Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

Start your own studio thread here: Goals, plans, layouts, treatment, speakers, questions, queries, comments...
User avatar
ericwisgikl
Active Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun, 2020-May-31, 15:15
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina..

Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

#1

Postby ericwisgikl » Wed, 2020-Jun-10, 20:31

Hello everybody,

First of all, thanks Stuart for the forum! There's such high level of information and knowledgement here! It's very valuable.

My name is Eric, and I'm designing a recording and mixing studio for a friend of mine. It's located 500 kilometres away from where I live, so, by now, I'm working online.

The inner dimensions of the studio are:
- Control Room: 5.17 m. (L) x 4.24 m. (W) x 3.72 m. (H)
- Live Room: 7.07 m. (L) x 5.21 m. (W) x 3.72 m. (H)

The studio was original designed by another friend of us who has passed away last year, so I took the job from then. There's no many data from the original designer, but all the outer shell (made of bricks, 30 cm. thick), floor and ceilings are already done.

The tasks remaining are the inner shell (which is gonna be 3 layers of drywall, 12 mm. each, and an air gap of 12 cm.), put doors and windows in its place (over both shells), air conditioning system, electric installation, pipes between control and live room for audio wires, and, of course, acoustic treatment.

The floor is floated. Made of a big, thick 15 cm. concrete platform, over Mason's floating floor stuff. The inner walls will be over that floor, and attached to the outer shell by Mason's Wics, and the ceiling will be hanging from the outer ceiling by Mason's ceiling Hangers. All that calculated by Mason Engineers.

There aren't any buildings or constructions surrounding the studio, at least by one or two meters. It's located in a house's yard, in a quiet small town. The main noise issue is trucks traffic nearby. The bet is that the studio could be used at any hour of the day, without bothering any neighbors, and get rid of any noise from outside. Maybe the isolation is a little exaggerated for the real needs, but it's already contemplated, so I don't think it harms anything. Therefore, I think the MAM system, with insulation in it, may help with some low mid absorption.

The budget is sort of relaxed. The owner wants the best solutions available for best sound, for a non comercial, but personal studio.

I will start with the control room, and once it's done, we will go on with the live room.


By that time, there are some questions that I have, and hope you can help me with:

- The air conditioning systems are already bought. There are splits. One for control room and two for live room. Which is the right way to pass trough walls the pipes that connect inner and outer units, avoiding flanking points?

- Do the studio need ventilation system for air renewing? In case that needed, which is te best way of doing that without harming isolation? Considering that there's no HVAC central system.

- Again, which is the best way for passing audio cables between control and live room without harming isolation? The best advice I took for that was using multiple 2" pipes, against one bigger, and, that way, sound gets harder passing thru. But I'm afraid i'd be dificult deal with pipe's curves.

- The main layout I draw for monitors and listening position is with the monitors freestanding in the room, since there's little space for soffit mounting, but, due to the fact that the main door is in the spot where first reflections will hit, and it's a glassy reflective surface, I draw an alternative layout where I tilted the door by 20º, in order to redirect that first reflections to the back of the room, and that gives me more room to build soffits and mount monitors into there. What do you think about this alternative layout? Are there any consequences for modal prediction and behavior if tilting the inner wall where door is? Since, by now, it's a perfect rectangular room with a good modal ratio. Will be soffits enough big in that layout? I think the baffle's face will be a little small. Will the separation between monitors be a little big that way? Perhaps it's too much.

- Since the window between control and live room is located in our control room's front wall, right behind the monitors, are there any advantages tilting it up by 12º? (it's the maximum angle the wall's thick allows me).

- The previous designer promised to the costumer installing a big difusor on control room's rear wall. Since my research, I don't know if it's such a great idea, or even necessary. Perhaps a fully absorbent rear wall will be ok, and we don't mess up with certain scattering patterns, but I want to know what you think about.


That's all for now. I hope you can help me, and we can go on with the project soon. Now is in standby because COVID19 restrictions.

Thanks for your time, and sorry for my not great English. Any other sugqestions are welcome!

-Eric-
Attachments
Studio-Outside.png
Studio-Floor plan.png
Studio-Main lay out monitors.png
Studio-Alt lay out monitors.png



User avatar
Soundman2020
Site Admin
Posts: 889
Joined: Thu, 2019-Sep-19, 22:58
Location: Santiago, Chile
Contact:

Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

#2

Postby Soundman2020 » Thu, 2020-Jun-11, 01:56

First of all, thanks Stuart for the forum! There's such high level of information and knowledgement here! It's very valuable.
:thu: I try my best to put up as much information as I can here, on as many studio-related subjects as possible.... and I have a long list of articles I plan to keep on adding, whenever I have time.

I'm designing a recording and mixing studio for a friend of mine. It's located 500 kilometres away from where I live, so, by now, I'm working online.
That can work! In fact, that's the way I work with pretty much all my clients: It's not very often that I actually get to meet them face-to-face, or even to visit the studio. That's surprising to some people, thinking that an acoustic consultant must actually be there to "hear" the room, so he can "fix" it.... but really it isn't necessary. There are software tools, such as REW ( How to calibrate and use REW to test and tune your room acoustics ) that do a much better job than my ears ever could, of telling me about the acosutic response of the room, what it is doing, and how it sounds. There are tools like SketchUp that allow me t design things in 3D, and send it to the client so he can build it. And there are tools like Skype, and Zoom that allow me to "meet" with the client if necessary, to discuss specific issues. And of course, there's also a very valuable tool called "PayPal" that allows them to pay me! :) So yes, designing a studio by remote control, from hundreds or thousands of km away, is very possible. Studio 3 Productions was done like that, for example ( viewtopic.php?f=8&t=14 ).

