First, to list data for wood panel bass traps at 1 KHz completely misses the point. The low-bass panel traps I've built have a peak center frequency at about 90 Hz. At that frequency they have a "perfect" absorption coefficient of 1.0. So listing the data at 125 Hz. is misleading. Even using 100 Hz third-octave data makes much more sense since that at least is a standard data point. Likewise for higher frequencies, where you make no distinction between the low-bass and high-bass trap types. Moreover, using octave data instead of the much more meaningful 1/3 octave misrepresents the true effectiveness of a panel trap. It also overstates the effectiveness of foam by a large amount.

I only listed data I was able to obtain from foam and panel trap manufactures. I used the figures that were supplied to me. Please feel free to extrapilate any measurements if you wish to aid in comparisons.

Moreover, you fail to account for the physical size of the products being compared. Absorption coefficients explain how much a material absorbs independent of size, so a product that is twice as effective as another but is only 1/8th the size has only 1/4 the effectiveness overall!

I agree. The 4" foam bass traps I specify covers 60 square feet times two for 120 square feet of coverage for $500.

I'm not sure what you mean by "diaphragm traps," but the data appears to be that of my company's MiniTraps. It's flattering that you show how much better MiniTraps are at low frequencies when compared to foam. But why you listed only 100 Hz and below rather than the same range as the other products is a mystery to me.

Once again, I used the figures that were supplied to me. If you want to add something to them I would be happy to include it.

You say, "$500 of DIAPHRAGM TRAPS will not do the same work that the same amount of foam will do in my room." Assuming you are in fact referring to MiniTraps, I wonder how you can make that assessment since you have never seen a MiniTrap let alone heard one in use. Also, how do you define "do the same work?"

Will 2 of your DIAPHRAGM TRAPS do the same job as 8" x 6" and 3 corner 4" foam traps, in coverage, reflection treatment and bass trapping in two corners of the room?

You wrote, "It is argued that foam is not as efficient as panel traps and absorbers made of ridged fiberglass and I have seen a lot of figures and data, in attempts to support this conclusion, all of which is questionable. Data that does not include any hard information regarding performance below 100 Hz. is useless."

I'm not sure who you're criticizing here, but no acoustic products have published absorption data below 100 Hz. What exactly is the point of that comment? Indeed, it's not clear to me what point you're trying to make with that entire post, since the data presented is incomplete, misleading, and seemingly biased.

I was saying, as you have pointed out, that the data was at best not perfect and difficult to figure out. I don't know why everyone can't use a standard either.

Kurt,

> I only listed data I was able to obtain from foam and panel trap manufactures.

Simply go to the Auralex site where you can see the data for typical foam at 1/3 octaves. That is much more useful than octave band data. Also, you simply cannot compare absorption data for foam and panel traps unless you take into account how the foam is measured, and why the published data is greatly overstated. The published data for foam corners includes as many as five surfaces, even though only one surface is actually absorbing when the foam corner is installed. I realize you don't understand the importance of this, so I urge you to consult with someone more knowledgeable than yourself if you don't want to take my word for it.

> If you want to add something to them I would be happy to include it.

Here is data that is much more meaningful, and which compares fiberglass-based MiniTraps on an equal footing with foam:

> Will 2 of your DIAPHRAGM TRAPS do the same job as 8" x 6" and 3 corner 4" foam traps, in coverage, reflection treatment and bass trapping in two corners of the room?

It's not clear how much foam you are referring to, so please restate the question. But there is no question that a full complement of MiniTraps does a far better job than a full complement of foam. Do MiniTraps cost a little more? Yes and No - it depends on how much you care about the quality of your room's low end. A full complement of MiniTraps actually costs about the same as a full complement of foam - somewhere between $800 and $2000 for most rooms.

--Ethan

Will 2 of your DIAPHRAGM TRAPS do the same job as 8" x 6" and 3 corner 4" foam traps, in coverage, reflection treatment and bass trapping in two corners of the room?

Sorry that was a typo.. I meant,

Will 2 of your DIAPHRAGM TRAPS do the same job as 8' x 6'(of 4"foam) and 3 corner 4" foam traps, in coverage, reflection treatment and bass trapping in two corners of the room?
(or 12 pieces of 2'X4' 4" foam and 6 24" corner traps)?

Kurt,

> Will 2 of your DIAPHRAGM TRAPS do the same job as ...

At what frequency?

At 100 Hz MiniTraps are far more effective than foam, as you can see in the graph above. And as an overall solution for a reasonable price, MiniTraps again win over foam every time. Do MiniTraps cost more per square foot of coverage than foam? Of course. But in the larger picture they are a better value because they do a more complete job at all low frequencies. And since they absorb low frequencies so much more effectively than foam, you can install enough of them to truly solve the LF problems without making the room too dead as usually happens with foam.

If boominess and lack of definition below 125 Hz. don't matter to you, then by all means buy foam and save a few bucks. But if accurate monitoring at all low frequencies is important to you, then using real bass traps - MiniTraps or wood panels - is the only acceptable solution.

Thanks. I really do appreciate you giving me the opportunity to explain why RealTraps products are better than foam.

--Ethan

Ethan,
I still don't accept that Wood Panel Traps are better than foam. Some points.....,

At 100 Hz MiniTraps are far more effective than foam, as you can see in the graph above.

Yes, when placed across a corner..

when And as an overall solution for a reasonable price, MiniTraps again win over foam every time.

You are saying that 2 mini traps will do the same work in a room as $500 of 4” acoustic foam?

Do MiniTraps cost more per square foot of coverage than foam? Of course. But in the larger picture they are a better value because they do a more complete job at all low frequencies.

You are making a comparison to 3” foam. Why don’t you compare them to 4” foam? 4” foam is as efficient as a piece of 2” 705.. The best performance for your minitraps is across a corner. Once you use them any other way the performance falls off rapidly. The same thing can be said for foam. If I stretch a piece of 4” foam across a corner, the coefficient goes way up.

And since they absorb low frequencies so much more effectively than foam, you can install enough of them to truly solve the LF problems without making the room too dead as usually happens with foam.

In some rooms yes, and in some rooms no. In a larger room where some coverage is needed for absorption, the foam may be as effective and less expensive, as well as much easier to install.

Kurt,

> I still don't accept that Wood Panel Traps are better than foam.

First, you need to understand the difference between wood panel membrane traps, fiberglass-based broadband absorbers with a membrane, and plain fiberglass and foam. These three types of absorbers work on three different principles!

> Yes, when placed across a corner

Panel traps give their best performance when mounted flush against a wall because they work on wave pressure. Foam, fiberglass, and fiberglass with a membrane act on wave velocity, and thus work worst when flat against a wall. These are important fundamental concepts that you must understand before you can assess acoustic absorbers and fairly offer opinions on their performance.

One important reason that panel traps are so much better than foam or fiberglass is they achieve optimum absorption when mounted on a wall. A room has only so many corners. So when the corners are all treated and bass problems still exist, panel traps can be mounted on the walls where they do a much better job than foam.

It would be great if you could just look at data and pick the product with the highest numbers. But it's not that simple. To use your logic, why spend $35 for a meal at a nice steak house when you can get the same number of calories for only $4.25 at Taco Bell?

> You are saying that 2 mini traps will do the same work in a room as $500 of 4” acoustic foam?

Yes, absolutely, at 80 to 100 Hz. In fact, two MiniTraps work much better than foam at those frequencies.

> You are making a comparison to 3” foam. Why don’t you compare them to 4” foam?

Because MiniTraps are three inches thick. This lets people make a direct comparison between the effectiveness of one material versus another, because they are the same size and thickness.

> 4” foam is as efficient as a piece of 2” 705

Not from 250 Hz and lower! And those are the frequencies we're talking about.

> The best performance for your minitraps is across a corner. Once you use them any other way the performance falls off rapidly. The same thing can be said for foam.

"Falls off rapidly" is relative. At 250 Hz a MiniTrap on the wall is three times more absorptive than the same volume of foam on the wall. So even though the absorption falls off, it continues to remain more than three times more effective than foam down to the data cutoff at 100 Hz.

> If I stretch a piece of 4” foam across a corner, the coefficient goes way up.

So please show us a comparison between four inches of foam across a corner and a MiniTrap across a corner.

--Ethan

Ethan,
I just don't believe that 2 of your mini traps will do the same amount of absorption and bass trapping as 120 sq. ft. of four inch foam..

Originally posted by Ethan Winer:
Kurt,

> You are saying that 2 mini traps will do the same work in a room as $500 of 4” acoustic foam?

Yes, absolutely, at 80 to 100 Hz. In fact, two MiniTraps work much better than foam at those frequencies.

You are saying that 2 minitraps will be more effective in a room than 120 square feet of 4" foam?

> You are making a comparison to 3” foam. Why don’t you compare them to 4” foam?

> If I stretch a piece of 4” foam across a corner, the coefficient goes way up.

So please show us a comparison between four inches of foam across a corner and a MiniTrap across a corner. --Ethan I can quote the article in EQ where you mounted foam on a lattice to place it off the wall to increase it's coefficent if you wish ... .... Kurt

Kurt,

> I am discussing 4" foam only. Anything less, IMO doesn't work as well.

Fine. In that case, I'm discussing only 4-inch 705-FRK because anything less, IMO doesn't work as well.

> That is why you choose to use 3" foam for the purpose of comparison.

I explained why we use three inches for comparison. But since you're intent on giving foam a handicap like in golf - which it so desperately needs - go ahead and compare the data with four inches of foam. Instead of being a full three times better at low frequencies, MiniTraps will compare only 2-1/2 times better than foam. That's fine with me too.

> These figures show 4" foam as more effective than 705 at those frequencies.

You compared foam with 705, but 705-FRK is what RealTraps sells and what we use in our MiniTraps. Two inches of the FRK type has an absorption coefficient of 0.60 at 125 Hz versus only 0.32 for four-inch foam. So in fact 705-FRK is four times more effective at 125 Hz than the same volume of foam. I suppose you now want to compare two inches of 705-FRK with eight inches of foam?

Note that MiniTraps are built with much more than just 705-FRK, so the above applies only to foam vs. 705-FRK and not vs. MiniTraps which are much better than just 705-FRK.

> This is why you deleted the thread in the Acoustics forum. You don't want people to see this data.

This is becoming a real trend with you. Rather than address the issues you instead choose to attack my motives. You called me a used car salesman, and accused me of convoluting my answers and skewing the data. I don't have to fudge the data. The data stands on its own!

In fact, you are the one who intentionally skews the data, in a desperate attempt to make foam appear as effective as fiberglass, panel traps, or MiniTraps. Your inclusion of absorption data for wood panel traps at 1 KHz proves that you are either totally clueless or you have a vendetta.

EW: >> So please show us a comparison between four inches of foam across a corner and a MiniTrap across a corner.

KF: > I can quote the article in EQ where you mounted foam on a lattice

I won't let you wiggle out of this one. Please address my point. Show me the data for four inches of foam mounted across a corner compared to a MiniTrap mounted across a corner.

--Ethan

Both you guys should switch to decaf.

Originally posted by Ethan Winer:
Kurt,

>I am discussing 4" foam only. Anything less, IMO doesn't work as well.

Fine. In that case, I'm discussing only 4-inch 705-FRK because anything less, IMO doesn't work as well.

>That is why you choose to use 3" foam for the purpose of comparison.Let me state for the record, from the beginning, I was speaking of 4” foam. Ethan is the one who keeps trying to compare 3” foam.

I explained why we use three inches for comparison. But since you're intent on giving foam a handicap like in golf - which it so desperately needs - go ahead and compare the data with four inches of foam. Instead of being a full three times better at low frequencies, MiniTraps will compare only 2-1/2 times better than foam. That's fine with me too.

But you never specify 4” FRK. I always refer to 4” foam.

>These figures show 4" foam as more effective than 705 at those frequencies.

You compared foam with 705, but 705-FRK is what RealTraps sells and what we use in our MiniTraps. Two inches of the FRK type has an absorption coefficient of 0.60 at 125 Hz versus only 0.32 for four-inch foam. So in fact 705-FRK is four times more effective at 125 Hz than the same volume of foam. I suppose you now want to compare two inches of 705-FRK with eight inches of foam?

No I am willing to concede the point. I was not aware of the figures on FRK. I was using the data that I could find at the Owens Corning site.. I choose the figures available that gave the fiberglass product the best performance. But that still doesn’t mean that 4” foam doesn’t work at all. In some cases it may be plenty to do the job. You don’t have to swat a fly with a sledgehammer. You say you use FRK in your minitraps. Do you also use it in your realtraps and your panel absorbers? Is FRK what you recomend everyone to buy when they are building bass traps?

Note that MiniTraps are built with much more than just 705-FRK, so the above applies only to foam vs. 705-FRK and not vs. MiniTraps which are much better than just 705-FRK.

I think your minitraps are marvelous Ethan. It’s just that they are so freakin’ expensive, as are all of your products. Regardless if I can afford them or not, I don’t see why I am expected to spend more money on treating my room than necessary just to satisfy your sense of aesthetics, so you won’t look down your nose at me and I can get on the ootie tootie train ... Your comments about what I can afford are very condescending and I take offense. It’s none of your business what my finances are.

>This is why you deleted the thread in the Acoustics forum. You don't want people to see this data.

This is becoming a real trend with you. Rather than address the issues you instead choose to attack my motives. You called me a used car salesman, and accused me of convoluting my answers and skewing the data. I don't have to fudge the data. The data stands on its own!

Then why did you delete the thread? No one was even talking to you. You could have just kept out of the conversation. I often do not contribute to a thread in the forums I moderate. I don’t consider it to be the “Kurt Show”… I'll say why I think you deleted the thread. You did it because you don’t want any voice of dissention, or anyone saying that there are other alternatives to your products and designs. Face it Ethan, you have to live in a world where there is foam rubber..

In fact, you are the one who intentionally skews the data, in a desperate attempt to make foam appear as effective as fiberglass, panel traps, or MiniTraps. Your inclusion of absorption data for wood panel traps at 1 KHz proves that you are either totally clueless or you have a vendetta.

Those figures I posted were simply the data I could collect on the items that were being compared. I don’t remember where the 1 K data on the panel traps came from but I believe it came from the source of all the data on them. I didn’t just make that up. I have no interest in skewing data. All I want to do is get the room treated without spending a couple of grand if possible. I do have a problem with people who insist that their way is the only way and there are no other viable options. One thing I have learned is, there are always options. You don’t have a corner on the world of bass trapping and acoustics.

So please show us a comparison between four inches of foam across a corner and a MiniTrap across a corner.

>I can quote the article in EQ where you mounted foam on a lattice.

And that’s all I have to offer on that. I do take your comments and accept them in many cases. I however do not accept that you are the final word in acoustics.

I won't let you wiggle out of this one. Please address my point. Show me the data for four inches of foam mounted across a corner compared to a MiniTrap mounted across a corner.

I am not trying to wiggle out of it. I have no way to generate that kind of data. But you have repeatedly said that leaving air space behind an absorber will increase its efficiency. I am simply taking your word on it. You seem to have a problem with me when I accept your points and well as when I reject them. I have never said that your traps and absorbers don’t work well as you have never really said that foam doesn’t work. But by insinuation you do seem to say that foam is no good. I don’t believe that. I think in many situations, foam may be plenty good to do the job.

***********************

Why do the acoustics products manufactures such as Acoustics First, Acoustic Sciences, Acoustical Solutions and Illbruk to name a few offer foam products? Because in some cases they work just fine. Why do they also offer other options? Because in some cases foam isn’t enough or isn’t right for the application. Does Ethan know something they don’t? I don’t think so.

I hope this is the last of it as it seems the members are tired of it but I am going to put up foam in my room. I will do some measurements before and after and I will post the results. I welcome Ethans input. Knightfly lives reasonably close to me so pehaps he will consent to assist me in this undertaking. Kurt

Lookit, no kidding, Ethan Winer should have a shred of dignity about this. It's shameless. He's hawking this stuff. He's unhappy with something someone said about it, maybe thinks the facts are wrong, whatever. Lump it. He should sit on his hands and lump it. I don't care if Kurt's right or wrong, I bet he's right but I have no idea, but it's darn ugly to say anything at all, let alone to put a black eye in the game, turn the thing agressively personal. Man. How about a little shame . . .

Kurt,

I agree with treeline and his :td: icon. This is becoming a big time waster for me and I'm sure for you too. I have said all I can possibly say on these issues, and proven beyond any doubt that a full complement of MiniTraps will give far better results than a full complement of foam.

Does foam absorb sound? Of course it does. Does it absorb low frequency sound? Sure, but not very well unless it is extremely thick. Can you treat a room with foam and get acceptable results? Sure, as long as your expectations are not very high.

> I was not aware of the figures on FRK. I was using the data that I could find at the Owens Corning site.

This is exactly why you are not qualified to make pronouncements on acoustic products. No offense, but you don't know anything about acoustic treatment. Heck, just a few months ago you were arguing that bass traps are a nonsense product that nobody needs! You made many other gaffs at that time about acoustic principles, such as the behavior of low frequency waves within a small room. You may be a fine recording engineer, but you have no business offering opinions on the worth of one acoustic product versus another.

> I think your minitraps are marvelous Ethan. It’s just that they are so freakin’ expensive, as are all of your products.

MiniTraps are less than half the cost of a tube trap of similar size. Our wood panel traps are about the same cost as a pair of RPG's membrane traps, but they're four times larger for a net cost of half. Do you not have any high quality gear in your studio? Do you not understand that sometimes high performance costs more? Did your best microphone cost $89? Nobody is more of a consumerist than I am, and I abhor high prices when one product is no better than another. But sometimes one product really is better.

> why did you delete the thread?

I deleted the thread because you were making a fool of yourself, and trying to drag my company's products along with you.

> You did it because you don’t want any voice of dissention

In fact that is exactly why you posted your silly "foam is better than panel traps" announcement and then locked it from comment. I watched in amazement the other night as you locked it, unlocked it, let in a couple of messages, locked it again, deleted the messages, etc.

I can take all manner of dissention. My products and statements stand on their own. If you can't understand why having 2.7 times more absorption at 100 Hz is a valuable attribute for a bass trap, that is your problem, not mine.

> I am not trying to wiggle out of it. I have no way to generate that kind of data.

Then you had no business making that original statement. This is exactly my objection to your posts. You make wild assertions about things you know nothing about, and most of the time you are wrong.

> Why do the acoustics products manufactures such as Acoustics First, Acoustic Sciences, Acoustical Solutions and Illbruk to name a few offer foam products?

Why does any company offer any product? To make money! Foam retails for many times its original cost, which is very attractive to a vendor. If you want a real eye opener, and you have a friend who's an audio dealer, ask them what their markup is on foam products. If you didn't begrudge the retail channel before, you will now!

Over and out.

--Ethan

Ethan,
I still have issues regarding small rooms but I did my best not to bring them into this discussion and I absolutely don’t want to go there. That horse has been beat to death twice and I have seen that we simply need to have a gentleman’s agreement to agree to disagree.

I have a different approach to setting up a room than you do. I am sure your way works but so does mine. I have set up several very good sounding LEDE rooms that have turned out a lot of good work. Records that have charted top 10 in Europe and Japan. You say I am not qualified to make statements regarding acoustics but you seem to discount diffusion as an aspect of room treatment. I know there are three elements in acoustic treatment. Absorption, diffusion and bass trapping. For some reason you seem to discount diffusion. Is this because you don’t sell diffusers?

I don’t think I ever said “bass traps were a nonsense product that nobody needed”. I have been aware of the importance of bass trapping for quite some time now. “Having 2.7 times more absorption at 100 Hz is a valuable attribute for a bass trap” is not as much of importance if you are in a room that doesn’t need that much bass trapping. If one starts with a decent room, there is no need to “polish the turd”. Once again, sledgehammer/gnat principal. In some instances, foam will work just fine. Not all rooms need all that much bass trapping. Some rooms are pretty good to start with and have enough volume that a lot of low end control is not needed. In those cases a few foam traps and some foam absorption and a couple of diffusers is all that is needed. When $500 of foam will do the trick, what is the point in spending more? To be able to say “I have the best, even though I don’t really need it”?

I don’t have any vendetta against you. I do wish that once in a while you would recommend something other than your products or designs. To not do so, only smacks of commercialism on your part. I think that may be what bothers me the most.

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
If one starts with a decent room, there is no need to “polish the turd”.

I have tried to stay out of this, but "polish the turd" is one of my all time favorite sayings (behind "shit sandwich") and your reckless misuse of the phrase is killing me.

“Polish the Turd” should be used when you have something BAD or INFERIOR as a starting point and you then make small changes, which may make something 'look' better, but not actual perform or function better.

My first introduction to said phrase was as I was literally polishing or buffing some rust off the rear quarter panel of my 1972 Cutlass Supreme. I was all of 16-1/2 and my Father pulled in from work and looked at me and uttered “Son, You can’t polish a turd.” In a fit of angst I remained silent and stewed in my juices. Turns out I really did not know what he meant by the phrase. Over dinner I asked. He returned with “That car is a broken down piece of shit (read: turd) and no matter how much bondo and wax you put on the outside (read: polish), it will still be a piece of shit.”

So, your use of the phrase is wrong, and is a gross disservice to an otherwise witty and clever phrase.

If one starts with a decent room, there is no “Turd.” If one starts with a poor room and then begins to treat it (following the advice of either yourself of Ethan) it is really not ‘Polishing,’ because (as you each contend) those treatments would be making a true improvement to the room.

If, by contrast, one was presented with a bad sounding room and decided that they were going to paint it a different color, that, my friend, would be “polishing the turd.”

There are only a handful of truly creative, grin inducing phrases that have not lost their original luster. Please do everything you can to make sure that this phrase remains among the few.

Regards,

Jim

PS: Proper use of “shit sandwich” (which, by the way, is not the usage most are familiar with; Shark Sandwich: Shit Sandwich) is when referring to a less than pleasant situation where you are getting paid. For instance, my job sucks, but I am very well paid, thus, when queried about my employer I am able to reply: “It is like a Shit Sandwich… The more bread they give you, the less you taste the Shit.” Note that ‘Bread’ in this example is MONEY, and ‘Shit’ is the general unpleasantness that I am greeted with every day of my working life.

You may be able to use it to describe a high paying gig tracking someone whose music you are not too fond of. “Hey Kurt, how is the tracking on the MegaMetal Satanic Death Musical Soundtrack going?” I think you know the reply…

Hmmmm..... wery informative, Jim, thank's for clearing that up for us ;)

glad to help

Lionard
(Now I fell better…)
Excuse my English… learning…

Originally posted by Lionard:
I’m only 1 ½ year in this and have spend a lot of time and money trying to learn, but in the way I founded a lot of equipment, a lot of books, a lot of advicers that are shit!

Now I take care of everything I read...I spend US $460 in auralex, because the auralex “expert” says so, and what I got? An f** boomy room. Foam is sh*** fiberglass is better...

Lionard, I prefer panel traps for the aesthetics. If I wanted the same results, I can achieve it with foam, that's just not the look I want.

With less than 2 years of experience, I would say the result of any boom in your recordings has little to do with acoustic treatments at this point.

Your Auralex purchase didn't make your mixes better, so now they are crap. If that were the case for all, there simply would be no market for foam in audio. With your limited experience, I rather doubt a full compliment of Ethan's traps would help either.

My opinion at this point for you, my inexperienced friend, is to spend more working on the other 90% of what is involved in recording.

--Rick

The big companies are trying to convince us that in any living room we can record like Sweeden just to sell us their stuff.

I agree wholeheartedly with this. This has been a point of contention for me all along. I believe that some rooms are not worth trying to “fix”, while Ethan implies any room can be made accurate if you purchase enough of his products.

I think one should start with a room that doesn't need a lot of correction in the first place. If you will go back and read all of my comments you will see that this is what I have been alluding to all along. I personally don't think that a bad room can be made to be accurate with any type of treatments. No I am not a math wizard, and I am not an acoustics expert. I freely admit this. I am also not so arrogant to think that only I know the answers and that I am always right. I don’t think I am smarter that everyone else. But I have set up several rooms that sounded good and that produced good mix’s, using my poke and hope methodology. I stand on my record credits and my body of work. My records are commercially available world wide. You can listen to the results anytime you wish. Just buy one of the CDs I have produced. I have learned some things along the way. Excuse me for trying to share them with all of you. From now on I will keep my experiences to myself.

But please keep in mind that I am not selling anything either. I have nothing to gain from arguing this point. Actually, I have taken quite a beating over all this. My credibility has been questioned and I am about to tell all of you to just do what you want to do. You want to spend $2000 plus to try to make a silk purse from a sows ear, be my guest. I don't give a rats ass anymore. I have $500 worth of FOUR INCH foam on its way here now and I will take some measurements of my room before and after I put it up. If I am lucky, this will solve what problems I have. But I can tell you already, I don't have a huge bass problem to start with. I have NEVER said that foam would work in all applications. I have always contended that it was in situations like mine, where the room is reasonable in the first place, that foam would do.

In closing please don’t address anymore comments or questions to me about this. I have reserved comment now, for almost a week hoping this thread would die but it keeps resurfacing. Those of you who have cash to burn and who want to engage in conspicuous consumption just so you can say “I have the best” , good for you. Myself, I would rather save the money and use it to purchase a nice mic, compressor or preamp.

I'm a songwriter. I have to say what I fell, if not I burn inside.

Thanks for the advice Rick. I want to spend all my time in recording but I think is better if my acoustic is good in my room. I want just finish my room and forget about acoustics.

I have 1 1/2 years just trying to be a sound engineer, but I’m an old musician (almost 25 years playing guitar and drums).

Kurt, I just want to learn... Let's talk about miking a vocal... I have a good new song...

Lionard

Originally posted by Lionard:

I'm a songwriter. I have to say what I fell, if not I burn inside.

I have 1 1/2 years just trying to be a sound engineer, but I’m an old musician (almost 25 years playing guitar and drums).

:) I see you have a strong opinion as well, given your 25 years. I respect that. I apologize for thinking you were very much younger. I could not stand by and see someone have at another person implying that he was a pretending to be expert, when he too has years of experience. Just as you have with guitar and drums.

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:

In closing please don’t address anymore comments or questions to me about this. I have reserved comment now, for almost a week hoping this thread would die but it keeps resurfacing. Those of you who have cash to burn and who want to engage in conspicuous consumption just so you can say “I have the best” , good for you. Myself, I would rather save the money and use it to purchase a nice mic, compressor or preamp.

now i'm really confused. i thought your whole point was that in spite of yuor great respect for Ethan's designs and concepts, if you spent the SAME amount of money on foam as on Ethan's products, you could get the same results on low bass. (given, of course, that the same amount of money buys an exponentially greater volume of foam, which begs the question of why anyone would want to deal with applying an astronomical amount of foam to their walls when two mini-traps would do the same job for the same price... i guess a grudge or personality conflict might explain it, but we know that couldn't possibly be true here.)

so how did one choice now morph into conspicuous consumption? and what happened to the alleged respect?

but i'll admit, by now the argument has gotten so convoluted I could be thinking of a different thread altogether...

oops... I forgot, you aren't reading this thread anymore. nevermind...

Originally posted by littledog, jr.:

but i'll admit, by now the argument has gotten so convoluted I could be thinking of a different thread altogether...

oops... I forgot, you aren't reading this thread anymore. nevermind...

I grow so weary of this............ why do you people insist on throwing fuel on this fire......do you just like to watch things burn... or is it that misery loves company.

You joined here what......... 3 days ago?.... and you need to throw barbs? Your sarcasm disgusts me.

I want you to know that i have a ton of respect for both of these individuals....... and i believe they both got caught up in the moment - they made the mistake growing passionate about something they believed in.

This isn't about right or wrong - it's about passion.

Both Ethan and Kurt are CORRECT that there are different ways of dealing with sound. And i can actually understand both of their positions - and i can also respect them both. I don't have to take sides. They both have enough experience in this industry to have valid opinions. Ethan certaintly have more behind him when it come to the math - but you cannot take away from Kurt the years of working in the environment and the actuall experience that the "school of hard knocks" has taught him either.

Heck - I have even worked with a studio designer (who is fairly well respected in the field of acoustics) who does it YET ANOTHER WAY - wow - you mean there are maybe even 3 whole ways of dealing with acoustics?

The people who throw gas here should be ashamed of themselves............. the 2 people who really matter in this issue have dropped it - why don't the rest of you let it go as well.

If you have a side in this - if you've formed an opinion - then at least respect the person who's side you're on - if he isn't attacking maybe that should signify something to you.

Sincerely,

Rod

Kurt,

please do me a favor - don't keep your experiences to yourself..... you have a lot to offer here - and i for one - welcome your point of view.

Rod

Lionard,

Thanks for your comments. You are correct that my goal is less to sell stuff, and much more to educate and promote acoustic treatment generally. I've been explaining the need for real bass traps and the limitations of foam for many years now, since long before I had something to sell.

> I don’t know whom to believe anymore. Too many bull sh** ... I even don’t believe in magazines

Yes, and this is a huge problem. As I explained in my Audio Myths article, anyone with good ears can proclaim himself an "engineer" even if he has no idea how audio and science work. And that's fine as long as they realize they don't know! I subscribe to every audio magazine, and in every issue of every magazine I find many serious errors of fact. Even the good magazines, like SOS, are clueless when it comes to acoustics.

--Ethan

Kurt,

> I have $500 worth of FOUR INCH foam on its way here now and I will take some measurements of my room before and after I put it up.

I think that's a great idea. Were you able to get Steve to agree to help? The reason I ask is I'm sure Steve knows what to measure. You can't just measure the frequency response using pink noise or swept sine waves, as those don't reveal low frequency problems at all. In fact, they don't reveal much more than how accurate your loudspeakers are!

Even the more sophisticated tests like TEF can't report low frequency problems due to standing waves and acoustic interference. The only practical way for you to test the effectiveness of bass traps in your studio is to measure the reverb time at all low frequencies with and without the treatment in place.

Also, since I don't think you've ever told us, what are the dimensions of your control room?

--Ethan

Originally posted by Rod Gervais:

You joined here what......... 3 days ago?.... and you need to throw barbs? Your sarcasm disgusts me.

Sorry about being disgusting. I'm trying to work on that...

I plead guilty to a lot of flaws,both genetic and acquired, but being a "newbie" isn't one of them. I did not join three days ago. i have something like 800 posts here, although most long before you joined, i guess. but for some reason, either accidently or intentionally, my identity was wiped out. Yet my name was still "reserved" so i couldn't come back without a new identity. i kind of thought that morphing from "Littledog" to "Littledog, jr." wouldn't be too hard to see through, but hey, ya never know, i guess...

Anyway, it was kurt's tone that in his last post that was so objectionable (calling Ethan's products conspicuous consumption and a waste of money)that would be closer to my definition of "disgusting" than someone calling him on it. Especially after claiming "respect" for the products in earlier posts. Ethan clearly is taking the high road, and I have new-found admiration for him for that. (And by the way, Ethan and i have had a classic rumble in the past about "coloured" preamps on this forum, so it's not exactly like I'm his rump-swab.)

Who knows, littledog, jr. might get erased from existence any moment now, and then you won't have me around to darken your towels anymore...

Hey, Rod, I just noticed you only joined in June 2003. Yet you have over 200 posts! Holy shit! You gotta get out more! :D

But, hey, with only one month of "seniority' maybe i should be the one calling you "junior"!

Lil' Doggie,

Thanks, I really appreciate you sticking up for me. Why the opinions of some bystanders are okay and others are not okay is beyond me. As long as folks are civil and stick to the issues at hand, all posts are welcome. Including those from people who sided against me. Everyone has a right to their opinion, whether its fair or not.

The only time I object is when people are rude, or knowingly misrepresent the facts. It's not a crime if someone doesn't understand a scientific principle. As long as we're all civil we can discuss the facts and everyone learns.

> calling Ethan's products conspicuous consumption

Yes, it's amazing that more people here have not jumped on Kurt for his obvious bias and grudge.

--Ethan

Littledog,

i was not suggesting that you were disgusting.... but rather that the tone was....... a slight difference there.......

I apologize for presenting it in a manner that suggested otherwise.

However - my point was that we should let the 2 of them deal with each other....... i do so hate taking sides - especially when i like both parties........ and i still feel it feeds food to the fire.

Anyway - tis only my opinion - :D :D :D

By the way - i've been called junior before......... ;)

Nice meeting you by the way

Rod

Rod,

The real point is that only by discussion can we resolve these issues. If the goal is to figure out what kinds of acoustic treatment work best and why, then we need to examine the facts. We need to look at absorption data, and analyze the logic and arguments made by both sides. Everyone has opinions, but accuracy and the science behind the facts are all that should matter here.

--Ethan

Ethan,

I have attempted to maintain an unbiased position in this issue for a variety of reasons. I have not stepped between you and Kurt - not feeling that it was my place. And if someone from the "outside" were to attack you (in my eyes) i would defend you. It's my nature - i don't defend it - i think it's a genetic defect.

I agree with you 110% about the idea of exploration through discussion - i also believe that you are very passionate (and that is probably one reason you are as good as you are with what you do) about the issue. I can relate to that - as i am very passionate about what i do as well.

My only point here - and it was certainly not to take sides - was that outside influences - that do take sides - that make demeaning remarks about one person or the other - tend to help this to escalate into a less than professional exercise.

When i say that i respect both you and Kurt - i mean just that.

And when i say that i believe Kurt has something to offer - i mean that too. I do not take away from you when i say this - you are a given - you truly are an expert in the field.

It will never stop surprising me how some people i run into have something that they suggest - just based on years of experiences - that they can never explain to me in engineering terms - but - when i look hard enough at what they say - there is something there for me to grab onto.

So when i hear someone say that they have tried "A" and it worked for them - i always try to analyze why "A" worked in that case.

A perfect room wouldn't need anything - a less than perfect room might need a touch of foam - and a room sent from heaven would have your product in it.

It may not be my place to defend anyone here - in fact i am a newbie for all intent and purpose - but once again - tis my nature -

Sincerely

Rod

I have been a bystander on this thread for a while, and I have to say it's both amusing, and disturbing. I have seen many post from both ethan and kurt, and they are both knowledgable and competent, at varying degrees in the studio environment. I see this thread about the merits of foam vs panel vs kurt vs ethan vs the laws of physics, but I think the real point has been missed.

Who's better, charlie parker or wes montgomery?
I guess that would depend if your situation required sax or guitar. Wouldn't it?
In my opinion the real bottom line here is that the needs of a certain studio encompass more than just the acoustic and aesthetic issues of the room. The real issue here, and what has been lost in this thread, are the needs of the individual purchasing a product for acoustic correction.

If money is NO object, then who cares how much it costs to do. With the majority of private individuals moeny IS an object, and the best acoustic solution should be addressed considering finances. When I built my studio I could afford NOTHING more than meager equipment. The first projects I got paid to do were on a roland vs 840! I recorded these in jam halls, and they sounded good enough. Later while building my studio, I also had budget constraints. Acoustically, I knew bass would be a problem in my room, because of its size, so I made my own, very inexpensive traps, and they have been alright. My room is not acoustically great, and now my gear is much better, and I have great sounding recordings. You do not have to have the best of the best to make a good recording. I believe It's the engineer, and the ear, not the gear, so here's what I have to say:

If I am to decide on the purchase of a product, then I will make that decision by evaluating my needs. I will go to someone professional who will help me better assess my needs and give me a sensible UNBIASED opinion about what I should purchase. Both Ethan and kurt are projecting a bias here out of a need to validate their opinions to the readers on this thread. As a consumer I may not purchase form either one of them, based purely on that. Why would I if they were more concerned about their own needs than those of the purchaser.
The simple fact is that for one customer, ethans products will best suit the needs of that customer. For other customers, perhaps foam is the best option for their situation, or a combo of the two. THis decision must be made with a number of variables which can not be pre conceived without a crystal ball. Budget, aesthetics, the actual room itself, what the room is being used for. Either way, mini traps are valid acoustic treatments, so are foam, fibreglass, carpet, moving blankets, wood, curtains, anything that will do the job with the best interests of the customer is the proper choice.
I think the discussion here, although informative, was an unfortunate display of poor communication between two established professionals, and a few well established common pruducts.

What band would you book for the gig? Garth brooks, or linkin park?
That would depend on the venue wouldn't it?

Rod,

> outside influences - that do take sides - that make demeaning remarks about one person or the other - tend to help this to escalate into a less than professional exercise.

I agree completely. But for me this has become a lose-lose situation. If I defend myself against the obvious bias and misleading information that was posted initially and remains posted, I'm accused of bending the facts just to sell stuff. If I keep my mouth shut and ignore the blatant errors in those comparisons, it looks like I have no valid response so the poster must be correct. So what the heck should I do?

--Ethan

littledog,
$500 will buy 3 minitraps.. with that you can cover at best (I don't know the exact dimensions) maybe 20 sq feet. $500 will buy 120 sq feet of 4" foam. Not only will this 120 sq feet of foam bass trap my room but it will also do a lot of the mid band absorption in the front of the room in a LEDE set up. So my comments were addressed to that . I contend that in my situation (and many other that are in similar situations) $500 of 4" foam will do more than 3 minitraps, in terms of coverage. Yes I freely admit that 3 minitraps will do more bass trapping in the deep bass, (which I don’t need) but they don't provide absorption for one end of the whole room. If anyone would read the whole thread and just take what I have said as it is rather than attempt to interpret it into something else, it would be obvious that this is what I have been saying all along. So in order to accomplish the same task with mini traps and fiberglass, even Ethan says the cost usually runs around an estimate of about $2000. $500 vs. $2000 … this is what my conspicuous consumption comment was referring to. If you want to spend more money to accomplish the same task, for reasons of aesthetics or as I said, to be able to brag that you “have the best”, by all means be my guest. Excuse me for tying to help you save some cash. To be attacked for trying to look out for your and others interests is the last straw for me. Like I said in my last post, at this point, I don’t give a rats ass what you do. Go ahead and waste your money.

I have nothing against Ethan personally. I have never met the man and I don’t know of him other than what he has posted here and on other forums and an article in EQ. Actually, I am the person who is most responsible for bringing Ethan as a moderator to the acoustics forum here at RO. I would never make the mistake of judging if I like or dislike a person on the basis of Internet communications. I am sure Ethan is a fine person and I hold no personal grudges. Sorry to disappoint all of you who are looking for a mud wrestling match. Ethan and I simply vehemently disagree on several topics in audio, foam rubber being one of them. I maintain my right to address these differences if I wish to, without being deleted. The mere fact that one of the threads on this topic that Ethan started is titled “Please remove your references to any of my products” goes to show that the reason Ethan is so upset about all of this is because he concerned about any negative exposure. The truth be told, I have not said anything negative regarding Ethan’s products. I challenge you to go through all these threads and find one disparaging comment from me regarding any of Ethan’s products. I have simply shown the audacity to mention that in some instances, foam may do the job. How dare I? Blasphemy! I however, have been accused of being mean spirited, having a vendetta or a personal agenda, have had to endure personal attacks and had my credibility questioned. I have nothing at stake in this. I have no financial gain or loss at stake and at this point don’t really care what those of you who are too thick to get what I have trying to say, think of me.

If you want to spend 3 or 4 times as much as needed to do acoustic treatments to satisfy some ootie tootie sensibilities, by all means do it! If you want to fill your racks with ten pieces of rack garbage instead of one quality piece of gear, go for it. Go ahead and make your studio all show and no go. I, at this point, simply don’t give a shit anymore. I am just about done trying to help any of you.

Do I think I am perfect? Do I think everything I have ever said is right? No. I make mistakes. I am sometimes wrong. I will however, when I discover I have been mistaken about something, admit it , step up to the plate and say, I stand corrected. I refuse to be put in a position of having to be 100% correct in everything I say and do. I after all am human too. So don’t expect that of me. You have no right to require that of me or anyone else.

People like littedog and J Slator are in the process of ruining RO by nitpicking and stirring shitpots. They offer nothing but opinion and it is usually in the direction of attempting to discredit someone else who has been trying to contribute something positive. They are simply detractors. They have come here to do this with an agenda. They are on a mission. Just last week littledog was a contributor to a shit thread at Gearslutz where they were trying to run down RO. Chris and I went over there and tried to straighten them out and now lo and behold, after an absence of several months, here comes littledog, sniffing around and attacking me. I can assure you if it weren’t me, it would be someone else. If the rest of you wish to simply sit on your hands and let these people ruin RO, then so be it. I have done all that I can. But if you care about RO and the level of communication and civility we have had here to this point, now is the time to tell them to shut up and go away. We need all the members to start doing this. The mods here have done all they can to deal with these types and we are at the end of the line. littledog wonders why his/her profile was altered? Because you are not welcome here. That’s why.

Originally posted by Ethan Winer:
Rod,

> outside influences - that do take sides - that make demeaning remarks about one person or the other - tend to help this to escalate into a less than professional exercise.

I agree completely. But for me this has become a lose-lose situation. If I defend myself against the obvious bias and misleading information that was posted initially and remains posted, I'm accused of bending the facts just to sell stuff. If I keep my mouth shut and ignore the blatant errors in those comparisons, it looks like I have no valid response so the poster must be correct. So what the heck should I do?

--Ethan

Ethan,

I am not speaking about you saying what you feel you must - i am speaking about people outside of you and Kurt taking sides - they feed the fire as it were..........

If you feel the need to debate - then debate - you have mathematics on your side - and Kurt has his trial and error method - eventually both yield results.

I just do not want to see outside sources take sides in the issue witout something constructive to say.

I am not anywhere close to your expertise in this area - although i am constantly learning (and in many ways from you) which is the biggest reason i have pretty much stayed out of it.

But i did not consider littledogs comment to "add" anything to the conversation - rather it was meant ONLY to inflame Kurt- and thus escalate this, all to the detriment of RO.

And that my friend, is what i am concerned with most.

Sincerely

Rod

Steve,

Eloquently put.

Rod

And finally to Kurt,

Kurt, I agree completely with your perception that people like Slator and littledog seem to like to inflame the people in this venue.

I came here because i wanted to learn from professionals, and because i had finally found a place where the pros - who so much love their work - were willing to devote their time to help poor slugs like me learn a thing or 2.

I ask you again - because i believe that the vast majority of people here are like me - please do not keep your opinions to yourself.

I also ask that you realize that by doing so - you are only allowing the idiots who love to cause dissent to win. In the end the only ones who lose are the good people who come here and don't cause problems.

Sincerely,

Rod

Originally posted by Ethan Winer:
Kurt,

I don't think you've ever told us, what are the dimensions of your control room?

--Ethan

Ethan, 14' by 17' with a 7'7" ceiling. I am firing into the 17' dimension. However one of the rear corners of the room opens up into a hallway that runs the length of the whole house. When I play music on the system and move about the room, there is no perceptible change in timber. Knightfly already has run the dimensions of the room and reported that they are very good. Even without treatments up I get a very good phantom image in the center between the speakers, both on the nearfields and the mains. The main thing I notice is a short flutter echo off the rear wall with sounds like snare drums and hi hats. I need some diffusion on the rear wall. Yes, I hope to entice Knightfly into visiting and helping me conduct these before and after tests. I think it would be an interesting project for RO..

Ethan, I want to take this opportunity to say directly to you, I have no personal animosity towards you. I am sure we could share a nice meal and enjoy each others company. I would most likely love to have you play some cello parts on one of my productions. I do disagree with some of your opinions, but it is not personal. I have stated repeatedly that we need to have a gentleman’s agreement to agree to disagree. I do respect you as an intellect and as a businessman among many other things. Respectfully, Kurt

Kurt,

> 14' by 17' with a 7'7" ceiling. I am firing into the 17' dimension ... When I play music on the system and move about the room, there is no perceptible change in timber.

In that case your assessment of not needing much bass trapping is likely correct. I just set up a home theater in my living room, which at 25x16 is only a little larger than your control room. After mounting only one MiniTrap in each of the four corners the low frequency problems pretty much disappeared. So it's true that for a room that's large enough and has good dimensions, a lot of bass trapping is not always needed.

> I want to take this opportunity to say directly to you, I have no personal animosity towards you.

Great. Then lets put this to bed and move on. All I ask is:

1) Please understand that a lot of rooms do need more than a little help in the low end. You may feel that someone with a poor room shouldn't even bother to add bass traps, but in fact these are the people who need high performance products like MiniTraps the most. This is the room they have, and their spouse won't let them set up in the living room. Yet they are serious about making good mixes, and they're willing to buy the right gear to make the room they're stuck with work as well as possible. I deal with rooms like this every single day, and I can tell you that good bass traps can make the difference between "My room sucks" and "Wow, I can finally hear what I'm doing."

2) If you post a comparison of panel traps to foam, and I explain why the comparison is not valid [comparing the wrong frequency ranges, ignoring edge effects, discounting absorption below 125 Hz, etc.], please don't immediately assume I'm just defending my financial interests. Try to understand my points, and see if you can understand how they make sense. Really, I'm here to help people, not sell products.

Thanks.

--Ethan