|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.167.202.186
As promised, here are my comments.DESCRIPTION: These are 11"x16"x2" cloth-covered panels designed to reduce the amount of bass "corner-loaded" into the listening room. They are meant to be placed in the top corners of the room, either two per corner or one per corner on the speaker and listener walls. Designed by Ultra Systems, they operate on a heretofore unexplored principle when it comes to acoustics -- the Venturi Effect (see Robo02's post below for details). The cost is $180 per pair. Here's a Cable Company website page with more info... http://www.fatwyre.com/tccfeaturedPanelsMoreInfo.html
THE ROOM: Speakers are set up on the long wall of a 30'x15' room with a 9' ceiling. However, half of the room functions as the living/listening room, and the other a sitting area. So, the speakers are about 9' apart, with one speaker about 3' from the side wall, and the other speaker about 12' from the same wall. Because of this split room arrangement, and the fact that the sitting area corners are so much farther from the speakers, I'm using two Cathedral panels in each corner of the listening area, and one panel in each corner of the sitting area.
SYSTEM: Audiomat Solfege Reference tube amp, Spendor SP1/2e speakers, REL Strata III subwoofer, Audiomat Maestro DAC, Vecteur L-4 CD transport, Acoustic Zen Satori Shotgun speaker wire, Acoustic Zen Silver Reference II IC, and Esprit Eterna digital IC. Clarity and punch increased by after-market power cords, AC filters, and absorptive feet as well.
COMMENTS: With these panels installed, the sound in the room changed dramatically. Here are some of the changes that both I and my wife noticed...
*Every instrument and voice was clearer.
*The bass was tighter and cleaner, and yet was not diminished in its essence, only in its excess.
*The lower frequency "mud" that I didn't know existed in the room suddenly vanished. While I don't have any gauges, it sounded (and felt) like the lower 1/4 or 1/3 of the audio spectrum cleaned up and came into focus all of a sudden. And when it did, everything else became clearer as well.
*Every instrument sounded more like itself. Brass was brassier, cymbals and high hats sounded more like themselves, stand up bass was gloriously full and true without being fuzzy or bloated ... the subtleties that distinguish different instruments were much more apparent. I heard undertones, overtones, and "around"tones I had never heard before.
*There was more space and air around the sonic images.
*I heard much more musical information, especially in the lower 1/3 of the spectrum ... but even in the mid and upper ranges. Instruments and musical lines that I had never heard before were suddenly revealed, as if the "bass smoke" had lifted.
*The soundstage was more defined, front to back and side to side.
*The low frequency vibrations that were very apparent previously were reduced significantly (the coffee table and floor didn't shake, rattle, and roll anymore)
*The sound was MUCH more balanced and true.CONCLUSION: While I haven't tried any other room treatments or bass-reducing devices before (so I can't compare), I can attest to a distinctly noticeable difference in the before and after while using these panels. There was clearly much less bass-loading (forgive my technical ignorance if my terminology is not correct), and the entire sound was more accurate and "there." I am a very satisfied customer and would recommend these unequivocably, especially since they come with an unconditional 30 day return policy.
Oh yeah, one other major benefit -- the WAF of these is extremely high; they are quite unobtrusive, even to my wife's eyes!
If anyone else tries these, I'd love to hear your impressions.
All my best,
Tom
PS: And no, I have no association with either the maker or the seller!
Here's the other post by Robo02 who works at UltraSystems:
Posted by Robo02 (D) on February 09, 2007 at 15:01:58
In Reply to: Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels...wots the deal? posted by Ethan Winer on February 5, 2007 at 14:55:06:
I work at Ultra Systems which distributes the Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels. My hope is to clarify some misconceptions I see in this thread.
1. These are not absorption panels. They contain nothing which absorbs. They work using a couple hundred year old concept in physics called the Venturi Effect, which in its simplest form describes how the restriction of flow results in both a greater speed of flow and a reduction of pressure on the "back end." This concept is used in devices such as carburators, and is also related to the concept of lift used in the design of airplane wings.2. This concept has not been applied to acoustics before, which is why to an old school absorption and diffusion acoustic designer like Ethan Winer it may seen strange that a small-sized panel applying this Venturi effect could do what only a giant absorbing/diffusing -type panel could do. But it's real science, and it really works.
3. It is also demonstable. The graphs referred to in the thread appear on our website here http://www.ultrasystem.com/usfeaturedPanelsTechInfo.html
and were produced independently by Rives Audio. While it is correct that the scale in the "after" waterfall plot has been reduced (to make it easier to read the data), in fact if anything this would serve to understate the impact of the Panels on the room response, not overstate it as suggested elsewhere in this thread.Hope this helps you make sense of this new approach to room acoustics.
Follow Ups:
- thanks! - mattcecil1@yahoo.com 10:00:01 02/16/07 (0)
In Reply to: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels: User Comments posted by tpcarter on February 15, 2007 at 23:05:43:
i've been waiting to hear about these. the Cable Co mentions Michael Green audio and i have a set of his Room Tunes Deluxe, which operate on a similar principle...controlling room pressure versus plain old absorption.these panels do look cool and much less objectionable than the kit i now have.
thanks for the good report. SOOOO cool to know folks are coming up with bass controlling tweaks that aren't refrigerator sized.
- Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels: User Comments - bartc 05:29:37 02/16/07 (29)
In Reply to: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels: User Comments posted by tpcarter on February 15, 2007 at 23:05:43:
Terrible website to read, at least on my screen! But product looks interesting.What does it appear they are made of? They say no foam nor fiberfill?
- Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels: User Comments - tpcarter 08:40:50 02/16/07 (28)
In Reply to: Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels: User Comments posted by bartc on February 16, 2007 at 05:29:37:
I'm not sure what's inside of the suckers. There's a speaker grill type cloth on the one side, and what seems like painted pegboard on the back. Unfortunately, I couldn't see inside when I tried to sneak a peek! My guess, since they're advertised as using the Venturi Effect, is that they have a series of baffles of some sort... but perhaps Robo02 could give more details?
- Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels: User Comments - Robo02 14:59:00 02/20/07 (5)
In Reply to: Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels: User Comments posted by tpcarter on February 16, 2007 at 08:40:50:
Yes, that other comment about there being no sound absorbing materials in the Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels, rather a series of peg board -like panels specifically oriented to make use of the Venturi effect, all of this covered with acoustically transparent fabric is correct. Simple materials, very old technology, newly applied to room acoustics.
- Can a room be over-dampened by them? - darkmoebius 15:33:48 02/21/07 (4)
In Reply to: Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels: User Comments posted by Robo02 on February 20, 2007 at 14:59:00:
The Positive Feedback article mentioned using 2 per corner while the diagrams show just one. Have you had a chance to try 3 per corner? (roof and side walls)Also, did you notice a need for further traditional acoustic treatments along with the Cathedral panels?
The PF review shows him using one of the smaller ASC tubes in the corner along with the Cathedral Panels. I'm assuming that was for midrange dampening. Am I correct in reading that the Cathedral's handle frequencies below 200Hz?
Very interesting product at a great price. So many questions to ask...
- Re: Can a room be over-dampened by them? - tpcarter 17:16:58 02/21/07 (3)
In Reply to: Can a room be over-dampened by them? posted by darkmoebius on February 21, 2007 at 15:33:48:
?: Have you had a chance to try 3 per corner? (roof and side walls).
!: No, I have not but what I did put up has resulted in awesome balance between low, hi, and mids.?: Also, did you notice a need for further traditional acoustic treatments along with the Cathedral panels?
!: Yes! Now that the sound is much cleaner, I can more readily identify what else I need to do. Basically, I need a little absorption directly behind me, plus modifying the parallel wall (also behind me). I actually found that a 4x6' folding silk screen works well when angled just slightly at each hinge. And... if it had greater WAF, I'd put a 4x4 absorption panel on the side wall at the first reflection point.?: The PF review shows him using one of the smaller ASC tubes in the corner along with the Cathedral Panels. I'm assuming that was for midrange dampening. Am I correct in reading that the Cathedral's handle frequencies below 200Hz?
!: Yes, that is my understanding as well.Very interesting product at a great price. So many questions to ask...
I agree! If you try it out, let me know what you think.
- If these work well at low freqs, it will make domestic life much easier... - darkmoebius 18:49:04 02/21/07 (2)
In Reply to: Re: Can a room be over-dampened by them? posted by tpcarter on February 21, 2007 at 17:16:58:
The primary reason I haven't gone for the large tube traps is that my girlfriend would blow a gasket. It's already bad enough with 5' horns and a pair of subwoofers sticking 5+ ft. out into the living room, can't imagine what those large traps would do.
I'm looking to tear out those windows on the left and build in a walled corner like the other side with a centered window on the rear wall. I can then use heavy curtains for the reflection point behind the speakers.
But, using the Cathedrals and the much thinner tube traps like in the PF review is definitely do-able. I also need some diffusers for the 1st reflection points.
I've got two fairly large suck-outs at 30-45Hz & 55-72Hz. This might be the result of bass overloads. I know I can walk around my room with an SPL meter and find "hotspots" that are If the Cathedrals could significantly drop that > 70Hz rise, things might fall into fairly nice balance.
The Cathedrals are perfect for this back wall which extends 5 feet out over my dining room. Guaranteed to have high pressure zones in the corners with those bare walls. The dog is strategically placed to absorb reflections from the floor.
- Re: If these work well at low freqs, it will make domestic life much easier... - Robo02 13:02:29 02/23/07 (0)
In Reply to: If these work well at low freqs, it will make domestic life much easier... posted by darkmoebius on February 21, 2007 at 18:49:04:
The Cathedral Panels will be easy to apply in your room and you will get good results.It is difficult (though not impossible) to mount the Panels to the ceiling; might be easier to mount additional panels near the floor (or just lay one on the floor near the corner, if you want to go for more than two in a corner, though two of these per corner is very powerful already.
With respect to the use of other acoustic treatment products, yes, you can definitely take it farther. Because the Cathedral Panels are not absorptive, they can be used with any other type of acoustic treatment product. I have had particularly good results with the Shakti Hallographs, one of the products that does not always play well with absorbing/diffusing products.
Since the Cathedral Panels are particulary effective on 20-200Hz, which is the most difficult area to deal with acoustically, and would traditionally require the biggest panels or rounds, other types of acoustic products, most of which don't do anything under 200-250Hz, become all the more effective.
Over at The Cable Company (affiliated with Ultra Systems) they have just begun a three part email piece on room acoustics. You can view the first installment at
http://www.fatwyre.com/email 1_31_07.html
and if you want to get emails of the next two parts you can send them an email or complete the guestbook on that website.
- Re: If these work well at low freqs, it will make domestic life much easier... - tpcarter 23:00:45 02/22/07 (0)
In Reply to: If these work well at low freqs, it will make domestic life much easier... posted by darkmoebius on February 21, 2007 at 18:49:04:
LOL about the dog!And by the way, two cats placed 2.5' away from each other, with twitching tails (from 0 to 79 degrees), will work just as well.
:-)
- I pinged them about the construction, etc...as I am curious about these as well... - AAG 08:02:07 02/17/07 (0)
In Reply to: Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels: User Comments posted by tpcarter on February 16, 2007 at 08:40:50:
and this is what they had to say...hope they don't mind me quoting...but they stated that they were going to add more info to the site...which would certainly be helpful as this product is such a departure from bass control via mass/absorbtion...and so raises more questions than it answers with what they currently have about the producst on their site...anyhoo:"Construction of the panels is fairly simple. The panels are made
of a series of panels sandwiched together in a frame. Each of these
panels has a series of holes in them of a variety of sizes. The
holes of these panels are offset from layer to layer and the final
covering is an acoustically transparent grillcloth. The spacing,
depth, and positioning of these holes is part of what comprises the
"Venturi Effect" design of these panels, allowing them to alleviate
room (acoustic) pressure."Hope that helps somewhat...and they don't mind the quote...
BTW - I also agree with the previous poster that the info is poorly scanned...and thus hard to read.
- PING Robo02... - Wellfed 22:49:40 02/16/07 (20)
In Reply to: Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels: User Comments posted by tpcarter on February 16, 2007 at 08:40:50:
I'd like to find out if the Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels would be effective mounted ONLY on the sidewalls up against the front wall. I have a cathedral ceiling, with sidewall ceiling heights of 9' on my right and 12' on my left.
- Re: PING Robo02... - Robo02 14:52:38 02/20/07 (19)
In Reply to: PING Robo02... posted by Wellfed on February 16, 2007 at 22:49:40:
The Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels are "activated" where pressure builds up in a room. Typically this would be in a three way corner: two walls and the ceiling or the floor. But in a room for instance with a peak roof this would be at this apex. The idea is that the large flat surfaces - walls, ceiling, floor - gather acoustic energy which pressurizes the points where they meet.
- Thanks for the response... - Wellfed 15:09:53 02/20/07 (18)
In Reply to: Re: PING Robo02... posted by Robo02 on February 20, 2007 at 14:52:38:
The only location on my upper front wall corners that appear to remotely meet your installation requirements is where my side walls intersect. I guess the ceiling itself would also allow for a snug fit to the corner. The front wall appears to be ruled out by the fact that they aren't square. Also note that the sidewall location in the "pinched" left corner would not allow for a fit within the 1/8" parameter Cathedral Sound specifies. My question now becomes, "Is any given plane as effective as the front wall location shown in your installation diagram?"
- Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels placement - Robo02 11:59:47 02/21/07 (17)
In Reply to: Thanks for the response... posted by Wellfed on February 20, 2007 at 15:09:53:
I am not 100% clear on your description of your room. If you want to send a photo or sketch you can attach to an email to ultra@ultrasystem.com or fax to 215-862-4871 and I will take a look.Two other things to note:
1. it is not all that important on which of the two walls at a corner you hang the panels (although the installation guide that comes with the Panels, or viewable online at
http://www.ultrasystem.com/usfeaturedPanelsTechInfo.html
shows the "best case" recommendations);2. you can also place the Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels near to the floor in a corner, on the wall, or even laying flat on the floor. The corner near the ceiling is functionally preferable because the energy flows are completely unimpeded by furnishings, etc, near the ceiling, and so typically greatest there, but the next best location is in the corner near the floor.
- Because my ceiling is higher on the left side of my listening room... - Wellfed 13:28:59 02/21/07 (16)
In Reply to: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels placement posted by Robo02 on February 21, 2007 at 11:59:47:
...I do not have a square corner to work with on both of my upper front wall corners. Both side wall and ceiling corners are square.Using the diagram above
AD represents the floor corner behind my speakers
AB represents the left corner behind my speakers
DC represents the right corner behind my speakers
BC represents the front wall/ceiling boundaryIf your device requires a square corner to be effective, this would not be possible if I were limited to the upper corners on the front wall plane. It's sounds though that any of the three surfaces of a square corner are suitable locations theoretically. My preference aesthetically would be to put a pair of white units on my ceiling in each corner. In theory, is this going to be as effective as putting 1 pair on the front wall upper corners as your instructions picture?
- Re: Because my ceiling is higher on the left side of my listening room... - Ethan Winer 11:52:49 02/22/07 (15)
In Reply to: Because my ceiling is higher on the left side of my listening room... posted by Wellfed on February 21, 2007 at 13:28:59:
> It's sounds though that any of the three surfaces of a square corner are suitable locations theoretically. <Just to clarify, all corners in a room are viable candidates for bass trapping. What matters most is total surface coverage, though the thickness of the panels determines how low in frequency the useful absorption extends to.
- Re: Because my ceiling is higher on the left side of my listening room... - tpcarter 23:04:27 02/22/07 (14)
In Reply to: Re: Because my ceiling is higher on the left side of my listening room... posted by Ethan Winer on February 22, 2007 at 11:52:49:
Ethan,I have your website "favorited" so am especially curious about your response: Would a pair of 11"x16"x2" panels of Owens Corning primo insulation work well as a bass trap if placed in the ceiling corners on adjacent walls?
I'd love it if you ordered some of these puppies and gave us your opinion.
- Re: Because my ceiling is higher on the left side of my listening room... - Robo02 14:20:23 02/23/07 (12)
In Reply to: Re: Because my ceiling is higher on the left side of my listening room... posted by tpcarter on February 22, 2007 at 23:04:27:
I would agree with Ethan that an 11"x 16"x 2" absorptive panel is too small to have any significant impact on your low frequency response, but the Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels, which are this size, will do the job.It is much easier to hang these on the walls than to mount them on the ceiling, and it doesn't matter that the corners are not square.
- Re: Because my ceiling is higher on the left side of my listening room... - Ethan Winer 10:54:28 02/24/07 (11)
In Reply to: Re: Because my ceiling is higher on the left side of my listening room... posted by Robo02 on February 23, 2007 at 14:20:23:
> the Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels, which are this size, will do the job. <Do you have any lab tests or other data or graphs showing that? As far as I know the number of Sabins of absorption possible is limited by the laws of physics.
:-> )
- Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panel Lab Tests - Robo02 14:35:25 02/26/07 (10)
In Reply to: Re: Because my ceiling is higher on the left side of my listening room... posted by Ethan Winer on February 24, 2007 at 10:54:28:
You had asked about lab tests for the Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels.Yes, there are before and after waterfall plots independently prepared by Rives Audio at their facility which appear on our website at:
http://www.ultrasystem.com/usfeaturedPanelsTechInfo.html
- Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panel Lab Tests - Ethan Winer 14:53:16 02/26/07 (9)
In Reply to: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panel Lab Tests posted by Robo02 on February 26, 2007 at 14:35:25:
Robo (what's your name?),I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be seeing there. I can't discern any difference between the Before and After graphs other than it looks like the volume control was turned down 6 dB. Everything else - the response shape, the ringing decay times, etc is exactly the same. Usually, even minimally effective acoustic treatment has at least some affect at the higher bass frequencies. But even at the 200 Hz right side edge the two peak shapes are identical.
What am I missing?
For reference, the graph pair below shows a typical domestic size room with and without bass traps.
--Ethan
- Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panel Lab Tests - Robo02 10:10:05 02/27/07 (3)
In Reply to: Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panel Lab Tests posted by Ethan Winer on February 26, 2007 at 14:53:16:
You seem confused by the scale of the change. It is much more pronounced than for instance in the waterfall plot that you posted using conventional bass traps. It is probably easiest to view the scope of the change in our plots in the decay axis, which for instance at 20-30Hz where the room was suffering the most from "overhang" is approximately halved!I have no problem with skeptics, but please don't cast aspersions on these results without any basis in fact for your comments. Once again this data was independently prepared by Richard Rives Bird at Rives Audio's own facility using one panel in each corner of a 10'x 20'x 10' room. The volume control was not "turned down" in the after results.
These results are consistent with my own experience of this product, and as you can see from other posts it is consistent with other user results.
Again, I have no problem with skeptics; I understand that from the perspective of room acoustic treatment products this is new technology. This is why these Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels come with a 30 day money back guarantee. FYI we are still waiting for the first return, except for someone who ordered black, then changed their minds preferring off-white.
- Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panel Lab Tests - Ethan Winer 12:28:02 02/27/07 (2)
In Reply to: Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panel Lab Tests posted by Robo02 on February 27, 2007 at 10:10:05:
Robo,Do you have a name there?
> You seem confused by the scale of the change. <
Not confused at all, I use ETF for a living. :-> )
Again, it is obvious from looking at the slope shapes that the ringing is identical. Were you present for this testing? Do you have the original ETF data files? If so, load them both up again, and adjust the vertical dB ranges so the highest peaks are the same for each graph, and the total span from top to bottom is the same too. In this case you can leave Before as it is, but change After to display 84 dB at the top and 54 dB at the bottom. Then post screen caps here so we can see what really happens in the After graph.
- Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panel Lab Tests - Robo02 11:12:56 03/02/07 (1)
In Reply to: Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panel Lab Tests posted by Ethan Winer on February 27, 2007 at 12:28:02:
I wasn't present at the lab test. I will ask the engineering folks at Nucore, Inc., the R&D company that developed the Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels, who was present, and will post more information as I get it. Because this was an independent test it may be that only Rives personnel were present, but I don't know either way.
- Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panel Lab Tests - Ethan Winer 14:57:04 03/02/07 (0)
In Reply to: Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panel Lab Tests posted by Robo02 on March 2, 2007 at 11:12:56:
> I wasn't present at the lab test. <Well, this isn't really a lab test. A lab test is done in an acoustics lab! And this was obviously done in a home or office room. But I know what you mean.
> I will ask the engineering folks at Nucore, Inc., the R&D company that developed the Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels, who was present, and will post more information as I get it. Because this was an independent test it may be that only Rives personnel were present, but I don't know either way. <
Thanks, please do post whatever you have. There's also a pending thread in the Rives section here at AA asking for the same information. Actually, even better, please ask the company reps to chime in there so we can get it from the horse's mouth, so to speak.
- "looks like the volume control was turned down 6 dB" - darkmoebius 23:26:19 02/26/07 (4)
In Reply to: Re: Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panel Lab Tests posted by Ethan Winer on February 26, 2007 at 14:53:16:
I think you meant "turned down 16dB"(instead of "6dB) and thanks for pointing that out, I didn't notice. But, damned if everything isn't exactly the same except that(just as you said).The only difference is the decay times from 20-56Hz. Is that simply an affect of lower volume?
Seems a little fishy without more explanation of extensive test information.
- Re: "looks like the volume control was turned down 6 dB" - Ethan Winer 10:56:17 02/28/07 (2)
In Reply to: "looks like the volume control was turned down 6 dB" posted by darkmoebius on February 26, 2007 at 23:26:19:
> Seems a little fishy without more explanation of extensive test information. <Even more fishy, today I find no mention of Rives on that data page. Am I hallucinating, or was there a section there just two days ago attributing this data to Rives?
- I've posted on the Rives forum for clarifiaction.... - darkmoebius 13:23:43 02/28/07 (0)
In Reply to: Re: "looks like the volume control was turned down 6 dB" posted by Ethan Winer on February 28, 2007 at 10:56:17:
Since I am seriously considering ordering 8 of these (~$700) if they are anywhere near as effective as the Waterfall plots imply, I figured it would be nice to get input from the actual testers as to the circumstances and results before spending a dime.
- Hmmm, I seem to remember that too... - Ted Smith 12:11:16 02/28/07 (0)
In Reply to: Re: "looks like the volume control was turned down 6 dB" posted by Ethan Winer on February 28, 2007 at 10:56:17:
HowdyPerhaps you are remembering the next to last paragraph in http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/tweaks/messages/141762.html
Or perhaps this snapshot at fatwyre is the old info you are referring to http://www.fatwyre.com/email%2010_18_06.html where they say "For before and after plots prepared by Rives Audio and placement diagrams click here for technical information." with a link to the page above.
-Ted
- Re: "looks like the volume control was turned down 6 dB" - Ethan Winer 12:19:25 02/27/07 (0)
In Reply to: "looks like the volume control was turned down 6 dB" posted by darkmoebius on February 26, 2007 at 23:26:19:
> I think you meant "turned down 16dB"(instead of "6dB) <No, I meant 6 dB, though it's difficult to read the legends. Each vertical division is 3 dB, and the After graph is exactly the same as the Before graph except everything was slid down two divisions.
> The only difference is the decay times from 20-56Hz. Is that simply an affect of lower volume? <
No, the decay times are the same at all frequencies. If you look at the slopes you'll see they're exactly the same shape. It's just that the ringing trails have been pushed off the bottom of the graph. If the After graph were changed to display to a lower dB level, you'd then be able to see that the decays are in fact identical.
- Re: Because my ceiling is higher on the left side of my listening room... - Ethan Winer 12:36:08 02/23/07 (0)
In Reply to: Re: Because my ceiling is higher on the left side of my listening room... posted by tpcarter on February 22, 2007 at 23:04:27:
Tom,> Would a pair of 11"x16"x2" panels of Owens Corning primo insulation work well as a bass trap if placed in the ceiling corners on adjacent walls? <
It depends on how you define "work well." IMO that's too small to be effective enough. I'm sure two small panels will help, and it'd have to be better than nothing. But for most domestic size rooms I recommend at least four 2 by 4 panels, and even 16 would not be too many. It's impossible to make any room perfectly flat at bass frequencies and with no modal ringing. So all you can do is add as many bass traps as possible, and accept the results.
You've seen my living room photos with 40 traps, yes? :-> )
> I'd love it if you ordered some of these puppies and gave us your opinion. <
Ordered what puppies?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
You can not post to an archived thread.