R/E/P Community

R/E/P => Acoustics in Motion => Topic started by: Jared Scott on January 19, 2011, 02:24:29 am

Title: Auralex vs Primacoustics vs ???
Post by: Jared Scott on January 19, 2011, 02:24:29 am
I'm sure this topic was beaten to death over on the old forums.  I am a live sound guy so I spent my online lurking tome on the SR forums.  If my question would be better answered by a previous discussion, please just point me in the correct direction.

Working on building a relatively low budget studio with a few friends.  We already have our pre-amps, interfaces, mics, computer, software, etc picked out.  We're 95% settled on the space we plan on using.  It is commercial carpet flooring, cinder block walls, and drop tile ceiling.  Approximate dimensions of the main "live" room would be 16ft x 12ft.  We would be free to do more or less anything to this room we like.  I can get pics if necessary if that would be of help.

Assuming a budget of around $3500 for acoustic treatments, what would be the suggestion?  I like what Auralex has to offer a bit more, one of my partners is really big into the Primacoustic stuff.  What brand, and what line from either brand do you feel would work the best for a medium treatment (I'm not looking for a dead room, just general control of standing waves and resonances)
Title: Re: Auralex vs Primacoustics vs ???
Post by: Thomas@Northward on January 19, 2011, 05:28:31 am
With a budget in this area I would look at DIY for a part of it and save some budget, maybe 30% of it, to buy the more complicated things to build like diffusors. Basic broadband & bass traps aren't difficult at all to DIY and there is no reason why they would not perform just as good as the ready made ones. It's important to choose the right type of Rockwool / OC etc. for the purpose.

It' s mostly a question of how good a craftsman you are and if you have the time to do it. If you feel you don't then there are indeed a lot of options out there. On top of those you mention GIK Panels comes to mind.


Title: Re: Auralex vs Primacoustics vs ???
Post by: 0dbfs on January 19, 2011, 05:57:17 am
If you DIY your panels, I recommend using 703. It is slightly more rigid and requires less framing for support than RW3. A cool trick for sharp edges is to use drywall corner-bead (tin or plastic) and cut to fit with some tin-snips.

Cheers,
j
Title: Re: Auralex vs Primacoustics vs ???
Post by: boggy on January 19, 2011, 06:28:16 pm
Greetings everybody, congratulations for a new forum! :)

..........
Assuming a budget of around $3500 for acoustic treatments, what would be the suggestion?  I like what Auralex has to offer a bit more, one of my partners is really big into the Primacoustic stuff.  What brand, and what line from either brand do you feel would work the best for a medium treatment (I'm not looking for a dead room, just general control of standing waves and resonances)

From my experience you can get a better results if you do-it-yourself your acoustics treatment
with rockwoll, fabric, wood and some glue and screws, for $3500, than with any of Primacoustics
 or Auralex ready-to-install packages with same price (your labor not included, btw  :D)

but of course... someone's mileage may vary.  :)

Good luck!
Title: Re: Auralex vs Primacoustics vs ???
Post by: Technojay on February 03, 2011, 02:26:33 am
DIY acoustics works. Correct implementation of air gaps behind panels can give very satisfying results. I have cannibalized old mattresses and used the foam for bass traps with highly pleasing results.
Title: Re: Auralex vs Primacoustics vs ???
Post by: paul hanley on February 23, 2011, 10:51:29 pm
Hey Jared,

I've gone the OC703 and 705 route. Both 3" and 4", in many cases doubled or tripled the panels. For LF attenuation issues, I don't think you'll find anything that can annihilate your room modes, or even hills and valleys in response below 100Hz, at least effectively.

A heavy handed EQ is dangerous, so I always recommend against that, but proper use of your PEQ to get decent room response at your listening position should work.

Just get to know how your sound translates into a car stereo, a home stereo, a pair of ibuds, etc. That will be a better guide for what you should aim for in both EQ and absorption IMO. I've never though flat frequency response was delightful to listen to anyway...I still like a little BBC dip in everything given our sensitivity to that freq range.

Regards,
Paul
Title: Re: Auralex vs Primacoustics vs ???
Post by: franman on February 26, 2011, 01:28:44 am
I have to agree with the DIY recommendations.. Do  a little research and building Reflection control panels and broadband bass trapping is pretty straight ahead... go the Rockwood / Rigid Fiberglass route and get creative to make into a 'design'... Hit the corners and first reflection points for starters... then buy a few diffusors and/or tuned bass traps for any specific 'problem areas' that pop up in your evaluation..

Of course, you can always get a consultation from your local acoustic consultant and have he or she help you figure the best way to spend your budget. never hurts!!  8)

FM
Title: Re: Auralex vs Primacoustics vs ???
Post by: DanDan on June 01, 2011, 04:41:18 pm
I have frequently like the sonics of rooms with absorbent ceilings. Very clean, free of honks and such.
Check if the Drop Tiles are absorbent or reflective or something else? You may be able to buy sheets of 703 or 5 with white facing to replace sections or beef them up. I think RealTraps do them. If your tiles are already 'acoustic' you might consider adding a layer of light fluffy insulation over them, for increased LF absorption.
If the ceiling is absorbent there is no need for the carpet. If it is already there, sheets of plywood under drums, fiddles, etc. should bring those instruments to life.

DD