The inner dimensions of the studio are:
- Control Room: 5.17 m. (L) x 4.24 m. (W) x 3.72 m. (H)
- Live Room: 7.07 m. (L) x 5.21 m. (W) x 3.72 m. (H)

Those are nice dimensions, in both cases, and particularly the ceiling height: Having a high ceiling is good for acoustics, in general. At 21m2 floor area the CR (Control Room) is larger than the recommended minimum size of 20m2, and the room volume of 81 m3 is excellent, so this can be a really nice room, with good design. The ratio is 1 : 1.14 : 1.39, which is Sepmeyer's ratio: Generally considered to be one of the best possible ratios.

The studio was original designed by another friend of us who has passed away last year,
So sorry to hear that! From the dimensions and layout, it seems he knew what he was doing.

There's no many data from the original designer,
That's a pity. It would be better if you could have understood his intentions. But the basic concept he left is good, and you should be able to fill it out well.

all the outer shell (made of bricks, 30 cm. thick), floor and ceilings are already done.
Maybe you can get your friend to take photos of all of that, the way it is right now, and post them here on the forum? It would be good to see exactly where you are in the construction.

The tasks remaining are the inner shell (which is gonna be 3 layers of drywall, 12 mm. each, and an air gap of 12 cm.),
Clearly, you are aiming for high isolation, with 3 layers of drywall. If you haven't already bought the materials, then I'd suggest replacing the first layer (that goes on the studs) with 16mm OSB. There are several reasons for doing that: OSB has much higher structural integrity and strength than drywall does, especially in sheer (forces acting along the plane of the wall). Secondly, it gives you a nailing surface around the entire room, so you can easily hang acoustic treatment, lights, and decorations wherever you need to put them, without needing to search for a stud. There are other less important reasons too, but those are the main ones. I do pretty much all of my studios like that these days.

The floor is floated. Made of a big, thick 15 cm. concrete platform, over Mason's floating floor stuff. The inner walls will be over that floor, and attached to the outer shell by Mason's Wics, and the ceiling will be hanging from the outer ceiling by Mason's ceiling Hangers. All that calculated by Mason Engineers.
Wow! I'm impressed! That's excellent, and done correctly. Clearly your friend who passed away was doing everything right with this place, building it as a world-class high-isolation studio. This is very good!

The main noise issue is trucks traffic nearby. The bet is that the studio could be used at any hour of the day, without bothering any neighbors, and get rid of any noise from outside.
Based on what you are saying, I'm pretty sure you can achieve those goals.

Maybe the isolation is a little exaggerated for the real needs, but it's already contemplated, so I don't think it harms anything.
It certainly won't do any harm. But since you have a floating floor, you do need to make sure that you keep the load on that floor within the limits set by the Mason Industries engineers. Do you have the documentation they sent? If not, contact them to get it. You need to know how much minimum load you need to add on that floor so that it floats properly, and also what the maximum load is that you can put on it, before the spring "bottom out". I wrote an article about floating floors a while back, that explains some of this. You might find it interesting: What is a floating floor? How to do it wrong, and how to do it right: You guys are doing it right, by the way! But it's important to understand the principles, so you can keep it right, and make sure it does float.

Therefore, I think the MAM system, with insulation in it, may help with some low mid absorption.
The MSM (or MAM) system is the key to getting good isolation. You already have part of that in place: a properly floated floor is, indeed, an MSM system. So your walls and ceiling need to be done the same, following the design principles that your friend originally created. Even if he didn't leave any notes, it is still possible to figure out what he had in mind for isolation, and to complete his original design concept. When you do it properly, you will have very good isolation, down to very low frequencies.

The budget is sort of relaxed. The owner wants the best solutions available for best sound, for a non comercial, but personal studio.
So far, the design is definitely suitable for a commercial studio! Personal home studios pretty much NEVER have properly floated floors, on sprung concrete slabs. That's actually very unusual, even for commercial studios. You should tell your friend that he has the basics for a really nice commercial studio, if he every decides to use it that way. It really can be a good commercial facility, which seems to be what the original designer had in mind.

I will start with the control room, and once it's done, we will go on with the live room.
:thu:

- The air conditioning systems are already bought. There are splits. One for control room and two for live room. Which is the right way to pass trough walls the pipes that connect inner and outer units, avoiding flanking points?
I wrote a post on Jennifer's thread a while back, and I mention how to do the pipes: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=8&p=92&#p92 That might help. The idea with the pipe bundle is that it should not go directly through the wall, crossing over the cavity, as that can create flanking paths and other issues, but rather it should be curved around gently as soon as it gets through the inner leaf, such that it runs parallel to the wall, then make a large "loop" of pipe bundle inside the wall (bend it around in a big circle, maybe a meter or so across), and finally curve it back again so it can go out through the outer-leaf. Also, keep those two penetration points as far apart as you can, at least a meter, so the the hole where the pipe bundle comes through the inner leaf does not line up with the hole where it goes through the outer leaf.

You will also need to caulk around the edges of those holes, using a high flexibility caulk, to make sure that the pipe bundle is decoupled from the wall, so that it cannot transmit vibrations into the wall. I wrote a bit about that on Starlight's thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=81&p=529&#p529 That's the type of caulk you need to use for this sealing.

- Do the studio need ventilation system for air renewing? In case that needed, which is te best way of doing that without harming isolation? Considering that there's no HVAC central system.
Yes!!!! Definitely!!!! Very important. Here's why: why your studio needs proper HVAC. That explains all of the concepts, and some of how to do it. For high isolation, you will need to do something like Tom did for his studio: Small studio with high isolation: how to build one. .

