audiokid, post: 448274, member: 1 wrote: Wonderful. Is there anything you would do different?

I probably would have done a totally separate structure like you are doing. Mine is an attached room in the house.

I always wondered about "ideal" dimensions and then read the Gervais book AFTER I built it...how's that for great planning. I experienced a frequency bump at 55 and another at 105-110 at my seated mix location, but then pretty flat from there on. The exact dimensions are 29W x 37.5L x 26H. I've tried all the math calculators but could never figure out the 2 bumps above. Although the ceiling is not flat and the room is not a clean rectangle - it has 2 angled corners (NW and SE corners) and an attached loft. So it's probably pretty complicated how the actual 55 and 105-110 bumps are generated in the room. I could treat them pretty easy with tuned membranes I guess. Wood floor, wood ceiling, wood ceiling trusses, 75% of 1 wall is stone. I was researching/reading RVG and his studios back in the old days. I was always intrigued with his masonry wall, so thought I would do stone instead.

I've mixed previously in 2 rooms in the house and finally settled on mixing in the largest room. The first room was too small, the 2nd room was a little bigger and treated fairly well but I kept feeling like the sound was "all over me". I always stayed away from the largest room for mixing because I was concerned on not hearing the recorded ambience - that is, same ambience from the same room problem. But lately I've finally tried the largest room for mixing and it is much better. Even though my old ears aren't what they used to be - everything seems cleaner in there. I still go back to the other room to double-check ambience. I would imagine your room will be even cleaner since my initial design was not for mixing in there. You may not want the wood ceiling or stone? as your emphasis is more mixing than mine initially was. I'm no professional on this stuff - only fascinated with sound/music. I can only imagine what some of the pro's in here like yourself could do with a nice large type of room. If you are ever in the area (or any of the regulars on here for that matter) and want to stop by, you are more than welcome.

But even though I have a room inspired on RVG, unfortunately I can't recreate his ears/knowledge.

JayTerrance, post: 448286, member: 49019 wrote: I always stayed away from the largest room for mixing because I was concerned on not hearing the recorded ambience

Yes, I was thinking about this too. You bring up a very good point.

JayTerrance, post: 448286, member: 49019 wrote: I still go back to the other room to double-check ambience.

Smart.

JayTerrance, post: 448286, member: 49019 wrote: I'm no professional on this stuff - only fascinated with sound/music.

You sound like me. Simply fascinated with sound and doing my best to keep the magic alive in it all.

JayTerrance, post: 448286, member: 49019 wrote: If you are ever in the area (or any of the regulars on here for that matter) and want to stop by, you are more than welcome.

That's very kind, I would do that for sure now, thank you.

JayTerrance, post: 448286, member: 49019 wrote: I can only imagine what some of the pro's in here like yourself could do with a nice large type of room.

You sound humble and as pro as the rest of us.

DonnyThompson, post: 448279, member: 46114 wrote: I've worked in some places that are so air-tight, that after a little while, people start to get logy, short tempered, and eventually, performances start to suffer... LOL... oxygen is important, but the good news is, it's free. ;)

HVAC seems expensive till people pass out lmao!!! The worst is booths with no AC. Man I have seen some really sweaty individuals come out of those.

I'd rather have a studio that was smaller to reserve money for proper hvac than a larger one without it.

Lol, if chris gets enough pultecs, he won't need heat up there in the great north!

DonnyThompson, post: 448279, member: 46114 wrote: I might also consider semi-permanently mounting a mic or two way up high, or maybe at the peak of the ceiling or something - or at least run a cable or install a jack panel up in spots like that, so that you could grab the sound from those hard to reach places. I mean, it might be a sonic disaster - but it might be kinda cool too!

Killer idea!

Got me thinking you could mount them on a little track/string and servo motor, and move them around from the control room remotely. Just dreaming aloud.

JayTerrance, post: 448286, member: 49019 wrote: So it's probably pretty complicated how the actual 55 and 105-110 bumps are generated in the room. I could treat them pretty easy with tuned membranes I guess.

Treat 55 and you'll tone down the 105 octave as well. If you could make some broadband traps centered around 60hz you could tame both of those modes. Assuming that the speaker positioning is at its flattest. Not trying to give un-solicited advice, just making conversation.

JayTerrance, post: 448286, member: 49019 wrote: I always stayed away from the largest room for mixing because I was concerned on not hearing the recorded ambience - that is, same ambience from the same room problem.

