cause some
problems. Consider smaller windows 4 by 4 is a pretty big window.

Having the back of the room no completely symmetrical is not a problem. It
is most important in the front of the room. The effects of non-symmetry
lessen the farther away you are from the mix position.

I like U shaped work area everything within arms reach.

I think it could be a good sounding room. If you need to do 5.1 mixing in
the future where will you mount the other speakers.
You may have little bass weirdness in the front of the room I can't really
explain it just something I feel, you may be out from the front wall enough
that it won't be a problem at all. Nothing 6" of 703 or some corner traps
can't solve.

You might want to have your racks on wheels to roll it when you need to
work on the wiring it looks a little tight to get behind it. I put mine on
three of those rollers they put under refrigerators it works great.

Dan Nelson
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 5:18 am

From: David Chertock <ap412@x??x.xxxx
Date: Fri Dec 17, 1999 10:07 pm
Subject: Re: Garage Studio Design

Dan,
thank you so much for your input. I really appreciate it. I'm so
relieved that I don't have to build that closet! As I find this stuff
quite confusing, would you mind clarifying your point about the wall
angles for me?

Dan Nelson <dprimary@e...> wrote

> David Chetock wrote:
> > A .jpg floor plan of the garage studio design I'm working on has been
> > uploaded to :
> >
> > http://www.studiotips.com/files/chertock.jpg
>
> > First off the dimensions got cropped off the scanned image. The inner
> > lengths of the side walls are 18'-7 1/2". The bottom inner wall length
> > is 22'-3 1/2 inches.

> The angle to prevent flutter echo is less then what you have. The Master
> Handbook of Acoustics mentions it but, I can't find it right now. To
> increase the ITD gap it is related the angle of incidence at which the
> sound strikes the wall. On the window close to the speaker it either just
misses it or is very
> close to missing it. For the far speaker the opposite window may cause some
> problems. Consider smaller windows 4 by 4 is a pretty big window.
>

I think what you are saying boils down to this: with the angle of the
walls that is drawn, a second reflection is going to nail me at the mix
position. Is this correct or am I just lost?

Do you think its possible given my space, to change the wall angles a
bit, and create a reflection free zone (don't worry about the ceiling
for now)?

> I think it could be a good sounding room. If you need to do 5.1 mixing in
> the future where will you mount the other speakers.

For flexibillity I will have to put the surrounds on moveable stands.

> You may have little bass weirdness in the front of the room I can't really
> explain it just something I feel, you may be out from the front wall enough
> that it won't be a problem at all. Nothing 6" of 703 or some corner traps
> can't solve.
>

I need to find someone to tune the room, but of course first I need to
find someone to build it. Does anyone know of someone in LA that they
can recommend?

> You might want to have your racks on wheels to roll it when you need to
> work on the wiring it looks a little tight to get behind it. I put mine on
> three of those rollers they put under refrigerators it works great.
>

Yes-sir-ee! Most of my gear already rolls around.

> >
> > ï Can anyone tell what the optimum angle for the splayed walls might
> > be? As drawn, the walls just accomidate an existing door and the space
> > necessary for a new 3 foot door in the sound lock/machine room. This
> > angle could be cut in a little wider making the sound lock and iso booth
> > a little larger. The only way I can figure out of surely finding a good
> > angle is to make a mock up of the room with cardboard, and do the mirror
> > along the wall trick, moving the cardboard walls until I can't see the
> > speakers. I took geometry a long time ago and I didn't like it. Help.
> >
> > ï Will the windows on the splayed walls give me trouble with early
> > reflections? The architect seemed to think they would be a problem, but
> > I thought if they were splayed correctly, highly reflective windows
> > would only screw up the sound for my clients behind me. Although the
> > architect drew 703 along the back wall, I actually want a diffuser on
> > the back wall, and 703 lining the front. That is the LEDE style, right?
> > If the windows are a problem, I want to build 703 inserts to plug the
> > windows with when I'm mixing.
> >

> >
> > ï Should the side walls be offset to prevent standing waves? Even if
> > they are coated with 703? If so, how far do I need to skew them?
> >
> > ï Do the doors of the sound lock and iso room have to be skewed to
> > prevent standing waves with the back wall? If so, would it be better to
> > have the back wall of the studio a little offset where the sound lock
> > and iso booth are (I was only planning a diffuser in the middle).

Thanks again,
David
Venice, CA
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 5:19 am

From: Jon Best <jrbest@x???xx.xxxx
Date: Sun Dec 19, 1999 2:02 am
Subject: Re: Garage Studio Design


I bet you can see, from the mix position, a reflection of one or both main
speakers in each window.
That sightline also denotes an early reflection off that window. Two ideas
(other than smaller
windows, that may help too)- one, have some heavy drapes a couple inches off
the wall that you pull
over the windows when you're doing critical mixing. Two, angle the top of the
inner panes in
towards you- I think Malcolm Chrissholm recommends about 14 degrees for a front
window, and that
seems like it'd be close for your two as well. That way, the first reflection
is hitting you in the
ankles. Either one of these may work, and both may work even better. Good
luck!

Jon Best
Sales Weasel From Mars
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 5:19 am

From: David Chertock <ap412@x??x.xxxx
Date: Sun Dec 19, 1999 5:22 pm
Subject: Re: Garage Studio Design

Jon Best <jrbest@e...> wrote:

> > A .jpg floor plan of the garage studio design I'm working on has been
> > uploaded to :
> >
> > http://www.studiotips.com/files/chertock.jpg
> >

> > Do you think its possible given my space, to change the wall angles a
> > bit, and create a reflection free zone (don't worry about the ceiling
> > for now)?
>

> Two ideas (other than smaller
> windows, that may help too)- one, have some heavy drapes a couple inches off
the wall that you pull
> over the windows when you're doing critical mixing.

In my original post, I mentioned that I was considering a plug for the
windows made out of framed 703. I devised a design where this plug would
be permanantly attached and folded in half against the wall directly
under the windows. I think heavy curtains are a much more elegant
design, do you think they would really work as well? Maybe 2 layers of
curtains? I read somewhere about using theater curtains for a task like
this. Hey maybe good looking curtains could even spiffy up the looks of
the place.

> Two, angle the top of the inner panes in
> towards you- I think Malcolm Chrissholm recommends about 14 degrees for a
front window, and that
> seems like it'd be close for your two as well. That way, the first
reflection is hitting you in the
> ankles. Either one of these may work, and both may work even better. Good
luck!
>

In Everests book on studio construction, he said that slanting windows
didn't effect transmission loss. After reading that, I guess being the
beginner that I am, I just forgot about the slanting. In rereading that
section, he mentions that some people use slanting to try and eliminate
reflections. In the words of Homer Simpsion, "Do 'oh"! I'll have to see
if slanting the windows will create reflections off the table and racks.

> Jon Best
> Sales Weasel From Mars

Not a Weasel to me!

Thanks for the great ideas Jon.

David
Venice, CA
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 5:20 am

From: Dan Nelson <dprimary@x??????xxxxx.xxxx
Date: Mon Dec 20, 1999 5:53 am
Subject: Re: Re: Garage Studio Design

David Chertock wrote:

> From: David Chertock <ap412@l...>
>
>
>
> > The angle to prevent flutter echo is less then what you have. The Master
> > Handbook of Acoustics mentions it but, I can't find it right now. To
> > increase the ITD gap it is related the angle of incidence at which the
> > sound strikes the wall. On the window close to the speaker it either just
misses it or is very
> > close to missing it. For the far speaker the opposite window may cause some
> > problems. Consider smaller windows 4 by 4 is a pretty big window.
> >
>
> I think what you are saying boils down to this: with the angle of the
> walls that is drawn, a second reflection is going to nail me at the mix
> position. Is this correct or am I just lost?

No, I don't think you will have problems since I assume the walls will be
treated,. The windows
are my only concern, drapes would probably be enough kill those. I have marked
up your floor
plan, it is in the file area. The maximum dispersion of most speakers is to
parallel to the front
face of the speaker most of this from the dome HF driver the dispersion of cone
drivers tends to
drop off past a parallel line with the surface of the cone, see the marked up
drawing. If the
speaker has a horn loaded HF it will follow the angle of the horn. So most of
the problem
reflections will be HF.

Dan Nelson
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:03 pm

From: David Chertock <ap412@x??x.xxxx
Date: Tue Dec 21, 1999 7:59 pm
Subject: re: Garage Studio Design

Dan,
as they say, a picture is worth a thousand words. Thanks for taking the
time to draw it up and help me. Now I think I understand (Ha!). My
search for an optimal angle is sort of a moot point, because its not
going to make a difference whether reflections are avoided by the
angling of the walls or absorbtive treatment (and in my case treatment
is a better solution).

Now I have another question to bug you with. What is the formula for
figuring out the reflective path? Is the answer to take geometry again
or buy the Master Handbook of Acoustics?

Thanks again,
David
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:04 pm

From: David Chertock <ap412@x??x.xxxx
Date: Tue Dec 21, 1999 9:08 pm
Subject: re: garage studio design

> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:31:37 EST
> From: SRF7@a...
> Subject: Re: Chertock's window
>
> I think he can pull off a pair of 32" wide windows provided he stays with
> about 43" off the rear wall, the monitors are 63" or less apart, and he
> angles them to form an equilateral triangle (60 deg.s for all three angles).
> See the *.Bmp I uploaded to the www.studiotips.com site for more detail.

Thanks for taking the time to help me. I'm not quite sure I understand.
Did you arrive at the dimensions for window length and treatment by
extending the line of the nearfield front face, or by the sound
dispersal pattern you drew in?

As Dan has pointed out, and as you have illustrated, its clear the real
solution is to shorten the windows and effectively treat them, but I
have a little problem. In my orignal post, I mentioned that I wanted the
windows to extend more towards the middle of the room than actually
drawn. Starting the windows at 3'7" from the outer wall as you did is
fine, but I sort of feel I need the window on the iso booth to extend
fairly close to the inside corner.

The reason is that I plan on re-recording film dialog. A TV will be in
the pointy corner of the iso booth, and the talent will most likely have
their back close to the walls of the far corner. When the film
production is recorded, a shotgun mic is used a few feet away from the
actors. In the studio, a shotgun is again positioned a few feet away to
re-record the actors. In this way the two recordings match as best as
possible.

If the talent is at the back of the iso booth, they will be in my "blind
spot" with 2'8" windows. That is the reason for me wanting a large
window, an angle which pushes the reflections away from the mix
position, and my frustration. URGH!

> ... "Dogs Playing Poker" and a "Young Elvis" would be too excellent choices
> (stick with the classics). Maybe use a bit of Velcro to hold 'em in place.

I think I'll have to go with a "Young Elvis" on one window and the "Fat
Elvis" on the other.

> Perhaps doing both is worth the trouble??? One layer of curtain and a 1" 703
> plug with decoration on each window???

Why not try both?

So who's going to move to LA and build this for me?

Thanks again Scott!

David,
Venice, CA
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:04 pm

From: SRF7@x??x.xxx
Date: Tue Dec 21, 1999 9:34 pm
Subject: Re: re: Garage Studio Design

In a message dated 12/21/99 4:14:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, ap412@l...
writes:

> Now I have another question to bug you with. What is the formula for
> figuring out the reflective path? Is the answer to take geometry again
> or buy the Master Handbook of Acoustics?
>
> Thanks again,
> David
>

The angle of reflection is equal and opposite the angle of incidence.

In other words (using a ray analogy) the laser beam bounces off the mirror at
an angle which is equal to the angle that the laser strikes the mirror, but
on the opposite side of perpendicular ... just like a bank shot in a game of
Nine Ball.

You need to draw more than one line though, as your speakers project sound
off axis (across a range of directions, from straight ahead to about 45 deg.
off center) ... 90 deg.s (total spread = 45 deg.s per side) is a good start,
but if you have a HF horn you probably have a specification in the product
lit. (you might for instance have a short but wide horn that is rated at 110
deg.s). If its different than 90 deg. then use half the listed spec. per
side to draw your "site line" diagram.

What kind of monitors are you using?

Assuming of course that you are in fact using lizards (not that there is
anything wrong with that).

Scott R. Foster

PS: Yes, you need to buy the book (keep it on top of the John for frequent
reference).
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:05 pm

From: SRF7@x??x.xxx
Date: Tue Dec 21, 1999 9:49 pm
Subject: Re: re: garage studio design

In a message dated 12/21/99 4:16:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, ap412@l...
writes:

> Thanks for taking the time to help me. I'm not quite sure I understand.
> Did you arrive at the dimensions for window length and treatment by
> extending the line of the nearfield front face, or by the sound
> dispersal pattern you drew in?

Uh ... both, sorta

A number of assumptions are made:

1) The splay angle of your walls, the width between the near fields (console
size - sorta), and their distance from the back wall (I took all of these
from your plan);

2) The dispersal pattern of your speakers (I assumed 90 degrees), and the
angle to which the speakers are turned (you and your monitors should make an
equilateral triangle (60 deg.s per angle). The monitors should be turned to
be on axis along two of the triangles legs as shown.

> As Dan has pointed out, and as you have illustrated, its clear the real
> solution is to shorten the windows and effectively treat them, but I
> have a little problem. In my orignal post, I mentioned that I wanted the
> windows to extend more towards the middle of the room than actually
> drawn. Starting the windows at 3'7" from the outer wall as you did is
> fine, but I sort of feel I need the window on the iso booth to extend
> fairly close to the inside corner.

Extending the window closer to the back wall is no problem, bringing into the
path of the speakers is a bad idea which defeats the whole idea of the
splayed walls.

> The reason is that I plan on re-recording film dialog. A TV will be in
> the pointy corner of the iso booth, and the talent will most likely have
> their back close to the walls of the far corner. When the film
> production is recorded, a shotgun mic is used a few feet away from the
> actors. In the studio, a shotgun is again positioned a few feet away to
> re-record the actors. In this way the two recordings match as best as
> possible.
> If the talent is at the back of the iso booth, they will be in my "blind
> spot" with 2'8" windows. That is the reason for me wanting a large
> window, an angle which pushes the reflections away from the mix
> position, and my frustration. URGH!
>

Draw the location of the talent on the diagram and email it to me, or post it.

> I think I'll have to go with a "Young Elvis" on one window and the "Fat
> Elvis" on the other.
>

sort of a yin yang thing

Scott R. Foster
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:05 pm

From: SRF7@x??x.xxx
Date: Tue Dec 21, 1999 10:11 pm
Subject: Re: re: garage studio design

In a message dated 12/21/99 4:16:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, ap412@l...
writes:

> If the talent is at the back of the iso booth, they will be in my "blind
> spot" with 2'8" windows. That is the reason for me wanting a large
> window, an angle which pushes the reflections away from the mix
> position, and my frustration. URGH!

You could put a mirror on the back of the door in the iso booth.

Scott R. Foster
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:07 pm

From: Jon Best <jrbest@x???xx.xxxx
Date: Wed Dec 22, 1999 2:57 pm
Subject: Re: Digest Number 52

Uh.... ?

:)

Jon Best
Sales Weasel From Mars

> Assuming of course that you are in fact using lizards (not that there is
> anything wrong with that).
>
> Scott R. Foster
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:07 pm

From: David Chertock <ap412@x??x.xxxx
Date: Wed Dec 22, 1999 10:03 pm
Subject: re: garage studio design

SRF7@a... wrote:

> What kind of monitors are you using?

Older Tannoy PBM 6.5s. Occaisonally NS10s come for a visit. Someday
something with 8" woofers will sit beside the 6.5s. The 6.5 dimensions
are 8 1/2" x 8 1/2" x 12 1/2".

> You could put a mirror on the back of the door in the iso booth.

Now thats a pretty interesting idea! I can get away with a few more
reflections in the iso booth because a Sennheiser 416 has a pretty tight
hypercardiod pattern.

Thanks once again!

David
Venice, CA
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:08 pm

From: SRF7@x??x.xxx
Date: Thu Dec 23, 1999 12:40 am
Subject: Re: Digest Number 52

In a message dated 12/22/99 9:56:52 AM Eastern Standard Time,
jrbest@e... writes:

<<
Uh.... ?

:)

Jon Best
Sales Weasel From Mars

> Assuming of course that you are in fact using lizards (not that there is
> anything wrong with that).
>
> Scott R. Foster
>>

A bad joke ... Monitor Lizards are the world's largest reptile.
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:08 pm

From: SRF7@x??x.xxx
Date: Thu Dec 23, 1999 12:47 am
Subject: Re: re: garage studio design

In a message dated 12/22/99 5:07:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, ap412@l...
writes:

<< Now thats a pretty interesting idea! I can get away with a few more
reflections in the iso booth because a Sennheiser 416 has a pretty tight
hypercardiod pattern.

Thanks once again!

David
Venice, CA >>

Well, if you buy some of that Plexiglas mirror they sell at Ho' De' Po' you
can hang it as a panel absorber (with proper alignment adjusted for optimum
viewing angle) and it's part of the iso booth "treatment" package.

Good luck, let us know what works.

Scott R. Foster
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am

Postby archive » Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:09 pm

From: David Chertock <ap412@x??x.xxxx
Date: Thu Dec 23, 1999 6:27 pm
Subject: re: garage studio design

Plexiglass mirror? Ok, I'll check it out.

When I was in scouts, they used to send the new kids to ask other
campers if we could borrow their "left handed smoke shifters", or if
they had any spare "dehydrated water". A plexiglas mirror sounds like a
reasonable product, but ya know with monitor lizards and all - I can
tell Scott has a sense of humor.

This mirror trick reminds me of another unexpected helpful hint a friend
came up with. I was whining about all the work it took to do serious
soundproofing (cinder bock walls filled with sand, etc. etc.), and my
friend says - "Why don't you build a fountain and raise the ambient
noise level outside?

SRF7@a... wrote:
>
> Well, if you buy some of that Plexiglas mirror they sell at Ho' De' Po' you
> can hang it as a panel absorber (with proper alignment adjusted for optimum
> viewing angle) and it's part of the iso booth "treatment" package.
>

Thanks yet again!

David
Venice, CA
archive
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 6:26 am


Return to 1999 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron