Old masonry to recording room

Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:50 am

WAAAA HOOO!!

Progress!! It's a GOOD thing!

So, how is the low frequency attenuation? Is it beginning to improve yet?

Please forgive me if I'm redundant, but are you/have you considered using Green Glue between this first layer and the next layer of Gypsum board?

http://www.greengluecompany.com/

http://www.greengluecompany.com/distributors.php

Looking good!!

Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 2:53 pm

Hi Max,

Thanks for your kind words my friend,

Yes it's good thing, but only if it comes with good results. Unfortunaly low end still boiling too loud and I'm frustrated. OK, maybe I'm expecting too much at this moment but what if next two more layers wouldn't help here enough? Right now I'm skeptic to the bones and feel down.

The plug is the weakest link of course, but the problem is much wider than that. It seems the evil bass comes from all surfaces of my „monoliths 2007“. It's hard to explain, combination of resonating, flanking and direct sound. Touching the surface of barrier I can feel it on the palm but it's not palpable on the brick wall. Damn, the beast just comes in and make the room useless for recording.

Moreover, searching inside Mr. Sayers RSD Forum last night, I have found something like I need a 25 cm (10'') concrete one leaf wall to get 60 STC with 45 dB at 50 Hz. Huh, now I'm totally #@(*)ked with my framed drywall attempt.

There is no Green Glue in stores here and importing from U.K. will cost a fortune. Come on Max, you know my horrible story with so simple stuff like the baker rod and acoustic caulk ... triple sucks.
I was thinking about substitute for GG like using some sort of lower viscosity acetyl silicon. On the end I decided to use screws only. Dan (link on 2nd page) was using more mass with GG in similar construction as mine and it seems without much success aginst the rumble.

Now playing: King's X – Down
Sad

Best regards

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:24 am

I wish I had been folllowing this project from the get go. I want to ask if you consulted a structural engineer before you poured that concrete. I would have also recommended removing the old windows and filling them up brick and mortar insulation and appropriate flashings. Have you thought about your buiding envelope? (keeping inside moisture inside and out side moisture outside) Most problems originate from poor building envelope. Have you considered building to combat climate change. check out www.architecture2030.com, you'll find that Buildings account for nearly one half of all green house gas emmissions in Canada. You'd think it was automobiles. Sorry about the rant, best of luck with you studio.

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:25 am

I wish I had been folllowing this project from the get go. I want to ask if you consulted a structural engineer before you poured that concrete. I would have also recommended removing the old windows and filling them up brick and mortar insulation and appropriate flashings. Have you thought about your buiding envelope? (keeping inside moisture inside and out side moisture outside) Most problems originate from poor building envelope. Have you considered building to combat climate change. check out www.architecture2030.com, you'll find that Buildings account for nearly one half of all green house gas emmissions in Canada. You'd think it was automobiles. Sorry about the rant, best of luck with you studio.

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:26 am

I wish I had been folllowing this project from the get go. I want to ask if you consulted a structural engineer before you poured that concrete. I would have also recommended removing the old windows and filling them up brick and mortar insulation and appropriate flashings. Have you thought about your buiding envelope? (keeping inside moisture inside and out side moisture outside) Most problems originate from poor building envelope. Have you considered building to combat climate change. check out www.architecture2030.com, you'll find that Buildings account for nearly one half of all green house gas emmissions in Canada. You'd think it was automobiles. Sorry about the rant, best of luck with you studio.

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:33 pm

Halifaxsoundguy wrote:

I want to ask if you consulted a structural engineer before you poured that concrete.

No one can tell exactly how much weight this structure can support without the expensive examination and testing, but, off the record, I got the hint from very experienced technician who exclusively works over two decades on old building restorations. After inspection of basement and the building he was laughing about my 2'' concrete plate over thick arched basement ceiling. Hope he's right.

Quote:

I would have also recommended removing the old windows and filling them up brick and mortar insulation and appropriate flashings.

Yes, much faster and better way but - not allowed.

Quote:

Have you thought about your buiding envelope? (keeping inside moisture inside and out side moisture outside) Most problems originate from poor building envelope. Have you considered building to combat climate change.

Well, limits are limits. Perfect moisture control is out of my range. One for sure, no visible moisture problem on the walls even on the north side (window wall) and I think it's more than good condition for this old lady. Anyway, I won't stay here forever.

Two things are noticeable inside 2' thick brick walls: in the winter period – needs a bit more energy to warm up the walls through maybe 1-2 days but when you get there – it keeps the temperature. In the summertime it's reasonably cool place without air conditioner.... OK ... late July and first half of August could be tricky...

One day I hope I could afford Solar-Green Peace Studio, until then GroffStudio would be just fine. Cool

Quote:

check out www.architecture2030.com

Problem loading page

Quote:

Sorry about the rant, best of luck with you studio.

No need for apologies about the rant (if it's not more than 3 times)

Thanks and you're welcome to this topic.

Lurkers, prepare yourself for the new photo show – tomorrow

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:08 pm

Hi Groff;

I google'd "sound proof studio building" and got a lot of good instructions.

this link here pretty much answers all your questions

http://www.homerecordingconnection.com/news.php?action=view_story&id=29

Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:43 am

Thanks bwmac, i will check that.

Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:28 pm

Hello and welcome,

News from Groffstudio:

Two more layers on the sides (now it's triple).

The first (previously on separate pics), then second and the third layer. Added mass of the last two layers really helps and made hearable difference in sound proofing. It's noticeable quieter. I'm almost happy with it. Still some subs from loudest cars occasionally comes in but I have to live with this limitation. All critical recordings could be done later at the evening time, a bit steeper on low cut filter and I hope I will be there.

The brackets for the cloud. The holes are drilled through the 55 cm thick walls. The longer drill bit, for the last few inches, was made by Sime. Amazing guy.

Before wall painting I have to make the background from planks for hanging the absorbers.
Removing the plaster, drilling, setting the screw anchors, preparation with mixture of sand:cement – 2:1 and the new plaster after substrate drying time. The holes are ready.

Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 3:54 pm

Hi there,

Hmmm, over 11.000 visits ... I'm famous!

Joking of course.

Groff Studio recording room, news, briefly:

The hole for cables (through the two feet wall again) plumbing, expansive foam, tile adhesive, silicone, done.

The walls were painted, laminate flooring...

What a symmetry!!! LOL. Really, it's not that ugly, come on ...It's my camera ... well, hmmm, my photo-pan ability sucks.

Cloud mounting brackets were redesigned and finally fixed on positions.

Posted: Fri May 18, 2007 1:45 am

Somewhat better view

Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 12:23 am

I'm one step in front of Mr. Ethan's territory to treat my recording room so I would greatly appreciate if he could take a look here for a minute.

It's about optimizing the gap behind broadband absorber.

Except corner absorbers and the cloud, I'm planning to play with gap optimatization at least on one wall, but before I come with the whole plan I would like to clear up something.

i.e. theoretically,

Using formula: wave length = V sound (344m/s @ 21*C,) / frequency

and 8 cm thick broadband absorber,

for optimal capturing 250 Hz at 1/4 wave length

(34400 / 250) x 0,25 = 34.4 cm should be the distance between the wall and the middle of the mineral wool thickness.

1. Is this correct?

There should be a range of close frequencies from the front to the back face of absorber which are also affected by 1/4 rule. For the thickness of 8 cm:

Front face at 38,4 cm -> 34400 / (38,4 / 0,25) = 224 Hz
Back face at 30,4 cm -> 34400 / (30,4 / 0,25) = 282 Hz

Therefore 8 cm thick broadband absorber with the front face placed 38.4 cm from the wall should be effective in 224 – 283 Hz range but optimally only at 250 Hz.

2. Correct too?

In general, A and C are absorbed equally, but B wins. So, the distance between the wall and the middle of absorber is what counts, not the width of the gap by itself.

3. …or did I mess it all and completely?

Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 11:41 am

Groff wrote:

for optimal capturing 250 Hz at 1/4 wave length

It seems to me the ideal gap is equal to the panel thickness, and that's shown in my Acoustics FAQ in the section Optimizing the air gap:

http://www.ethanwiner.com/acoustics.html

However, the main point is to have the center of the panel 1/4 wavelength from the wall where the velocity is highest. So if the panel is too thin for the frequency of interest, you risk absorbing too little at other frequencies. For panels flat on the wall you can have peaks and nulls at any frequency due to simple comb filtering. So I'd always aim for material as thick as possible, and use a gap the same as the material thickness.

--Ethan

Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 9:25 am

Thank you very much for the input Mr. Ethan.

Ethan Winer wrote:

However, the main point is to have the center of the panel 1/4 wavelength from the wall where the velocity is highest.

This is the confirmation what I was looking for.

Ethan Winer wrote:

So if the panel is too thin for the frequency of interest, you risk absorbing too little at other frequencies.

I'm planning to tune one wall similar like you did your ceiling, but using just 3’’ thick wool and varying the gap. I presume that placing the panels (even relative thin – 3’’) at the points of 1/4 wave length of the target frequencies should be more effective (wider range) for low end control than just equal gap/panel proportion.

Regards

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 7:55 am

Hi I've been watching your studio progress for some time know and I enjoy it alot.

Are you recording yet?

greetings from Iceland,
Halldor....

This topic sponsored by: