|
|
Post by jeromemason on Oct 5, 2014 23:00:57 GMT -6
I've got a small room I'm going to use as a vocal booth. I could just order a ton of 703 but it's only going to make it seem even smaller. I want to make the room seem much bigger than what it is, and I also want it to sound great with know reflections or even the slightest echo.
I'm thinking of lining the sheetrock from floor to ceiling with 1" 703 or if you know of something else that will absorb high mid-high frequencies that is easier to apply, that may come in a roll like the denim stuff, let me know. So, after I basically treat the room floor to ceiling with absorbing material I want to build floor to ceiling diffuser panels. So, basically the whole room is covered with 1" 703 and then is diffused to give it a larger room sound. I need to find plans on the vertical slat diffusers because the block type are just way to expensive and take way to long to build. So, anyone with ideas or suggestions please jump in here and let's have a discussion on how to best treat a vocal booth.
Thanks!
Jerome.
|
|
|
|
Post by RicFoxx on Oct 6, 2014 5:36:11 GMT -6
We would need to know how big it is, exact dimensions. I think I read in another thread that it was a closet… If this is the case your only solution would be to deaden the room as there would be no useful diffusion in a space that small.
In my experience recording vocals, I would rather record vocals in the same room (your mix room) with some gobos if noise wasn't an issue. Small rooms, even with 703/rockwool on the walls, will still have some issues.
The best rooms Ive ever recorded vocals in were rooms that were wide open.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 6, 2014 6:57:34 GMT -6
So I have a few thoughts, some academic, some based on experience.
1. I don't like vocal booths. You can't possibly make a room completely dead without significant absoprtion (think anechoic chambers..) so at least some of your vocal signal will be reflecting. What frequency range depends on what type of absorption technique you use, but you can expect some degree of comb filtering.
2. 1" of 703 won't get you much. You need 705 at the minimum if you are going directly against the drywall.
3. A better and cheaper choice would be going with rockwool (either soft mineral wool supported by something, or hard mineral wool panels) about 2" off the drywall. If you give it an airspace behind the mineral wool, it lowers the lower absorption frequency and makes it more efficient, without adding more rockwool.
4. Deaden your ceiling first, then your wall behind the mic and see what you get. Those are the two most critical points for sound absorption. The ceiling is because the floor and the ceiling are the largest parallel surfaces in the room. Most people treat the walls and forget about the ceiling because they don't think in 3 dimension. Deaden the wall behind the mic so that the first reflections are significantly cut to reduce the comb filtering.
5. Completely dead is better than early reflections. With completely dead rooms at least you can use synthetic reverb to make it sound "better". With a very small live room, everything will have that ZING-y fast slapback that you can't get rid of in the mix.
Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Oct 6, 2014 9:50:02 GMT -6
My 2 cents J,
dimensions of the room are very important to know, You can make most rooms usable, but you can't hide from the room all together, the ear is too sophisticated, your brain can tell what's going on without much thinking. Things to keep in mind are, room interaction is directly related to spl's, an acoustic guitar is much easier to track than a drum kit, being more to the middle of the room, and closer to the floor is better than middle between a low ceiling and floor(use a throw rug to soak a bit up if needed). Early reflections are mostly a good thing, i use them all the time, they can give position and depth to a source, it's about measure, close direct/first reflections are bad, basically 20ms is the muddle rule. What svart said about the gap behind a single layer of rigid insulation is true, that said, 2 gapless layers are better than 1 with an air gap, and 703 is a more effective broadband than 705, 705 is better for low bass when applied shallowly, but reflects more middle up frequencies... (if memory serves me correctly), i agree 100% on the ceiling being the most critical, i have also found to my ears, in a treated room, mineral wool sounds better than fiberglass. And gobos are your not so secret weapon in the acoustics battle.
dimensions need to be stated most importantly.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Oct 6, 2014 11:45:11 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 6, 2014 11:57:04 GMT -6
ok, so roughly 9.25'x4.75'x8'. I'd still do full dead ceiling, and full dead on the 4.75' walls, with possible re-positional panels along the long walls for more/less deadening. I'd also position the mic so that the back faces sorta into a corner, with an absorption panel at the reflection point (it's not the best solution, but it'll work in a pinch:  |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Oct 6, 2014 12:35:52 GMT -6
Those are pretty tough dimensions, just off the dreaded square.... I'll chime in a little later with what I think I would do, svarts reco of kill the ceiling is spot on IMO
|
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Oct 7, 2014 1:43:40 GMT -6
I went today and bought enough fiber board to cover the entire room, I guesss the best thing to do is just make it dead, as long as there is actual space that's fine with me, I just didn't want any reflections, I like for my vocalist to be away from the mic a bit, if there's any reflections I've had horrible results like that. I'd rather just make it dead and be able to mic a singer or player how I want. Good news is I got 4 5'x10" sheets for like $150, guy gave me a really good deal. It's the FRK but I'm going to rip the backing off.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 7, 2014 9:58:15 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Oct 7, 2014 11:14:53 GMT -6
Well its duct board, same as 703, but I've always called it fiber board or glass board. It's made by certaiteed and it's slightly just off the coefficients of 703, but that's below 125 and since I'm not building bass traps I don't care much about trapping any below 200. I would give you a link but I'm not sure what the model is, the guy at the store looked up the coefficients, the coefficients from 4000 to 450 were above 1.00, that's not too shabby, but it's only 1 1/2". |
|
|
|
Post by RicFoxx on Oct 7, 2014 16:48:39 GMT -6
I find the most troubling frequencies in a small room are 200-400Hz and hard to get rid of. Higher frequencies are easy to deal with.
|
|