- Again, which is the best way for passing audio cables between control and live room without harming isolation? The best advice I took for that was using multiple 2" pipes, against one bigger, and, that way, sound gets harder passing thru. But I'm afraid i'd be dificult deal with pipe's curves.
There's some info on that in Tom's thread too, right before he poured his control room floor. There's also something on Scott's thread, about how to bend the pipes correctly: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=480&p=1169&#p1169

The idea is to make gentle curves, not tight bends. Wide radius. Then you use "fish tape" ("laucha" in Spanish) to actually pull the cables through the conduit, and often you need to use something called "wire pulling lubricant" to make it slide easily through the conduit.

But conduit is mainly for wires and cables that are not too thick. If you plan to run a thick multi-channel snake ("multipar") between rooms, then it might be better to do that without conduit.

- The main layout I draw for monitors and listening position is with the monitors freestanding in the room, since there's little space for soffit mounting,
I'm not so sure about that! I think you might have enough space there, for slim soffits... as long as your speakers are not too deep. What brand and model of speaker will you be using?
I draw an alternative layout where I tilted the door by 20º, in order to redirect that first reflections to the back of the room, and that gives me more room to build soffits and mount monitors into there. What do you think about this alternative layout?
It looks like that should work, yes. But I would mount the door so it swings the other way, opening towards the back of the room. The way you have it now, it will clash with the desk and console, and you won't be able to open it very wide. Flipping it to open the other way should fix that.
Are there any consequences for modal prediction and behavior if tilting the inner wall where door is? Since, by now, it's a perfect rectangular room with a good modal ratio. Will be soffits enough big in that layout? I think the baffle's face will be a little small. Will the separation between monitors be a little big that way? Perhaps it's too much.
The soffits will not change the basic modal response, since that is set by the walls of the room. However, they will have an effect on some of the modes, in the sense that the soffits are large, flat, rigid surfaces, so they tent to "break up" the mode a little, and "smear" it a little.... which is a good thing! They will mostly effect the lengthwise axial modal response (front-back direction), which is also good, but the front of the room is not as critical for that as the rear. That back wall at the other end of the room, should get a LOT of your attention! It will need extensive treatment: deep, thick, broad absorption, covering he entire rear wall, with major bass trapping. The combination of that rear wall treatment plus the soffits is the key to getting really good acoustic response ir rooms like yours.

- Since the window between control and live room is located in our control room's front wall, right behind the monitors, are there any advantages tilting it up by 12º? (it's the maximum angle the wall's thick allows me).
There's no acoustic advantage at all, and in fat it can reduce the isolation between the rooms (make it worse):
angled-glass-myth-doesnt-work--.jpg
Just keep the two panes parallel, and with plenty of porous absorption around the cavity perimeter.

OK, so there no acoustic benefit from angling the glass, but there might be a light glare benefit. If the glass would reflect light from your lighting system, or other bright light sources, then that might be a problem, as you would not be able so see clearly through the glass: there would be "ghostly" reflections of things in the room getting in your way. So you need to take care to prevent that from happening, by careful positioning of the lighting, and careful use of dark surfaces that could cause glare or reflections on the glass.

- The previous designer promised to the costumer installing a big difusor on control room's rear wall. Since my research, I don't know if it's such a great idea, or even necessary. Perhaps a fully absorbent rear wall will be ok, and we don't mess up with certain scattering patterns, but I want to know what you think about.
I would agree with the previous designer here! Your room seems to be big enough that you can do that... I think. In general, you want to have about 3m distance between the face of the diffuser and the mix position, to avoid the artifacts created by the diffuser, and your room is large enough for that. I would suggest using Tim Perry's style of "Leanfuser" for that. I have used diffusers based on his thesis in a few rooms, with good results. Here's one that is under construction right now by one of my clients:
STVNOUS--room-rear-sofa-riser-diffuer-complete-10.jpg
STVNOUS--Diffuser-DSC00237-2.JPG
STVNOUS--rear-diffuser-couch-riser-DSC00242.JPG


And some "before / after" acoustic test results for that same room:
STN--REW--FR--20-20k--With-[GREEN]-and-without-[BLUE]-leanfusers.png
STN--REW--IR--100ms--With-[GREEN]-and-without-[BLUE]-leanfusers.png
You can clearly see the nice effect it has on smoothing things out. The client was very impressed with the actual listening tests he did in there, right after installing the diffuser. That was several months ago, and things have advanced quite a bit since then: we are getting close to completing that room, and he has promised to do a thread on it, here on the forum, as soon as he can.

That room is a bit bigger than yours, but the concept is the same.

If you have only absorption on the rear wall, then you end up with a room that doesn't sound "natural": it sounds too dead. You need to have something back there to return a low level diffuse field to your ears. Tim's diffuser does that, in a fairly thin profile (that's why he calls it the "Leanfuser", and it is a fractal diffuser with several different levels, each for a specific frequency band, so it covers a very broad frequency range: far more than a typical Schroeder or Skyline diffuser can handle, and it does so smoothly.

That's all for now. I hope you can help me, and we can go on with the project soon. Now is in standby because COVID19 restrictions.
Yup. Same here. We are still on total lock-down in Santiago, for at least then next couple of weeks. But that's a good opportunity for you to carry on with the design of the studio! Doing a good design can take months, and that needs to be completely finished before you can start building again....

Thanks for your time, and sorry for my not great English. Any other sugqestions are welcome!
Your English is just fine! No problem at all.

I'm really looking forward to seeing how this design comes together, and how it gets built!


- Stuart -



User avatar
ericwisgikl
Active Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun, 2020-May-31, 15:15
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina..

Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

#3

Postby ericwisgikl » Thu, 2020-Jun-11, 18:23

Stuart, thank you very much for the feedback in such little time! Many doubts were cleared. I already had read some of the topics you linked above, but now I'm re-reading, knowing where to get focus in.

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post Maybe you can get your friend to take photos of all of that, the way it is right now, and post them here on the forum? It would be good to see exactly where you are in the construction.

I'll be posting soon some documentation about isolation devices from Mason, and pictures of the studio as it is now, since it could be interesting for some readers, and in order to show you all the process and progress.

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post I would mount the door so it swings the other way, opening towards the back of the room. The way you have it now, it will clash with the desk and console, and you won't be able to open it very wide. Flipping it to open the other way should fix that.

Yes, it's important to consider. I don't have measure the real desk yet. I'm using the dimensions from a similar one. But you're right. Maybe it will be better opening the door in the oposite way.

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post What brand and model of speaker will you be using?

By now they are Focal CMS 65. But the plan is going with a pair of Focal Twins and a Sub.

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post there no acoustic benefit from angling the glass, but there might be a light glare benefit.

My idea was tilting the other way: towards the ceiling. But as you say, maybe it's even worse idea. So we'll keep the window straight. But it takes me to the question: isn't it bad to have a hard surface behind the soffits and not continuing their baffle?

Some more questions:
- As I posted in the layout with soffits, the separation between monitors is 2.34 m. Do you think it's ok? Isn't it a little bit large?
- Which one is the better way of tilting the door's wall? I'll be attaching some options.
- Do I have to tilt the oposite drywall leaf on the other side of the room in order to keep symmetry? Or would it be enough copying the tilt with the soffit's leaf?

Thanks again! Greetings.

- Eric -
Attachments
Wall tilt - Just door.png
Wall tilt - Just door
Wall tilt from floor to ceiling.png
Wall tilt from floor to ceiling
Soffit L copying R side's shape.png
Soffit L copying R side's shape
Symmetric drywall and soffits.png
Symmetric drywall and soffits



User avatar
Soundman2020
Site Admin
Posts: 889
Joined: Thu, 2019-Sep-19, 22:58
Location: Santiago, Chile
Contact:

Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

#4

Postby Soundman2020 » Thu, 2020-Jun-11, 22:45

I'll be posting soon some documentation about isolation devices from Mason, and pictures of the studio as it is now, since it could be interesting for some readers, and in order to show you all the process and progress.
:thu: Great!

I don't have measure the real desk yet. I'm using the dimensions from a similar one.
The desk can have a large impact on the overall acoustics of the room. It is best to have a "low profile" desk that is positioned as far below the speaker-to-ear path as you can get it, with nothing protruding up much from the desk surface, to interfere with the direct path. If you need a lot of gear on the desk, then put it down low, under the surface. It should also be as "open" as possible, in the sense of not having large flat surfaces. And any angles on the desk should be calculated to send the reflections in directions that don't matter, or preferably ones that can help create a more diffuse field.

Here's one I designed a few years ago, and have modified several times for various clients: https://www.digistar.cl/StudioShowcase/ ... SK-CMP.mp4 Let me know by PM if you are interested in using that.

By now they are Focal CMS 65. But the plan is going with a pair of Focal Twins and a Sub.
Nice! For the sub, I'd suggest the Neumann KH805. Even better is a pair of KH805s, and if you really want to go very high end, then get four of them. If you have two or four, then I can help you set them up as a plane-wave bass array (also sometimes called a "double bass array"). That can produce excellent acoustic response in the room, because the purpose of the plane-wave array is to use the subs to cancel out some of the modal issues, and they can also be used to eliminate SIBR, floor bounce, and a couple of other things: Those are all tough issues to deal with using acoustic treatment alone: its a lot easier to do it with a combination of acoustic treatment, and a pair of subs (or four subs!), and the results are better. We are doing it that way in the room shown in my previous post, with the rear wall diffuser. There's a pair of KH805's in there, and well be doing the tuning process for that in a couple of weeks. In addition to the subs themselves, you also need a good cross-over that has very fine, accurate adjustment of timing, and can flip the phase of any speaker individually by itself. I like the Mackie SP260 for that, but there are others.

- As I posted in the layout with soffits, the separation between monitors is 2.34 m. Do you think it's ok? Isn't it a little bit large?
It's probably a bit wider than it should be, but I'm betting there is a way to narrow that down a bit, with careful soffit design. Playing with the angles, dimensions, and locations is part of the "art"here, to optimize them. One key aspect is to ensure that the acoustic axis of the each speaker points just past the tip of your ear, and the two axes meet at a point about 16" behind your head (give or take a few inches). That gives the best psycho-acoustic setup for your ears. Of course, checking that there are no reflections is also very important! I'm not sure if you've seen the tool I released for that: https://digistar.cl/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2 You can use it inside SketchUp, attached to the front face of the speaker at the location of the acoustic axis. It helps you to see where the reflections might be going, in both horizontal and vertical directions.

- Which one is the better way of tilting the door's wall? I'll be attaching some options.
I would go with the first one you show. It is usually much easier to build a simple rectangular room, then fit the soffits and all the treatment inside that. In your case, the door is a part of the soffit... sort of! I think that would be the simplest and best way.

- Do I have to tilt the oposite drywall leaf on the other side of the room in order to keep symmetry? Or would it be enough copying the tilt with the soffit's leaf?
There's no need to angle the actual room drywall there: leave that flat, on both sides, then build the soffit modules to be "mirror-images" of each other, and fit the door into the right one, while keeping the face of the left one as similar to the door as you. The only thing I would do different, is to use the area above the door for bass trapping: put a fabric panel up there at the same angle as the soffit so it looks good visually, but just fill behind it with low-density insulation.

- Stuart -



User avatar
ericwisgikl
Active Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun, 2020-May-31, 15:15
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina..

Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

#5

Postby ericwisgikl » Fri, 2020-Jun-12, 17:49

Thanks again Stuart for such quick answering!

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post I'll be posting soon some documentation about isolation devices from Mason, and pictures of the studio as it is now, since it could be interesting for some readers, and in order to show you all the process and progress.

Unfortunately I couldn't find many specifications from Mason Engineers, but a couple of drawings without many details. I'm attaching them anywhere. Maybe somebody gets something from them. I'm also attaching photos of the studio right now, in order for you to see what's all about!

ceiling hangers layout.pdf
ceiling hangers layout.pdf
(11.39 KiB) Downloaded 981 times
ceiling hangers layout.pdf
ceiling hangers layout.pdf
(11.39 KiB) Downloaded 981 times
ceiling hangers detail.pdf
ceiling hangers detail.pdf
(48.1 KiB) Downloaded 1025 times
ceiling hangers detail.pdf
ceiling hangers detail.pdf
(48.1 KiB) Downloaded 1025 times
walls wics detail.pdf
walls wics detail.pdf
(16.87 KiB) Downloaded 1178 times
walls wics detail.pdf
walls wics detail.pdf
(16.87 KiB) Downloaded 1178 times


Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post Here's one I designed a few years ago, and have modified several times for various clients: https://www.digistar.cl/StudioShowcase/ ... SK-CMP.mp4 Let me know by PM if you are interested in using that.

That desk looks great! I also like very much the ones designed by Thomas Jouanjean, which also have the gear at the lower sides. My friend has already one, similar to the Sterling Studio E, and will be using that for the studio if it doesn't mess all up, but then, if we notice some bad stuff coming from the desk, for sure will be thinking another option ;)

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post I'd suggest the Neumann KH805

Great! I saw another post of a studio you designed, and used that sub. What are its main features for you to choose it? We were thinking about the Focal Sub6, just because it's the same line than the monitors are, but maybe de Neumann is a good option too, and even better!

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post If you have two or four, then I can help you set them up as a plane-wave bass array (also sometimes called a "double bass array").

Well, first we want to focus into the construction and there are so many things to spend in, that it would be a little much for the current budget having to buy so many subs, but maybe then, when everything else is donde, it could be very interesting applying that system. I even didn't know it was used in that way!

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post It's probably a bit wider than it should be, but I'm betting there is a way to narrow that down a bit, with careful soffit design.

You're right! Today I've been doing some adjustments into the sketch and ended up getting 2.15 m. of separation (19 cm. less than before). Anyway, I'm a little concerned because now, speakers are near the 25% width, and as I know, it's not so good. Anywhere, I'll keep trying. I don't know how better could it be since window's width, but, as you said, playing with the angles, dimensions, and locations is part of the "art" :D

3.png
listening spot from top
1.png
listening spot from side
2.png
listening spot perspective


Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post The only thing I would do different, is to use the area above the door for bass trapping: put a fabric panel up there at the same angle as the soffit so it looks good visually, but just fill behind it with low-density insulation.

I also did that! Here are some new drawings. Later i'll be thinking everything else about treatment, such as cloud, side and rear walls, etc., but now, my priority is the front wall and soffit, in order to start building the inner layer.

Thanks for reading. Every advice is welcome!

Greetings!

-Eric-
Attachments
studio outside 1.jpeg
studio outside 1.jpeg
studio outside 2.jpeg
studio outside 2.jpeg
control room from live room window 1.jpeg
control room from live room window 1.jpeg
control room from live room window 2.jpeg
control room from live room window 2.jpeg
control room front wall 1.jpeg
control room front wall 1.jpeg
control room front wall 2.jpeg
control room front wall 2.jpeg
live room 1.jpeg
live room 1.jpeg
live room 2.jpeg
live room 2.jpeg
live room 3.jpeg
live room 3.jpeg
live room 4.jpeg
live room 4.jpeg
live room 5.jpeg
live room 5.jpeg



User avatar
Soundman2020
Site Admin
Posts: 889
Joined: Thu, 2019-Sep-19, 22:58
Location: Santiago, Chile
Contact:

Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

#6

Postby Soundman2020 » Thu, 2020-Jun-18, 16:30

Unfortunately I couldn't find many specifications from Mason Engineers, but a couple of drawings without many details. I'm attaching them anywhere.
Well, at least that's something!

I did notice on there that the inner-leaf walls extend up past the top of the inner-leaf ceiling, nearly up to the outer-leaf ceiling, with just a thin piece of fiberglass insulation separating them: I'm wondering why they did that, since there's a risk of flanking there, from careless installers... Is that a requirement from the Argentinian fire code or building code? Or was that something the previous designer did? Or something that Mason did? If possible, I would suggest leaving out that extra extension of the drywall, and stopping the inner-leaf walls just above where the inner-leaf ceiling will be.

Also, you will need to find out how much extra weight the suspended ceiling can handle: You will almost certainly need to hand one or more ceiling clouds from the ceiling, and they can be heavy, so you need to be sure that you won't overload the suspension system. It already has three layers of 12mm drywall on it, so there's a lot of mass there: adding the extra weight of the clouds might make the suspension units "bottom out", which would greatly reduce your isolation. I'd check to make sure how much margin you have there, for loading the ceiling.

if we notice some bad stuff coming from the desk, for sure will be thinking another option
:thu:

Great! I saw another post of a studio you designed, and used that sub. What are its main features for you to choose it?
Three things, really: 1) The published specifications are conservative: it actually performs BETTER than what they claim! They say it goes down to 19 Hz for +/- 2dB, but it's more like 16 Hz. They say it goes down to 18 Hz for +/-3 dB, but it's more like 14 Hz. So , unlike many speaker manufacturers, they are honest and overly careful with their specs: Nobody can accuse them of "hype"!. The second reason is smoothness: the response is less "bumpy" than some other subs I have seen. It's really hard to build a sub with flat response, but the KH805 is reasonably flat from around 18Hz to around 300 Hz, which is pretty incredible: that's four octaves! For a single driver. The third reason I like it is power balance. Not so much the overall power (it's only 200 W) but the evenness of how it delivers that power, at various settings, and the way it fills the room nicely. It produces a peak level of around 112 db, which is quite impressive for 200 Watts in a sub, and more than you need for the majority of rooms. With a pair of those, you could theoretically push close to 118 dB... which is overkill! It's not that you need a low of raw power and high SPL from sub, but rather simply that, because it has the ability to do that, it can deliver normal levels cleanly without any trouble.

I often compare this to cars: Maybe a typical small Fiat or Toyota speedometers says that it can do 150 kh/mhr... but the engine would be screaming to attain that, right at the limit, getting hot, and the car would be unstable, ... not happy. But a big BMW, Audi or Mercedes can handle 150 m/hr without any trouble, because it can hit 230 km/hr at the top end (and more). So at 150, it isn't even straining at all: just smooth, stable comfort and power. Then, if you need a sudden burst of speed in the big car, you can put your foot down and get it, with no problem. But put your foot down in the Fiat at 150 km/hr, and nothing happens: it can't give you what you want. So to with speakers: a big, powerful, stable, well designed speaker like the KH805 can hit 112 dB, and can go down to 15 Hz. You would never need that in a typical studio, but since those are the limits, it can happily handle more typical bass range in the 40-90 Hz range, and 60 to 90 dB range, and it does so without straining. A smaller speaker might also be able to put out 90 dB and get down to 30 Hz, but it is straining and struggling to do that, because it is at its limit: it cant give you any more. If there's a sudden extra-loud floor-tom hit that needs more power, it can't do that... but the KH805 can, because it isn't at the limit yet.

So those are the reasons why I like the KH805. Its good features are all about the sonic performance, and its ability to produce smooth, clean bass sounds under all typical circumstances, and beyond. On the down side: I don't like the rear panel control features so much: There somethings you would expect that such a speaker can do with settings on the rear panel, but it can't. Also, some of the control labels are a bit cryptic, and don0t do what you'd think they do when you first read them! That's not really a problem, since I do all of the controlling upstream, and just set the speaker full range. But of someone wanted to use it differently, those rear panel controls might be a hindrance. It's fine for what I want in a control room with sophisticated digital tuning upstream, but maybe not for someone in a small home theater without the other stuff I use. On the other hand, many studio subs are in the same boat here: lots of them don't have substantial control on the rear panel!

We were thinking about the Focal Sub6, just because it's the same line than the monitors are, but maybe de Neumann is a good option too, and even better!
With subs, there's no need to use the same brand and product line as the mains. With the mains, yes, for sure! Both of the L and R mains must be matched as closely as possible, and for a multi-channel system it's good to use the same product line for the C and surrounds as well, but the sub can be different. The exception might be in a multi-channel bass-managed system, where the sub is often the bass manager as well, but for most cases I still prefer to use a separate speaker processor or cross-over to do the tuning, and just use the speakers individually. I've had good success with the Mackie SP260 for that, for small systems: you can do 5.1 with that, or 2.2.. or even 2.4 if you really want some fancy plane wave bass array! I normally use it as 2.2, with 2 spare channels that you could use for something else: maybe headphones, or feeding a stereo pair in the LR, or whatever.

Well, first we want to focus into the construction and there are so many things to spend in, that it would be a little much for the current budget having to buy so many subs, but maybe then, when everything else is donde, it could be very interesting applying that system. I even didn't know it was used in that way!
It's one of those "secrets" that studio designers don't talk about much! :) But there is some info around. Even with one single sub, there's a whole procedure you can follow for finding the best location and tuning for the sub in the room, to fill in SBIR and maybe help with one modal issue as well. It takes a bit of time, and it is boring to do, but the results can be rather good. And you'll find that the typical "sub in the middle" setup is pretty much always WRONG! The sub should never be in the middle of the front wall, equidistant from the two mains. That's almost always a really bad setup. The sub goes off to the side a bit, nor centred...

You're right! Today I've been doing some adjustments into the sketch and ended up getting 2.15 m. of separation (19 cm. less than before). Anyway, I'm a little concerned because now, speakers are near the 25% width, and as I know, it's not so good.
Welll... "yes and no". Another "secret". Sometimes you can use the 25% location to your advantage. If there happens to be a modal issue at a suitable frequency, you might be able to create phase cancellation with the speakers at 25%. So you would not trigger that mode. But you do have to be careful. It can be done, though! :)

I also did that! Here are some new drawings. Later i'll be thinking everything else about treatment, such as cloud, side and rear walls, etc., but now, my priority is the front wall and soffit, in order to start building the inner layer.
That looks pretty good, but instead of a glass door, I would suggest using a solid wood door with a small glass panel in it, so you can treat some of that surface with absorption, if necessary.

The building looks great! That's going to be a really good studio.

- Stuart -



User avatar
ericwisgikl
Active Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun, 2020-May-31, 15:15
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina..

Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

#7

Postby ericwisgikl » Thu, 2020-Jun-18, 17:36

Stuart! As always, thank you very much!

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post I did notice on there that the inner-leaf walls extend up past the top of the inner-leaf ceiling, nearly up to the outer-leaf ceiling, with just a thin piece of fiberglass insulation separating them: I'm wondering why they did that, since there's a risk of flanking there, from careless installers... Is that a requirement from the Argentinian fire code or building code? Or was that something the previous designer did? Or something that Mason did? If possible, I would suggest leaving out that extra extension of the drywall, and stopping the inner-leaf walls just above where the inner-leaf ceiling will be.

I'm gonna find out if it's about a requirement from a building code or what. I'm sure it was something that Mason did. But I'm with you into the fact that it has to stop just above the inner-leaf ceiling.

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post Also, you will need to find out how much extra weight the suspended ceiling can handle: You will almost certainly need to hand one or more ceiling clouds from the ceiling, and they can be heavy, so you need to be sure that you won't overload the suspension system. It already has three layers of 12mm drywall on it, so there's a lot of mass there: adding the extra weight of the clouds might make the suspension units "bottom out", which would greatly reduce your isolation. I'd check to make sure how much margin you have there, for loading the ceiling.

Right. It's a big load already. I'll check that. I have to figure out how can I estimate the cloud weighting.

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post So those are the reasons why I like the KH805. Its good features are all about the sonic performance, and its ability to produce smooth, clean bass sounds under all typical circumstances, and beyond.

I appreciate that info! So much accurate than any other subjective opinion around the web. Thanks! :mrgreen:

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post It's one of those "secrets" that studio designers don't talk about much! But there is some info around.

Yes! Since then I've been reading some posts and it's very interesting. Some folks even say it works better in untreated rooms. I don't know if this is true, but in any case, here we are doing our best with treatment first. Then there is always time to test alternative methods. And they sure work great too!

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post Welll... "yes and no". Another "secret". Sometimes you can use the 25% location to your advantage.

Good to hear that! Anyway, I kept drawing lines and moving things here and there, and got even little more separation, by 10 cm., going with baffles over the window as long as I can, without blocking the view, just over the sides where the view was already tight by perspective. I don't know if it's clear enough.
Captura de Pantalla 2020-06-18 a la(s) 18.24.19.png
Captura de Pantalla 2020-06-18 a la(s) 18.23.29.png


Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post That looks pretty good, but instead of a glass door, I would suggest using a solid wood door with a small glass panel in it, so you can treat some of that surface with absorption, if necessary.

Unfortunately, the owner already bought doors and windows many time ago. In fact, I'm tilting the door in order to redirect reflections, but ideally it'd be a solid wood door with some absorption on it. I'd make the window less wider, in order to get less separation between monitors, but these things are already there, and we have to deal with them as they are.

There will be new tasks done soon. I'll be posting some pics.

Greetings!

- Eric -



User avatar
Soundman2020
Site Admin
Posts: 889
Joined: Thu, 2019-Sep-19, 22:58
Location: Santiago, Chile
Contact:

Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

#8

Postby Soundman2020 » Fri, 2020-Jun-19, 16:29

Right. It's a big load already. I'll check that. I have to figure out how can I estimate the cloud weighting.
I can probably help you with that. I have developed a "Dynamic Component" tool in SketchUp, that I use to help me when I'm designing clouds. It estimates the weight based on the size of the cloud and the materials, plus a few other parameters. (The tool actually does most of the design work for me, and even produces a dimensioned model in SketchUp!) I could simulate a cloud approximating what you will need, and let you know what it says.

Clouds are often much heavier than you originally expect, because the often need a "hard back" on them (thick, dense wood panel on top), and they often incorporate light panels, wood trim to make them look nice, etc.

Yes! Since then I've been reading some posts and it's very interesting. Some folks even say it works better in untreated rooms. I don't know if this is true,
Nope! Not true. Well, it's true in the sense that it can be very effective at reducing some modal issues even in untreated rooms, but it cannot make the room usable! There's far, far more to getting a room to the point where it us acoustically transparent, neutral and natural, then just fixing a couple of front-back axial modes! I only ever use this type of system after the room has already been treated acoustically as much as possible, and I just use it to help with the final remaining problems that have not been solved 100% by the treatment.

The reason they say it "works better in untreated rooms" is simply because that's where you'll notice a large difference when you turn it on: but that doesn't mean it "cured" the room and made it perfect! Far from it. A plane-wave bass array can ONLY deal with SOME issues, and they are all in the low end, below about 150 Hz. It is no us at all for mids and highs, for obvious reasons...

but in any case, here we are doing our best with treatment first.
:thu:

Good to hear that! Anyway, I kept drawing lines and moving things here and there, and got even little more separation, by 10 cm., going with baffles over the window as long as I can, without blocking the view, just over the sides where the view was already tight by perspective. I don't know if it's clear enough.
That looks a bit better! I think you are fine with your separation like that. I would suggest that you make the front inner corner of your soffits 90°, to simplify construction, speaker mounting, and internal treatment, even if you have to increase the spread a little to achieve that.

Also, don't forget that you can move your head side-to-side if necessary, to get a better view through the glass, if the edge of the soffit overlaps the visual field slightly. Not ideal, but still an option.

Unfortunately, the owner already bought doors and windows many time ago. In fact, I'm tilting the door in order to redirect reflections, but ideally it'd be a solid wood door with some absorption on it
Well, you could still put panels on those glass doors if necessary: it might not look fantastic, but it could be an option. For a control room, acoustic accuracy beats aesthetics! Don't get me wrong: it doesn't have to be ugly! Just not as clean as having a full glass door there.

- Stuart -



User avatar
ericwisgikl
Active Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun, 2020-May-31, 15:15
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina..

Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

#9

Postby ericwisgikl » Thu, 2020-Jun-25, 20:12

Thank you Stuart!

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post I can probably help you with that.

I'll appreciate that very much. The cloud I'm planning to do is about 3.2 m. length, by 3.3 m. width, with the "front" part angled back, and the "back" part, less angled, and almost against the ceiling. Here go some preliminar drawings.
Captura de Pantalla 2020-06-25 a la(s) 20.38.29.png

Captura de Pantalla 2020-06-25 a la(s) 20.31.19.png


Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post I would suggest that you make the front inner corner of your soffits 90°, to simplify construction, speaker mounting, and internal treatment, even if you have to increase the spread a little to achieve that.

Ok. Sure it'll be simpler. Do you mean these corners?
Captura de Pantalla 2020-06-25 a la(s) 20.27.57.png


Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post Well, you could still put panels on those glass doors if necessary: it might not look fantastic, but it could be an option.

Yes! If necessary, of course we will put panels on them. Our goal is good sounding.

By the way, I'm planning the other treatment for the room. On the side wall panels, I'll use 10 cm. thick 30 kg/m3 fiberglass. Then, if needed, I'll put some plastic on it, or not. We'll see.

On the rear wall I was thinking hangers could be a great option, beside the diffusor, which isn't designed yet. Rear wall treatment would be 40 cm. thick at midpoint, and thicker at corners.

I read somewhere here in the forum that rear wall treatment has to be 0.07 the lowest axial mode wavelength. In that case, being 5.17 m. my length, it is supposed to be 0.72 m. the minimum thick I should take. But does it applies to hole rear wall treatment or just corners? I have to get a well treated rear wall losing the less posible space. If the hole treatment has to be that thick, I'll be losing some room, but i'll be ok anyway.

Beside, there is some room I maybe could take from the air gap of the MSM isolation system, which is greater in the back wall only in order to go ahead with room ratio, but reading Stuart's post about ratios, I think it won't harm getting a little out of my "perfect" ratio and wining some room. The room will still be into good dimensions, wouldn't it? What do you think? Keep exact ratio? Get some extra room?
Captura de Pantalla 2020-06-25 a la(s) 20.28.31.png


Thank you very much for every suggestions!

- Eric -



User avatar
ericwisgikl
Active Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun, 2020-May-31, 15:15
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina..

Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

#10

Postby ericwisgikl » Thu, 2020-Jul-02, 17:40

Hello folks! Some new doubts beside the ones above:

I'm designing the rear wall treatment, which will have hangers, and looking for an alternative material for homasote, since it's not available in my country.

Stuart, since you also are in Latinoamérica, do you know any alternative? What do you think about this one? https://www.knauf.com.ar/producto/12-pl ... esign-fine
product_12_normal.jpg


I'm waiting an email I sent to the seller asking about the density of that product, in order to see if it is close to homasote density.

I'm also waiting to see if is it there a benefit with using the room available behind my inner rear wall and the outer shell, since now there is a very big gap, and I think it could be smaller, beyond the room ratio and mode distribution achieved in the design as it is now.



User avatar
Starlight
Full Member
Posts: 459
Joined: Wed, 2019-Sep-25, 12:52
Location: Slovakia, Europe
Contact:

Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

#11

Postby Starlight » Thu, 2020-Jul-02, 19:15

Eric, that picture is of what is called wood wool. It is a misture of wood and cement. It has a high air flow resistivity and works well at being an absorber for higher frequencies in places such as corridors, reception areas or dining halls. Knauf sells it under a few brand brand names including Heraklith, Celenit, Fibralith and, as you linked to, Heradesign. In my town it is used as absorption by gluing it to cement walls beside roads where the noise would be too much for nearby houses. I have seen it in one studio where it has been used as one part of a full-frequency acoustic treatment.

Hermasote is a brand name of what is known generically as cellulose based fibre wall board.



User avatar
ericwisgikl
Active Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun, 2020-May-31, 15:15
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina..

Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

#12

Postby ericwisgikl » Thu, 2020-Jul-02, 19:21

Thanks Starlight!

Yes, that is, exactly. I gave a thought it could replace homasote because of its density, but anyway I don't know it yet, since it isn't in the datasheet of this product. If not, I'm not sure what else can I use instead of homasote, or any other cellulose based fibre wall board, since mdf, ocb or plywood are way more dense. Anyway, my idea is use it with insulation in each side, and this material as nucleus of the hanger. Not as the only material.



User avatar
ericwisgikl
Active Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun, 2020-May-31, 15:15
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina..

Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

#13

Postby ericwisgikl » Tue, 2020-Jul-07, 15:57

UPDATE

Hi folks,

I've been thinking if the inner leaf at control room is really necessary in our case, or if it would be better to take advantage of the room it would take, and the money too. I'm just talking about the control room, where our goal is sound doesn't get off from the room, but we don't really care about sound getting in, in small amounts. For the live room, I'm sure we need the inner leaf, since cars noise could harm any recording.

I think we could get rid of it, since the outer shelf is 30 cm. thick brick wall, and the location is a really small and quiet town. Another reason is that almost every post I've been reading about isolation, is with other construction methods (wood studs, drywall, etc., but not concret and bricks, except Tom's one: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=32). What do yo think about?

In order to know, the studio owner ordered a SPL meter and when he gets it, he will be doing measurements and there we'll know how our isolation is right know. There will be double windows and doors anyway, even in the case we get rid of the inner leaf.

Meanwhile, does anybody know how isolated a thick brickwall is?

Best regards!

Eric



SoWhat
Full Member
Posts: 277
Joined: Tue, 2020-Jun-09, 12:13
Location: Philadelphia, USA...

Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

#14

Postby SoWhat » Wed, 2020-Jul-08, 11:47

Greetings Eric,

Rod's book has a section on masonry walls. Have a look there. He points out that outside the US, non-wood framing is common due to lower materials costs.

All the best,

Paul



User avatar
ericwisgikl
Active Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun, 2020-May-31, 15:15
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina..

Recording & Mixing Studio in Argentina

#15

Postby ericwisgikl » Wed, 2020-Jul-08, 12:15

Hi Paul,

Thank you! I'm looking there then. Rod's book is a must read, many times. Always finding new stuff there, and it's been a year since last reading, so It's a good chance to read it again.

Best regards!

Eric




  • Similar Topics
    Statistics
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests