|
|
Post by gouge on Jul 9, 2014 18:30:25 GMT -6
Not in the freq a studio needs isolation with. It is thought that adding flexible layers between sheets actually reduces low freq attenuation.dampening is most effective at reducing impact noise which is why these mat products get used in floors.you issue could be impact related, flanking noise related or just the outcome of not enough mass. when I say attenuate I mean reduce or in other words, transmission loss the wall is capable of at particular frequencies.
I completely agree that damping absorbs energy and that it has an effect, so does isolation, mass and air, there are many methods that all effect different frequencies. in your specific case you have said you want to improve sub bass isolation from external noises and to me that requires more mass.
to really get a grip on using the membrane materials you'd need to test your new wall once membrane is applied and then after additional layers of board go up as I feel the additional layers of board will have a bigger effect but am keen to know none the less.
|
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Jul 9, 2014 18:35:56 GMT -6
thats what i was looking for, it is pretty impressive, but at $80-4 huge tubes of GG to cover 32 sq ft, there killing me! I want to bring specific attention of the GG test being gyprock based and not high density fire rated board. that is why I also linked the type x testes provided by Canadian testing as it levels the playing field when using high density board. |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Jul 9, 2014 19:09:39 GMT -6
thats what i was looking for, it is pretty impressive, but at $80-4 huge tubes of GG to cover 32 sq ft, there killing me! I want to bring specific attention of the GG test being gyprock based and not high density fire rated board. that is why I also linked the type x testes provided by Canadian testing as it levels the playing field when using high density board. oh... they used useless lightweight rock huh? No doubt, to do that testing that way is lame, and shows a disingenuous effort to fool the layman, everyone who's ever performed any sound proofing knows that lightweight rock is a non starting joke. Well thats another good reason not to trust them IMO, like i said before, if you have something that is thee shit, you're proud to post specs, detailed comparisons, and flood that info everywhere you can, i had to search my fingers off to find some decent info, and none more in depth than what you guys posted here. I just read through gouges link, it's more of a sales pitch than a data sheet(because there is no independent data sheet?), also, where's the comparisons to resilient RC8 channel? How is that not relevant? How does the same wall configuration without GG, weigh more than when GG's added? |
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Jul 10, 2014 0:35:56 GMT -6
GG test data is on their website. I notice they also have test data for their own resilient mount furring channels that use type x. that seems to be their best outcome achieved via testing.
|
|
|
|
Post by keymod on Aug 3, 2014 5:35:00 GMT -6
I thought there were two different types - TP4G and TP4. I am looking forward to hearing of your results. you could well be right? I will let you know how it does, and thanx for putting that idea in my head bromee, i'm sure it's gonna work, i'm just curious to what extent...stay tuned. Hey Tony, any news on this yet? I recently saw something called "PermaBase Cement Board", made by National Gypsum, being used in a non-audio residential application. It was actually a 5/8" x 4' x 8' sheets and I wondered how it would compare to drywall, perhaps being sandwiched with regular drywall, in an audio application. I went on National Gypsum's website but could find no STC information. However, they do have a section on their website with some videos, one of which has to do with drywall used for sound applications. Haven't had time to watch it yet, but it might be of interest to some people here. Their stated reason for the videos was for educational purposes for Architects. |
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Aug 3, 2014 6:25:54 GMT -6
If I'm reading the data right then it should outperform type x board if you used 1/2".
Problem is it doesn't say ft2 in the spec which could be a typo. It's all about density. The other question is voids. Lots of voids will only just reduce it's performance regardless of voids.
Does look good though .
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Aug 3, 2014 8:28:34 GMT -6
If I'm reading the data right then it should outperform type x board if you used 1/2". Problem is it doesn't say ft2 in the spec which could be a typo. It's all about density. The other question is voids. Lots of voids will only just reduce it's performance regardless of voids. Does look good though . Never use 1/2" for any reason in a studio, by itself 5/8"x is an 1/8" thicker, and more effective than 3 layers of 1/2". Also, voids don't damp, but they do de couple, I don't know how that applies to what u read though. keymod oddly enough, I'm doing that wall today, I'll let u know how it works out. |
|
|
|
Post by keymod on Aug 3, 2014 10:29:37 GMT -6
Take pictures
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Aug 3, 2014 12:40:28 GMT -6
taking lunch and taking pictures, i have to say as of now, the liberty is really easy to place, as you peel the backing, you can easily place it, i'm doing it by myself, if you use 2 people it would be much easier still. I recorded a bass drum pounding before, and i'll do an after. I've already pounded on the wall with my fist since installing just the butyl, and its damping the heck out of it. i think its gonna work very well? |
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Aug 3, 2014 15:38:39 GMT -6
I'm sorry tony but there is nothing in your post that is correct. We should try to keep these discussions based on fact if possible. If I'm reading the data right then it should outperform type x board if you used 1/2". Problem is it doesn't say ft2 in the spec which could be a typo. It's all about density. The other question is voids. Lots of voids will only just reduce it's performance regardless of voids. Does look good though . Never use 1/2" for any reason in a studio, by itself 5/8"x is an 1/8" thicker, and more effective than 3 layers of 1/2". Also, voids don't damp, but they do de couple, I don't know how that applies to what u read though. keymod oddly enough, I'm doing that wall today, I'll let u know how it works out. |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Aug 3, 2014 16:27:37 GMT -6
I'm sorry tony but there is nothing in your post that is correct. We should try to keep these discussions based on fact if possible. Never use 1/2" for any reason in a studio, by itself 5/8"x is an 1/8" thicker, and more effective than 3 layers of 1/2". Also, voids don't damp, but they do de couple, I don't know how that applies to what u read though. keymod oddly enough, I'm doing that wall today, I'll let u know how it works out. That "3" was a miss hit, i meant to type 2 sheets of 1/2"(even though three 1/2's aint much better than a single 5/8) 5/8" sheet rock is loaded with fiberglass and is about 4.5lbs per square ft, and is upward of 40% heavier than 1/2" rock at around 3.3 lbs per square ft. Anyone who knows anything about sound proofing knows mass and fiberglass are sound stoppers, so clearly the miniscule extra 1/8' more thickness of 5/8" renders the use of 1/2" a ridiculously flawed decision by almost any standard. Also, technically a void constitutes empty space, if there is no contact between 2 substrates, there can be no vibrational transmission, of course in the real world, you can get flanking migration through fasteners, and there are potentially dozens of other short circuiting factors..such as using poultry 1/2" drywall for instance 8) But instead of me speculating on what your refering to in your 2 previous ambiguous posts, why don't you enlighten me with your wisdom vs being a dismissive #$%. Also, if you want to suggest that a 25 years in career construction contractor doesn't know what he's talking about, you better more than bring it bro. |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Aug 3, 2014 16:39:10 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Aug 3, 2014 18:05:34 GMT -6
I'm sorry tony but there is nothing in your post that is correct. We should try to keep these discussions based on fact if possible. That "3" was a miss hit, i meant to type 2 sheets of 1/2"(even though three 1/2's aint much better than a single 5/8) 5/8" sheet rock is loaded with fiberglass and is about 4.5lbs per square ft, and is upward of 40% heavier than 1/2" rock at around 3.3 lbs per square ft. Anyone who knows anything about sound proofing knows mass and fiberglass are sound stoppers, so clearly the miniscule extra 1/8' more thickness of 5/8" renders the use of 1/2" a ridiculously flawed decision by almost any standard. Also, technically a void constitutes empty space, if there is no contact between 2 substrates, there can be no vibrational transmission, of course in the real world, you can get flanking migration through fasteners, and there are potentially dozens of other short circuiting factors..such as using poultry 1/2" drywall for instance 8) But instead of me speculating on what your refering to in your 2 previous ambiguous posts, why don't you enlighten me with your wisdom vs being a dismissive #$%. Also, if you want to suggest that a 25 years in career construction contractor doesn't know what he's talking about, you better more than bring it bro. 5/8" sheet rock is not loaded with fibreglass and is not 4.5 p/sf. nor is 1/2" sheetrock 3.3 p/sf, according to the sheetrock site 5/8" is 2.2p/sf.
5/8" is only better than 1/2" if it has more density. your comments that thickness x is better than thickness y makes no sense because you are not comparing density.
what type of effect a void has on isolation depends on how it is applied. go drill a "void" into a wall and see how your isolation strands up. or build your studio out of aerated concrete and see how it performs. put a void or "cavity" between 2 walls and se what the results are. so if a product has a lot of mass but with many "voids" it really won't perform that well overall under typical conditions.
I'm not being dismissive at all I just didn't want to go into a long winded response because it is argumentative.
I get you've been a contractor for 25 years and I am not being critical of your ability or workmanship. problem is your post is not based on any facts so I rebutted it.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Aug 3, 2014 19:14:21 GMT -6
That "3" was a miss hit, i meant to type 2 sheets of 1/2"(even though three 1/2's aint much better than a single 5/8) 5/8" sheet rock is loaded with fiberglass and is about 4.5lbs per square ft, and is upward of 40% heavier than 1/2" rock at around 3.3 lbs per square ft. Anyone who knows anything about sound proofing knows mass and fiberglass are sound stoppers, so clearly the miniscule extra 1/8' more thickness of 5/8" renders the use of 1/2" a ridiculously flawed decision by almost any standard. Also, technically a void constitutes empty space, if there is no contact between 2 substrates, there can be no vibrational transmission, of course in the real world, you can get flanking migration through fasteners, and there are potentially dozens of other short circuiting factors..such as using poultry 1/2" drywall for instance 8) But instead of me speculating on what your refering to in your 2 previous ambiguous posts, why don't you enlighten me with your wisdom vs being a dismissive #$%. Also, if you want to suggest that a 25 years in career construction contractor doesn't know what he's talking about, you better more than bring it bro. 5/8" sheet rock is not loaded with fibreglass and is not 4.5 p/sf. nor is 1/2" sheetrock 3.3 p/sf, according to the sheetrock site 5/8" is 2.2p/sf.
5/8" is only better than 1/2" if it has more density. your comments that thickness x is better than thickness y makes no sense because you are not comparing density.
what type of effect a void has on isolation depends on how it is applied. go drill a "void" into a wall and see how your isolation strands up. or build your studio out of aerated concrete and see how it performs. put a void or "cavity" between 2 walls and se what the results are. so if a product has a lot of mass but with many "voids" it really won't perform that well overall under typical conditions.
I'm not being dismissive at all I just didn't want to go into a long winded response because it is argumentative.
I get you've been a contractor for 25 years and I am not being critical of your ability or workmanship. problem is your post is not based on any facts so I rebutted it.
yes fire code x(is the only type 5/8 available here in Cali) 5/8" sheet rock is LOADED with glass fiber, find the ingredients of that rock and you will see, my guess is it slows down the burn process? The sheetrock brand site has NO info on that. All you have to do is break a piece of 5/8" off and look closely at it, you will see clear hair like fibers, then push it against your sweaty arm, it will make you itch like crazy, 1/2" does NOT do that, it shows no hair like fibers what so ever, and when you break it, it crumbles away in a total and obviously different manner. Plus 1/2" is NOT fire rated, and that isn't due to the lack of an 1/8". As far as void/decoupling is concerned, i think you being semantical with me, so i'm done with that. I'll will retract the weight thing though, my comment about weight was based on a number i've kept in my head as a contractor regarding transporting 5/8" sheetrock, it has a carry load of (delivered as 2 sheets taped together at 12' long, @ 96 sq ft total) 210lbs, that breaks down to 4.4 lbs if you consider 96 to be 48sq ft, which is what i did, and its wrong, i should have counted single 48sq ft sheets @105lbs. But the main point is still exactly correct, using 1/2" in place of 5/8" is not a good idea, it's not as effective. If you were to shave away an 1/8" off the 5/8" rock, it would still have more heft than 1/2 inch rock"...they are NOT the same formulation. |
|
|
|
Post by winetree on Aug 3, 2014 19:23:51 GMT -6
Tony, Is this the material you wound-up using and where did you get it?
GAF/Liberty Self-Adhered Base Sheet.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Aug 3, 2014 19:30:13 GMT -6
Tony, Is this the material you wound-up using and where did you get it? GAF/Liberty Self-Adhered Base Sheet. thats the stuff man, home depot i believe... yes home depot. |
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Aug 3, 2014 21:03:05 GMT -6
5/8" sheet rock is not loaded with fibreglass and is not 4.5 p/sf. nor is 1/2" sheetrock 3.3 p/sf, according to the sheetrock site 5/8" is 2.2p/sf.
5/8" is only better than 1/2" if it has more density. your comments that thickness x is better than thickness y makes no sense because you are not comparing density.
what type of effect a void has on isolation depends on how it is applied. go drill a "void" into a wall and see how your isolation strands up. or build your studio out of aerated concrete and see how it performs. put a void or "cavity" between 2 walls and se what the results are. so if a product has a lot of mass but with many "voids" it really won't perform that well overall under typical conditions.
I'm not being dismissive at all I just didn't want to go into a long winded response because it is argumentative.
I get you've been a contractor for 25 years and I am not being critical of your ability or workmanship. problem is your post is not based on any facts so I rebutted it.
yes fire code x(is the only type 5/8 available here in Cali) 5/8" sheet rock is LOADED with glass fiber, find the ingredients of that rock and you will see, my guess is it slows down the burn process? The sheetrock brand site has NO info on that. All you have to do is break a piece of 5/8" off and look closely at it, you will see clear hair like fibers, then push it against your sweaty arm, it will make you itch like crazy, 1/2" does NOT do that, it shows no hair like fibers what so ever, and when you break it, it crumbles away in a total and obviously different manner. Plus 1/2" is NOT fire rated, and that isn't due to the lack of an 1/8". As far as void/decoupling is concerned, i think you being semantical with me, so i'm done with that. I'll will retract the weight thing though, my comment about weight was based on a number i've kept in my head as a contractor regarding transporting 5/8" sheetrock, it has a carry load of (delivered as 2 sheets taped together at 12' long, @ 96 sq ft total) 210lbs, that breaks down to 4.4 lbs if you consider 96 to be 48sq ft, which is what i did, and its wrong, i should have counted single 48sq ft sheets @105lbs. But the main point is still exactly correct, using 1/2" in place of 5/8" is not a good idea, it's not as effective. If you were to shave away an 1/8" off the 5/8" rock, it would still have more heft than 1/2 inch rock"...they are NOT the same formulation. you're just throwing all products into the same basket because you're not fully across the materials and their uses.
if you go back to the original post i specifically compared the 1/2" baseboard that keymod mentioned and said it should outperform 1/2" gyprock just based on the data i found online. to be honest it should also outperform 5/8" type x and that is exactly the point. there is a clear and identifiable condition where 1/2" would be used over 5/8" and in that case would be more "effective". which is the point i keep making.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Aug 3, 2014 22:35:20 GMT -6
yes fire code x(is the only type 5/8 available here in Cali) 5/8" sheet rock is LOADED with glass fiber, find the ingredients of that rock and you will see, my guess is it slows down the burn process? The sheetrock brand site has NO info on that. All you have to do is break a piece of 5/8" off and look closely at it, you will see clear hair like fibers, then push it against your sweaty arm, it will make you itch like crazy, 1/2" does NOT do that, it shows no hair like fibers what so ever, and when you break it, it crumbles away in a total and obviously different manner. Plus 1/2" is NOT fire rated, and that isn't due to the lack of an 1/8". As far as void/decoupling is concerned, i think you being semantical with me, so i'm done with that. I'll will retract the weight thing though, my comment about weight was based on a number i've kept in my head as a contractor regarding transporting 5/8" sheetrock, it has a carry load of (delivered as 2 sheets taped together at 12' long, @ 96 sq ft total) 210lbs, that breaks down to 4.4 lbs if you consider 96 to be 48sq ft, which is what i did, and its wrong, i should have counted single 48sq ft sheets @105lbs. But the main point is still exactly correct, using 1/2" in place of 5/8" is not a good idea, it's not as effective. If you were to shave away an 1/8" off the 5/8" rock, it would still have more heft than 1/2 inch rock"...they are NOT the same formulation. you're just throwing all products into the same basket because you're not fully across the materials and their uses.
if you go back to the original post i specifically compared the 1/2" baseboard that keymod mentioned and said it should outperform 1/2" gyprock just based on the data i found online. to be honest it should also outperform 5/8" type x and that is exactly the point. there is a clear and identifiable condition where 1/2" would be used over 5/8" and in that case would be more "effective". which is the point i keep making.
Dude...frustrating, it's sheetrock, not rocket science for god sake, you keep telling me i don't know shit, but you haven't provided a shred to support what ever it is you're claiming?? Show me this "point" you keep talking about that i have not yet seen??, and some proof of this elusive "point" as well?? Then i'll shut up i swear lol, just one "clear and identifiable condition" where 1/2" out performs 5/8"x used in the same configuration?(and cutting off the test frequency graphs at 80-100hz is NOT acceptable, i want to see it all the way down) Type x is the heaviest rock that i'm aware of, so unless you have found nickel/lead fortified 1/2" sheetrock of extraordinary ma$$, it will lose, especially at 100hz and below where sound stop control is the hardest to deal with. This whole thing is going no where without you presenting some proof of this "point". If it's logical and believably legit, i will concede this "point", I would love to know if i'm missing something that's out there, though i'd still contest, configurations i've constructed dozens of times over the years are common knowledge, and proven over and over again by many to be greatly effective on thousands of studio builds. Btw, I'm not interested in reading that monstrosity Canadian report, it's a friggin novel. Just show me empirically proven, specifically pointed scientific data to reveal and support your "point" what ever that is? |
|
|
|
Post by winetree on Aug 3, 2014 23:08:12 GMT -6
If I'm reading this post right, someone suggested using 1/2" Durarock, not 1/2" drywall,
sandwiched between two layers of 5'8" drywall. I've been looking at Durarock at Home Depot
and wondering if this would be a good dense material to use in studio construction.
Any use or comments on Durarock?
|
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Aug 3, 2014 23:33:37 GMT -6
you're just throwing all products into the same basket because you're not fully across the materials and their uses.
if you go back to the original post i specifically compared the 1/2" baseboard that keymod mentioned and said it should outperform 1/2" gyprock just based on the data i found online. to be honest it should also outperform 5/8" type x and that is exactly the point. there is a clear and identifiable condition where 1/2" would be used over 5/8" and in that case would be more "effective". which is the point i keep making.
Dude...frustrating, it's sheetrock, not rocket science for god sake, you keep telling me i don't know shit, but you haven't provided a shred to support what ever it is you're claiming?? Show me this "point" you keep talking about that i have not yet seen??, and some proof of this elusive "point" as well?? Then i'll shut up i swear lol, just one "clear and identifiable condition" where 1/2" out performs 5/8"x used in the same configuration?(and cutting off the test frequency graphs at 80-100hz is NOT acceptable, i want to see it all the way down) Type x is the heaviest rock that i'm aware of, so unless you have found nickel/lead fortified 1/2" sheetrock of extraordinary ma$$, it will lose, especially at 100hz and below where sound stop control is the hardest to deal with. This whole thing is going no where without you presenting some proof of this "point". If it's logical and believably legit, i will concede this "point", I would love to know if i'm missing something that's out there, though i'd still contest, configurations i've constructed dozens of times over the years are common knowledge, and proven over and over again by many to be greatly effective on thousands of studio builds. Btw, I'm not interested in reading that monstrosity Canadian report, it's a friggin novel. Just show me empirically proven, specifically pointed scientific data to reveal and support your "point" what ever that is? why you couldn't look up the spec sheet is beyond me. so here you go. this product spec sheet suggests it's heavier.
www.nationalgypsum.com/resources/construction-guide/NGCPermaBase.pdf
|
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Aug 3, 2014 23:43:38 GMT -6
If I'm reading this post right, someone suggested using 1/2" Durarock, not 1/2" drywall, sandwiched between two layers of 5'8" drywall. I've been looking at Durarock at Home Depot and wondering if this would be a good dense material to use in studio construction. Any use or comments on Durarock? winetree it depends on mass. product names aside, we need mass. (yes I am leaving isolation out of this discussion)
generally speaking, there is no benefit I am aware of by sandwiching one type of board between other types of board. just buy the most dense best valued board you can find and use multiple layers. sometimes buying a less dense board and using more layers is cheaper than using more expensive higher density board.
in general doubling the amount of density increases the wall performance by 3-5db.
for a nicer finish add 1 layer of standard drywall to the facing layer so the joints look better and if you are really wanting a high grade finish then do a full skim coat.
|
|
|
|
Post by keymod on Aug 4, 2014 8:12:15 GMT -6
What about Homasote ( sp? )? I've read that using a first layer of this, attached to the studs/joists/etc, and then covering with drywall, will reduce vibrational transmission from the drywall surface into the studs.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Aug 4, 2014 8:37:50 GMT -6
What about Homasote ( sp? )? I've read that using a first layer of this, attached to the studs/joists/etc, and then covering with drywall, will reduce vibrational transmission from the drywall surface into the studs. Looks like that stuff is just a decoupling material. It doesn't dampen the sound per se, it keeps the vibrations from coupling into the framing to some degree. As gouge mentions, the only ways to stop sound are mass and distance. Mass works by impeding the ability of the soundwave's power to move it. Lower frequencies have higher powers and can move heavier objects, therefor, heavier walls are needed to resist the power of the lower frequency waveform. Decoupling materials just help keep that vibrational energy from transferring through vibrating anything that is connected to the wall (studs, other walls, etc). Greenglue is just another version of decoupling but is used between the sheets of material (drywall, rockboard, etc.) as resilient channels are used between the materials and the studs to allow some movement to bleed off energy. I think if I had to do it over, I'd try a layer of cement-fiberboard on my walls. That stuff is much more dense and heavier than drywall, although i think the stiffness of the boards might allow resonating without some kind of backing material and other layers of drywall on top of it. |
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Aug 4, 2014 8:38:50 GMT -6
I'm not familiar with the product but looking at the spec sheets it seems to be an insulation board. to hazard a guess, if you were to use it between the studs and the drywall you should get an improved outcome due to a deeper wall cavity and additional insulation.
if you were using a membrane as mentioned previously by others then that is the place to put them. between the stud and the drywall. there it will act as a limp membrane. it needs to be limp.
personally I think trying to reduce impact noise on a single leaf wall is a waste of money. other than a store room, a single leaf wall is not really the solution for a studio because of the shallow cavity depth and the lack of impact/vibration resistance. it doesn't really start to work for a studio until you are using twin leaf construction.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Aug 4, 2014 8:45:49 GMT -6
I'm not familiar with the product but looking at the spec sheets it seems to be an insulation board. to hazard a guess, if you were to use it between the studs and the drywall you should get an improved outcome due to a deeper wall cavity and additional insulation. if you were using a membrane as mentioned previously by others then that is the place to put them. between the stud and the drywall. there it will act as a limp membrane. it needs to be limp. personally I think trying to reduce impact noise on a single leaf wall is a waste of money. other than a store room, a single leaf wall is not really the solution for a studio because of the shallow cavity depth and the lack of impact/vibration resistance. it doesn't really start to work for a studio until you are using twin leaf construction. Agreed. I used two-leaf construction on my studio walls and the outcome was far better. During my build I built an interior facing wall first to judge the amount of sound leakage. I started with one drywall layer, then added fiberglass between the studs, then added a second layer of drywall, then finally (when I wasn't seeing the attenuation I needed) I added the outer wall with two layers of drywall with about 4" between wall studs (11" total cavity distance from drywall to drywall). It made a world of difference having that second leaf. Now, when measured at low B through a bass cabinet, inside I set it for an ear splitting 140dB, outside the room about 2 feet away I get around 70dB. Can't even hear it outside the building. |
|