Larger rooms generally have more optimal low end response, which is super important. It's much easier to tame the overal ambience and decay time in a larger room, than make the bass response better in a smaller room. It just comes down to more broadband absorbsion generally.

I know at Normandy in the 80's they had rebuilt the CR a couple times and had made it smaller becuase there was apparently a discernible slap echo. That room was an LEDE style so reflections play a paramount role in the function of the room. So due to the inherent nature of a semi reflective back half in the lede style shrinking it made sense to them to control the reflections length/delay.

This is one of the few times I've heard of a case where a smaller CR was actually more beneficial.

I’m back at starting to plan this more

I really like the barn style but I’m uncertain with a pitch like in this picture.

starting with the shell, $70,000 budget to lockup stage...
Kurt, other’s, tell me what you would build?
Size etc
Let’s have fun talking and sharing

audiokid, post: 457536, member: 1 wrote: I’m back at starting to plan this more

Oh man that’s great! Can’t wait to here’s more about it. I’m here to help in any way possible.

Is there any existing structure or foundation yet? Is this freestanding or attached to another building section?

If you need better than 30-40db of sound isolation, your looking at a room within a room. In that case a large outer shell, rectangular, and ditto with the inner shell. If you like that angles on the ceiling, you can angle the acoustic treatments. It’s perfectly acceptable to angle the inner shell, you just sacrifice some cubic footage. That said you can make the space useful by running ducts and conduit thru it. Ideally the angle is ‘lopsided’ for lack of proper term. So the pitch angle on either side is different, this keeps the Asymmetry that tracking rooms love. It won’t effect mixing imaging much, given a decent height.

Barn styles really can look cool or classy. With big access doors they’re perfect for studios. Also, typical barns are big enough, that room modes aren’t usually a major issue, as they are in smaller rooms. Area (cubic footage) is a wonderful bass trap, and usually cheaper than building smaller and trying to stuff traps in.

One consideration with pitch roofs, or any non-rectangular room, is the complexity of the calculations for the acoustic response.

That pitch in the pic is much steeper than I’d make it, given the choice. I’d use a much flatter angle, maintaining a higher avaerage ceiling height, and maximizing the cubic footage as much as posssible.

Having a single room saves thousands on walls, glass, and doors. Glass and doors are particularly expensive and painstaking with studios.

God willing, it’s going here if it kills me.

Kyle, travelling so my posts are short.
Free standing in a very quiet surrounding.

I have a flat 1/2 acre spot on that 5 acre lake property to put it.

Pffft. Could you have picked a more perfect place?

Are you gonna build on that plot? Or is it going in the existing building?

That’s my home. And my shop on the far right in the trees
The studio will go Between But back

Should I build it with a view or forget that?

audiokid, post: 457541, member: 1 wrote: Kyle, travelling so my posts are short.
Free standing in a very quiet surrounding.

I have a flat 1/2 acre spot on that 5 acre lake property to put it.

Excellent you isolation exists naturally!!!! That took 30-50% off what it would otherwise cost.

Imho, and hopefully others will chime in, but here’s my initial thoughts.

Slab foundation.

2x6 or 2x8 wall frames (depending on height), and a flat, gambrel, or pitched roof, in that order or preference. Engineered i-joists can span quite far, like 35-40ft, without mid-span supports or lally columns. That’s what I’d use for the roof. They’re relatively economically priced, and I’ve seen a single dude, average size, install them for his 2-story garage. So they seem somewhat possible to install with any sort of crane.

I’d then sheath the outer layer of the barn with two layers of osb, and Green glue, or consider a third osb layer and no glue. Cost is usually what determines which is best, since performance is similar. Two layers (no glue), plus the finish (siding, shingles, Ect) would be around STC 40ish, which is about 6-8db better than a single layer wall. You could also use Hardie Backer, and the appropriate siding. Hardie backer is a bit heavier than osb or drywall. So you could do OSB layer one, Hardie backer layer two, and the finish.

On the inside id cover the r-value insulation with some plastic sheeting to contain the fibers, then finish that off with fabric or barn board, or combo of both. This will setup your overall room response and reverb decay time. And you can modify from there.

After that I’d add coats of shellac one by one to get the right brightness, and/or add wall panels or removing barn board to get the right amount of absorption. I was really surprised how many high level acousticicians tune the rooms by ear, one the basics are set.

For the flooring, I like the look of wood, as opposed to carpet, or bare stained concrete, which are less expensive.

48,000 btu Ductless Multi split for ac/heat can be had for 5-8k installed, typically around here. And that’s for Daikin, which is best imho. I may be off on the BTUs but not by much.

Electric and plumbing could be significant costs, depending on plans, an existing electrical service. Perhaps you would consider using solar/wind/water power for some of the less intensive electrical stuff like lighting.

Sorry a lot of that is generic info, usually the complicated parts are due to existing conditions, tiny or cluttered areas, or the desire for multiple isolation rooms.

If you figure

15k foundation
10k electrical/plumbing
8k hvac

That leaves 40k for the structure. Which if it’s say 24x42 roughly, is about 20k in materials, very roughly, Boston prices. Maybe an additional 5-8 for sheathing layers and insulation.

Leaving 10-12k for treatments et al’.

That’s a very general and vague cost estimate but typical to what I’ve experienced around here on New England.

I think you can accomplish what you need within your budget, without a lot to spare, or it’s easy enough to just design and size to the budget constraint.

audiokid, post: 457544, member: 1 wrote: Should I build it with a view or forget that?

To me the view is priceless. Even if through a couple sliding glass doors. That said, glass is one of The more expensive propositions usually, because it has to be thick. You can likely get away with bigger or cheaper, since your iso requirements are low.

I’d be jealous if I wasn’t so inspired! I almost bought a lakeside house last fall, but the deal went south. Something about playing out on the deck with an acoustic guitar seemed natural.

For my place, I have strongly considered using a single OSB layer, and the stone/plaster/concrete exterior finish. The name of it escapes me but it gets you some mass cheap, since all it’s both a mass adding layer, and the finish layer, it just needs paint. That type of finish can be installed faster than layers of sheathing in general, if it’s apllied with a trowel. It may not have the allure of the other exteriors, but it’s acoustically and cost effective, and very low maintenance, while being dead simple to repair.

Looking forward to hearing what the other fellas round here have to say.

Wow, lots of good info, Kyle, thank you.

kmetal, post: 457545, member: 37533 wrote: Slab foundation.

Yes, I'm thinking I will build it on a radiant heated slab using a wood or gas to heat the water.

I won't ever need AC here, just slow turning fans or open windows to circulate air.
The temp here is usually cool averaging (20C 68F or less) and there is an even breeze that comes off the lake to cool as well so there is a big saving right there.

There is a 200 amp service, I'll do all the electrical
Plumbing is going to be really simple

Very interesting about using shellac to brighten up the room. I had no idea you would even do that. Add brightness into it.

In floor heating. Does this look logical" I've never seen isolation board put in the floor like that. I would have thought it would crush form the weight of the concrete.

Here is the wood furnace https://www.heatmor.com/

audiokid, post: 457544, member: 1 wrote: Should I build it with a view or forget that?

I guess it depends how much more it will cost you and how it will affect sound. Morein heights had a view and they closed down none the less.

pcrecord, post: 457555, member: 46460 wrote: I guess it depends how much more it will cost you and how it will affect sound. Morein heights had a view and they closed down none the less.

yikes, that's a sobering chair, sign of the times.

Being said, I'm not worried about closing down because I'm building this to be used and shared for multi purposes.
Examples: music lessons, practicing, writing, producing, collaboration stuff for my musical family and myself.

Any income generated would likely only subsidize us. Its by no means intended to be a commercial studio like you'd expect in a city. Imagine this as your big play house for you and musicians that have the luxury to track decent work with excellent recording and mixing equipment. A nice place to work on music with no one around to bother you. Ah... peace and quiet in a nice country setting.

I'll likely put a cozy wood stove (Blaze King) in there as well so it has a really cozy feeling. Like this example but over in a corner where a group can sit around a fire and jam, party etc with mics ready to go when needed.

kmetal, post: 457545, member: 37533 wrote: After that I’d add coats of shellac one by one to get the right brightness, and/or add wall panels or removing barn board to get the right amount of absorption. I was really surprised how many high level acousticicians tune the rooms by ear, one the basics are set.

https://recording.org/threads/a-cool-interview-with-bob-olhsson.63858/ listen to Bobs comments on what a Chamber is and his reference to shellac Starts at 17:06 . (y)

audiokid, post: 457567, member: 1 wrote: https://recording.org/threads/a-cool-interview-with-bob-olhsson.63858/ listen to Bobs comments on what a Chamber is and his reference to shellac Starts at 17:06 . (y)

Yeah man I gotta check that whole interview out, my batteries died when i was listening. Rod and Phil (Greene) told me about the shellac. 5-7 coats seems to be the recipe for The Powerstation, and Normandy. I prefer the sound of wood reflections vs the plaster reflections at The Wave Cave. For an actual echo chamber, tile or plaster however is my preference, or smooth concrete in a large area for the most perfect decay I’ve ever heard. Ever.

Chambers are the opposite rules for tracking and mixing rooms. A cubiod or rectangular room with reflective surfaces, and parellel boundaries.

If I remember correctly it was capitol (def some major studio) that had a great echo chamber they made in a closet or bathroom. It was wonderful. So they tried to design a fancy one with typical acoustics techniques, and it wasn’t special.

If you put a mic 15+ ft away from any source, and aim the mic at the (reflective part) of a wall, a few inches away, you can get a big sound. It’s the sound of the first Stevie Ray Vaughn record, or 80’s blues, or rock like Aerosmith. Not always appropriate but can make any room sound large.

audiokid, post: 457550, member: 1 wrote: Yes, I'm thinking I will build it on a radiant heated slab using a wood or gas to heat the water.

Perfect.

audiokid, post: 457550, member: 1 wrote: I won't ever need AC here, just slow turning fans or open windows to circulate air.
The temp here is usually cool averaging (20C 68F or less) and there is an even breeze that comes off the lake to cool as well so there is a big saving right there

I’m not doubting you, but I mention this for conversation. In the control rooms, and recording rooms to a lesser extent, I’ve used AC year round. Seem like you have it covered, and a standup ac, or ductless mini, is a very simple installation even in finished studios, should the need arise. Those units can do heat as well. I don’t see any problems with what your currently thinking.

audiokid, post: 457550, member: 1 wrote: There is a 200 amp service, I'll do all the electrical
Plumbing is going to be really simple

Beautiful. It cost the home theater project 8k to upgrade from 120 to 200A. I shoulda been the electrician on the project instead. They did it in a day and a half, and sent the B team.

audiokid, post: 457552, member: 1 wrote: In floor heating. Does this look logical" I've never seen isolation board put in the floor like that. I would have thought it would crush form the weight of the concrete.

Slabs are an area of ignorance for me. I’m somewhat of an armchair acoustician, with some holes in my game.

That said, my best guess is that you need some form of semi rigid underlayment, to compensate or move with, the expansion and contraction of the ground and concrete. Otherwise the pipes would crack.

I’ve been lucky (in one sense) that all 6 or so builds I’ve done, and most of the ones I’ve consulted, have had an existing foundation already. Second floors, and slab design have evaded me so far. I’m always eager to learn. Normandy is on a wood deck above the basement of the building, and (supposedly) Phil had them fill up the cavity below with sand. 6ft high, 25’x17’ area. I’m not sure I believe that, and tried to avoid the moldy dirty basement as much as possible on that project. One of the few times I dished off the shitty jobs to someone else. I used to take the worst of it for myself.

Heater looks killer. The support pole obstructing the view is a detriment imho. I’m a huge fan of clear spans. I’d rather add decorative wood beams, and clear spans, than incorporate columns.

kmetal, post: 457570, member: 37533 wrote: I’m not doubting you, but I mention this for conversation.

(y)
For sure, this thread is for others too. I am taking what seems to fit for me but listening to everything said!

kmetal, post: 457571, member: 37533 wrote: Heater looks killer. The support pole obstructing the view is a detriment imho. I’m a huge fan of clear spans. I’d rather add decorative wood beams, and clear spans, than incorporate columns.

(y)

Same. The building I build will not have any posts like that but the fireplace does look awesome so I'm in on that!.
Log structures like that picture require posts everywhere. I've built and worked in a lot of log homes and they are not my choice. They look amazing and have a wonderful vibe about them but I would never want one for a variety of reasons. I much prefer a stick frame with decorative trim and paint which is what I'm planning. :)

audiokid
Hi brother. :)
I have no advice to give you on the technical aspects of your room, but I can offer a few thoughts on the spiritual, human part of what you are doing, and it’s this:
If building your own multi purpose music/creative facility brings you happiness, if you get up in the morning and what you see around you brings you a feeling of accomplishment and stokes creativity, if you are surrounding yourself with creative people, (not to mention working and spending time with people you love ...like your kids ) and providing a place for artistic visions to come to fruition, then everything you’ve done or will do is absolutely worth it. Whether you turn it into a successful revenue generating entity is kinda secondary at that point. Yeah, of course we would all like to earn a comfortable living doing what we love to do ... but if your space is bringing you happiness, a sense of contentment and inner peace, then that should be enough, my friend. Especially at our age, when so many of us have been through the ringer of the rat race, or have faced health issues, or dealt with all the crap that life throws at everyone from time to time if we get old enough to experience them (LOL)...
creating something that brings you or others happiness is worth more than you could ever put a price tag on. ;)
I think what you’re doing, and what you’ve described doing in the near future, is a great thing. You deserve to be happy. Don’t get to a place where you second guess yourself about it.
You’re building s sort of dream factory; where very cool things can happen for you, and for the people that will come there... and you’re never too old for dreams.
IMHO, of course. ;)
-d.

Thanks for all that said, Donny. You summed up all the reasons why I am doing this.

Could the ceiling benefit from spraying it all with acoustic foam insulation and leaving it exposed ?

The ceiling would be dead then.

I would be tempted to keep the room alive to some degree if it sounds good of course. You know, to get those big drum sounds everyone dreams of.. ;)
You could have a dead isolated room for when dead sound is needed but keep the rest alive.

I know nothing about acoustics so everything I do is listen first and fix the issus. Just like when mixing, it's easy to overdo acoustics...
But that's just me !

audiokid, post: 457652, member: 1 wrote: Could the ceiling benefit from spraying it all with acoustic foam insulation and leaving it exposed ?

The ceiling would be dead then.

It all depends on height, and ceiling type. With a pitched roof, often the peak is a wonderful place to have a couple feet (2’-6’) up there, for bass trapping, like a typical corner trap. This would be a stronger consideration to me in your case since since the room is going to have some mixing done. You can then use a semi reflective covering on the trap, to maintain life in the room. This can be anything from fence slats, to a glass feature, to plywood with holes cut in it.

If your 10ft or lower in height, completely dead is my preference. Ceiling reflections are generally gross, until your in then 12’-15’+ range. I typical overhead mic 6’ high is only 4’ away from the ceiling, which is going to exhibit phase cancelizations.

My personal preference if doing a room like yours would be to keep it dead over the mix position, and then open up the sound with a more lively, but balanced tracking area. I’d probably make one dead section in then corner for tight drum/gtr/bass/vocal sounds, and incorporate some Gobos if necessary. This is what I designed for a garage conversion in Finger Lakes NY, in late 2016. (I can dig up some of the floor plans that included treatment if you’re interested)

With a pitched roof in particular, id leave at least one small section live, as the reverb time, and density will increase as you get closer to the peak of the roof. This is a creative tool. The power station has the ‘coffin’ at peak of studio A, that serves this purpose.

Flat ceilings can have useful reflections as well, just not quite so drastically Varialble with mic positioning. It’s easy enough to have angled, and curved treatments hanging as well, to achieve a similar result to the peaked roof.

That said, even with a completely live ceiling, min 10ft, it really doesn’t seem to effect the close mics, or any of the mics on floor stands, to any great degree in Munich experience. In reality it’s equally simple to liven a dead room, or deaden a live room. And my preferred way is to think in ‘Zones’ when it comes to one large room.

audiokid can you link the acoustic spray foam? I’ve never seen a that type of product before.

I’m still in the planning stage but I’m thinking the building will be 60 x 40 x 20 high. With 12’ or maybe 16’ walls . Or whatever the height is needed to get the right pitch.

20’ of the 60’ will be a mixing and or where dead tracking will be done.

Here is the foam I’m thinking.

You can spray this on peaked ceilings too. Which in my case, a barn style,

I may be clueless how it would work for insulation but I saw this done in the last log home I finished and it worked excellent.

They of course covered it all (between the ridge beams etc ) with drywall.
But I’m wondering if I could blast it up there, leave it open, maybe double the dept if needed. I guess I need to consult with the company that makes this stuff.

Hey Marco, yes indeed! I’m wanting a live room for acoustic guitars, grand piano, drums, percussion etc.

That video is completely inaccurate from an acoustic perspective. Thermally, blown in foam is an excellent insulation product. It’s nearly idiot proof (although I’m sure i could screw it up), and it gets into all the crevices and imperfections, forming a great air seal. I’ve not compared the costs to typical fluffy batt insulation so I can’t comment on cost vs performance.

From an acoustic perspective it’s worthless. The density / GFR (gas flow resistivity) https://www.google.com/search?q=gas flow resistivity&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1

Is what makes the semi pourus insulation’s commonly used in studios effective. Think of to like a sponge for sound. Too dense and it can’t absorb anything, too pourous and it can’t contain anything.

Any soundproofing you get is related to the air tightness of the blown in foam, since the foam has not got the mass to have any great effect on isolation. Typical fluffy bats offer about a 3db attenuation at a 1k center frequency. It’s job within a wall or ceiling cavity is to muffle resonance (like palm muting a string, or moon gels for drums). When used in bass trapping or broadband acoustic treatments, you select the density and cubic footage that is appropriate for the frequencies of issue.

I cannot wait to develop and release my series on acoustics. I plan to brutalize much of the crap that floats on YouTube. I am an avid fan of acoustics and physics, far from an expert, but I never search for acoustics related stuff on the tube unless it’s with actual designers and engineers like WSDG, ect ect.

If this stuff is useful and cost effective from a thermal and structural point of veiw, by all means employ it. it certainly is an excellent insulator. Is has no place however in the realm of acoustic treatments.

Good to know. Thank you for the info. I was thinking I could then add traps up there and all over where needed. Feel free to school me on this but I have always thought its good to deaden a ceiling so it has no audible height heard. So it sounds like it could be 40 ft high for that matter. But, this was when I was only thinking about using Bricasti's which I am still doing but that would of course be for the dead production stuff.

Again, just cluelessly wondering lol! With a dead ceiling, could I then strategically add reflective sheets or is this all ass backwards.

audiokid, post: 457676, member: 1 wrote: I was thinking I could then add traps up there and all over where needed. Feel free to school me on this but I have always thought its good to deaden a ceiling so it has no audible height heard. So it sounds like it could be 40 ft high for that matter.

Your dimensions are excellent, so the main thing your treating is decay time, as opposed to trapping modal buildups. Room modes don’t come into play very much in a room that large. You also can use the treatment to qualitatively effect the Sonics. Ie, hard plaster sound, softwood sound, rigid fiberglass sound, ect. You can manipulate the tone of the room to taste along with the acoustic response.

In small, low rooms, dead ceilings are almost a necessity. Once you get into ‘full size’ rooms, reflections become part of your arsenal, or at least can be if you choose. I believe the powestation is like roughly 35’ at its peak, but I don’t know that for sure.

Most of the rooms I’ve tracked in are either basements or 10 footers, as far as ceiling heights. Because of this I end up using chamber mic, and room mics, as opposed to high up mics. The nightclub I worked at had a pitched ceiling roughly 15’ in the center, and was roughly 60x90’ of floor area. The JBls were flying from the ceiling over the dance floor. If I had a choice I’d have installed absorbers over the dance floor area (stained concrete) to make the mid range smoother.

Drums however sounded quite good. The kick thru the PA did that ‘concert boom’ thing, and the snare carried out with a nice full and smooth decay.

audiokid, post: 457677, member: 1 wrote: Again, just cluelessly wondering lol! With a dead ceiling, could I then strategically add reflective sheets or is this all ass backwards.

Either way works. If you start live/bare then add absorbing materials you could potentially save vs doing an entire layer of absorbent, then adding additional material on top. This presumes the bare surface is visually appealing enough, and made of something reasonable like wood sheathing. A steel sheet metal roof would not be desireable acoustically or otherwise, and that’s a situation where it would make more sense to me to start dead then liven things up.

I find that even close mic’d cabs and drums seem to sound better in big rooms. Or maybe more effortless is the better way to describe it. Not that I don’t like a nice tight booth sound for some things. When the sound is allowed to blossom it can help tremendously imho.

One economically reasonable way to start dead would be if the ceiling bays that are going to be insulated anyway for thermal reasons. This gives you a dead ceiling by default, and you can just cover the insulation with fabric for the dead areas, and a (semi) reflective surface. In this case it’s not bass akwards, or financially inefficient. I picture this in a senerio where there is a flat roof, or even an A frame style ceiling.

kmetal, post: 457683, member: 37533 wrote: One economically reasonable way to start dead would be if the ceiling bays that are going to be insulated anyway for thermal reasons. This gives you a dead ceiling by default, and you can just cover the insulation with fabric for the dead areas, and a (semi) reflective surface. In this case it’s not bass akwards, or financially inefficient. I picture this in a senerio where there is a flat roof, or even an A frame style ceiling.

That’s sort of what I’m thinking.