Quiet Glue vs. Green Glue

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 7:08 pm

I've done a search here on this subject but cannot find opinions or comparisons. If you know of a thread please direct me to it.

Quiet Glue: http://www.quietsolution.com/html/quietglue.html

Green Glue: http://www.greengluecompany.com/

Quiet Glue is about $30 per case cheaper than Green Glue. Is it the same stuff, or is there a reason why someone should pay $30 more per case for Green Glue?

I am about to purchase 6 cases and $180 in savings could be applied to some bass traps or diffusors.

Thanks.

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 9:00 am

I do not see actual test data for this product similar to that which has been provided for Green Glue - shy of that I cannot comment on it's effectiveness.........

I would still have to recommend GG to my clients.

Rod

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:25 am

The only data I see from QG is http://www.quietsolution.com/QuietGlue_315_dsheet.pdf which has a chart of TL there and damping factor 0.45-0.65 (do not understand why they did not specify a single number). Comparing that chart with http://www.greengluecompany.com/images/transmissionLossTests/OL05-1049_Report.pdf
it seems GG is a bit better.

Maybe it is equivalent but without more data from independent labs (preferably from the same lab) one cannot aswer. Test results differ a bit even when done in independent labs. I had a picture of different results from several european labs for the same type of construction and the differences between them where sometimes significant Shocked

PS - I have found some links here

http://pcfarina.eng.unipr.it/Public/Papers/093-IN96.PDF
http://pcfarina.eng.unipr.it/Public/Papers/091-EG96.PDF

http://www.acoustics.hut.fi/asf/bnam04/webprosari/papers/o16.pdf

Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 6:06 pm

I have the silent suspicion that both materials are the same and resulting from some kind of agreement or license between both companies.
Hence that only name, marketing and target group differ or complement.

Brian could confirm or deny that, but if he can commercially I don't know.

Eric
.

Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:19 pm

I sorta think the same thing eric, but the quiet glue would not have the green food coloring and that would certainly equal at least 1 stc point, you think?

Smile

Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:31 am

Glide,

I once wrote more extensive about "the why I think that" (at John Sayers, but can't find the post back) after analyzing the text on the quiet solutions site and knowing a bit the history of the stuff and business in general.

But if there is some kind of agreement, with GG as the main designer/owner and they choose this path, none of both will officially make that public.
The only way to know for sure is looking at the stuff itself.

I can be wrong of course but often my belly informs me well. I read the lines and my belly reads between them.

Wink

Now Brian (the designer and technical manager of GG) can always correct me of course, and I trust they follow the most relevant forums in the background.
I should like to know for sure either.

Have you seen the applied (not sold) quantities referred since 2003 on the quiet solutions site? These numbers and date doesn't fall just out of the blue.

Eric

Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 7:07 pm

eric_desart wrote:

I have the silent suspicion that both materials are the same and resulting from some kind of agreement or license between both companies.
Hence that only name, marketing and target group differ or complement.

Brian could confirm or deny that, but if he can commercially I don't know.

Eric
.

Eric,

yes he can comment - and will be here shortly to do so.

Sincerely,

Rod

Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:52 pm

There is a very long thread here comparing the two products. Interestingly, Rod was the last poster on it. Very Happy

Sticking like glue to knowledge:
Andre

Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 4:41 am

Andre,

That's a very good link I didn't know about and answers/corrects my question/doubts.

Rod,

I assume you contacted Brian, and that's a very good initiative. Thanks for that.

It's good that Brian will provide some comparative data here, and even better that he puts that on the Green Glue site, in the same manner that GG compares GG with other solutions.
That way this comparison is also accessible for competitors to see. If nothing happens it only enhances the validity of the comparison (if no official measurements are involved. I personally always tend/tended to believe and support/defend Brian's objectivity and scientific attitude, but it's still commercial stuff.)

Thanks guys.
This is useful stuff.

Eric

Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 12:03 pm

Hi all,

I had a bit of trouble logging in, but I got it worked out.

We haven't updated the website in some time, but we recently hired a new web guy, and the entire thing will get an overhaul. Its possible that like many of our pages, this one has errors or type-O's and the like, but a comparison is shown here:

http://www.greengluecompany.com/greenGlue-vs-EngineeredDampingGlue.php

I have the reports identifying QuietGlue as well (in that report we opted to not name a brand, as we have never done so).

The situation is complicated by the fact that we have attained, via commercial purcahse by the contractors from Quiet Solution, two distinct forms of their product. To the best of our knowledge, QS never announced a change to their product or their marketing. Why the two rather different versions, we don't know. Again, both versiosn were purchased in tubes with the same basic marketing stuff they have on their site now. We will run a test in January on newly purchased QuietGlue to see which version is currently on the market. Quiet Solution could certainly answer better than we what the situation is with their product.

But in any case, we have these data's from a NVLAP certified lab (same wall/studs/insulation/thickness of drywall/#of drywall layers, etc.). This is a 2x4 wood stud wall, 24" OC, R13 insulation, double 5/8" on each side

Reference wall (no glue)= STC 45, OITC 30, Rw+Ctr 33, Tennekes 26
QuietGlue (type A) = STC 45, OITC 33, Rw+ctr 36, Tennekes 29
QuietGlue (type B Test 1)=STC 50, OITC 35, Rw+Ctr 39, Tennekes 30
Green Glue = STC 55, OITC 39, Rw+Ctr 44, Tennekes 34
50% coverage Green Glue = STC 52, OITC 38, Rw+Ctr 42, Tennekes 32
OSi Drywall Adhesive = STC 37, OITC 27, Rw+Ctr 31, Tennekes 24
25% coverage Green Glue = stc 51, OITC 35, Rw+Ctr 39, Tennekes 31

Test reports for all of these are available OR will be available the 1st or 2nd week of January (we have a large chunk of test reports forthcoming from the lab Shocked

).

So official data is available to back up all of the above statements. All tests were paid for by GG. I have never seen any test report or formal documentation for a test of QuietGlue supplied by QS, just one graph.

One version of QuietGlue performs much closer to no glue than to Green Glue. The other version offers about 1/2 of the benefits of Green Glue.

using 1/2 as much Green Glue (50% coverage) yields about 70-75% of the benefits of Green Glue. That's considerably less money than QuietGlue, and still notably better performance than either version of QuietGlue.

And for people on a budget, ~25-30% coverage of Green Glue yields similar or better performance than the best of the QuietGlue tests, about 50% of the performance of the full recommended coverage of Green Glue. Thats starting to get awfully economical.

Also, in a 3rd party lab test for just damping properties, the results were these: (all data for 2 pieces of 1/2" drywall glued together)

Damping values for the first 4 modes are reported, all trowel applied for 100% covg

epoxy: .009, .014, .020, .017
OSi drywall adhesive: .008, .014, .014, .014
USG acoustic sealant: .016, .034, .057, .086
GE Silicone: .028, .040, .035, .045
Green Glue: .375, .428, .364 (none)
Quiet Glue: .038, .088, .129, .132
Version B of QuietGlue wasn't known to us at the time of tihs test.

The differences in performance here are drastic. Beyond differences in airborne sound performance, things like flanking noise attentuation and impact noise will be strongly affected by damping values.

All that will be onto our new site, along with very apples to apples comparisons of GG on steel, wood, staggered studs, and some other walls like RC and all.

Alot of other R&D work going on over here and keeping me away from the forums and locked up with some other R&D types all day. The most interesting of these, perhaps, is a new underlayment for floating floors that exhibits basically no MSM. It has no effect on the location of MSM thats positive or unexpected, but it shows basically no dip at MSM in terms of TL.

Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 12:16 pm

One thought, at random. The color in Green Glue is something that additional pigments (yellow or blue) could fairly readily overpower, turning the material another color. Adding red would make a dirty brown, etc.

And no acoustics lab possesses any capacity to chemically analyze something to ensure that it is what someone says it is.

so, imagine that I was selling wood blocks for 2 bucks each, just little simple wood blocks. But whne I went to the lab to test my wood blocks, I brought RSIC clips instead. The laboratory would throw me out. Obviously, my wood blocks and RSIC clips arne't the same thing.

But, that protection doesn't exist for Green Glue. Its just the color that would let anybody identify what it was at all. Just empty some GG tubes and put them in "Super Sound Killer" tubes with some blue pigment, and, wala.

This isn't aimed at the QuietGlue -vs- Green Glue thing, or at Quiet Solution at all, but one day, someone may "prove" that some repackaged acoustic sealant or whatever it is works as well as Green Glue.

GGCo has samples of board from the tests it runs retained by the laboratory to allow us to prove that it was in fact GG used in the test, and I wish NVLAP would require this OR BETTER require independently purchased, by a 3rd party, damping material to be utilized in tests that are run.

Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 1:31 pm

OK,

In my mind that answers the question - not only of performance versus cost (again - Green GLue beat the competition hands down) but also as to whether or not QG was GG in a different cover.......

Glide,

Stick with the green glue -

if you are willing to settle for 1/2 the performance of GG - then buy 1/2 as much GG (A BIG savings over QG) accept the loss in performance and enjoy the cost savings.

Sincerely,

Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 6:07 pm

Thanks Rod (and Brian),

Even a 5 pt difference in STC using the best Quiet Glue sample is worth the $180 to me to use Green Glue to do my studio. This is just another example of what a fine resource this forum is.

I do find it extremely interesting though that the curves comparing the two products on the Green Glue website are almost identical with the exception of the Green Glue curve being slightly higher. That tells me that Quiet Glue is indeed effective (or that it has an active in it), or you would see a straight horizontal line across that chart. I wonder if the Quiet Glue chart would look the same except the two would be inverted if they did their own test? (smile).

Coke-Pepsi / Ford-Chevy

I would stay diligent Brian - It looks like they are wiggling into your market and I would bet they have captured some of it with that sweet pricing. It got my attention. Which brings up another question: What in the world is in that stuff that costs $170 per case? <grin> Is it the manufacturing process or a raw material driving the cost that high, or simply demand?

Eddie

Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 9:43 pm

Glide wrote:

Even a 5 pt difference in STC using the best Quiet Glue sample is worth the $180 to me to use Green Glue to do my studio. This is just another example of what a fine resource this forum is.

Glide,

The way you say that suggests to me that you do not grasp the concept of how decibels (or STC ratings) work.

First off - it's a 10 point difference in STC ratings - not 5.

But - just to put this intro perspective - even at 5 - you say that as if that were some trivial amount -

6 dB is a doubling (or halving) of power. Thus if it were only 5 dB (weighted)it would still be almost twice as good (as quiet) as the competition -

But it isn't 5 dB - nor 6dB - (rather) it's 10dB (STC 45 vrs STC 55) - and that is much more than just a doubling (it's almost 4 times more quiet in measured power) but is an actual full doubling (or halving) of perceived amplitude.......

The human ear would say that room A (with GG) isolates fully twice as well as room B (with QG) (i.e.: it would sound twice as quiet outside the room (using GG) with the same sound levels playing inside both rooms.

I would say that that is a considerable difference.

Picture doing that from the perspective of mass law.........

a doubling of mass = a 6dB increase in isolation - so for a wall that began with 4 layers of drywall - an 8 layer wall would be a 6dB increase - and a 16 layer wall would be 12 dB.......

10dB would be about 12 additional layers -

So if I can take their wall and increase it by roughly 10dB in isolation just by switching GG for QG (instead of adding more than 11 layers of drywall) I would consider this a SUBSTANTIAL gain.

[quote]I do find it extremely interesting though that the curves comparing the two products on the Green Glue website are almost identical with the exception of the Green Glue curve being slightly higher. That tells me that Quiet Glue is indeed effective (or that it has an active in it), or you would see a straight horizontal line across that chart. I wonder if the Quiet Glue chart would look the same except the two would be inverted if they did their own test? (smile).

Actually - there is a vast difference that shows (almost identical readings in fact( at around 200 Hz.........

I am sorry - even though I see the smile at the end of this statement above - I find myself offended (on behalf of my friend Brian) by the suggestion.

First of all - Green Glue did not do their own test.

It was done by an independent 3rd party.......

I have gone over this in depth before - any firm that is willing to do a 3rd party test and provide what ever answers the owner of the product wants will not be in business for very long.

The minute you can prove the deception (and their competitors will be able to) they will loose their accreditation and will no longer be allowed to do buisiness.

Believe me when I tell you - for the couple of dollars in chump change they get from Green Glue for testing (lots of money for Green Glue from a budget point of view - but they have so many companies and so much work that if they never saw the money they made from Green Glue for those tests it wouldn't make or break them) they would be insane to lie about results.

So the answer is "No Difference" who has the work done - WHICH IS THE REASON THERE AREN'T ANY COPIES OF ACTUAL TEST DATA OVER AT QUIET SOLUTIONS FOR THAT PRODUCT" only their claims of what it does.

Quote:

Coke-Pepsi / Ford-Chevy

Nope - sorry - not accurate at all - you cannot not find any measurable differences between those products - thus only opinion matters........

On the other hand - apples / oranges or Ford- Chevy/ Horse-Carriage for those things I can find scientifically measurable differences.......

Siincerely,

Rod

Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 10:28 pm

Thanks Rod,

You are correct I do not really know that much about STC ratings or acoustics in general, but I was able to make it through Calculus 2 in College and managed to get out with a 3.6 GPA magna Cum Laude.

Brian's data above shows:
Green Glue = STC 55 - QuietGlue (type B Test 1)=STC 50

So I simply subtracted 55 - 50 = 5

Am I doing that wrong, and how do you derive 10 from that equation?

Thanks.

This topic sponsored by: