About to do some modest room treatment. For a corner trap I am conaidering a trap of almost pyramid shape some 16in at the base and tapering to an almost point at about 4 ft up the corner. This is for aethetics rather than sq. Wonder if this will work or do I really need the traditional prism triangular shape. Any ideas please?
Corner base trap project
- Thread starter RobinKidderminster
- Start date
Where are you mounting the trap Rob? If it is a three sided pyramid that you are mounting in your rooms tri-corners (I.e. where two walls meet the ceiling or floor), then it sounds like a great idea!
In an ideal world a bass trap of 600mm x 600mm (triangle) all the way up the corners would have a more absorbing effect on the bass frequencies, but most of us have to balance WAF aesthetics with trying to maximise SQ - so on that basis, anything you put in will be better than having no treatments at all.
Are you making from mineral wool/insulation?
In an ideal world a bass trap of 600mm x 600mm (triangle) all the way up the corners would have a more absorbing effect on the bass frequencies, but most of us have to balance WAF aesthetics with trying to maximise SQ - so on that basis, anything you put in will be better than having no treatments at all.
Are you making from mineral wool/insulation?
Thanks Chewy. Yes I am looking at 4 bottom corners which should be fairly conxealed behind the speakers. I am going to use RS60 similar to rw3 with a frame if it needa support. I need ro see the material first. Spurd on now by your 'support' I have some to pick up tomorrow. I intend to cover them to blend in and will post my findings tho an evaluation in comapative terms is impossible. Cheers
I'd be very interested to hear how you get on Rob, it's good to see someone trying room treatments!
Post some pics if/when you are willing and able. If you are able to, it'd also be interesting to see some frequency response measures before and after, to see what effect the traps have had?
Post some pics if/when you are willing and able. If you are able to, it'd also be interesting to see some frequency response measures before and after, to see what effect the traps have had?
michael hoy
Well-known member
Thanks Michael for a useful ebay link. I will look at these to add to my corners. I am hopeful a little treatment will be useful tho as many of us mine is not a studio or home theatre but just a lounge. I guess some experimentation with tiles will be simple and cost effective. Cheers.
michael hoy
Well-known member
Thanks for that link too Michael. I'll be starting the project in the morning.
Cheers
PS I am sorry about my appauling spelling. I blame it on the tablet not the boogie
Cheers
PS I am sorry about my appauling spelling. I blame it on the tablet not the boogie
I would steer clear of the so called acoustic tiles to be honest Rob, at 20mm thick at their minimum point, they will do little to nothing for your in room acoustics. The thicker panels (3"+) in the link Michael gave, might be worth a look if you want to tackle your first order reflection points, or rear wall reflections - though I still think the rock wool gives much better broadband performance for the same thickness - i.e. you probably need to have a 3 or 4 inch foam panel to match the absorption of a 2" rock wool one.
Also be careful about acoustic panels you buy off eBay, that trader is recommended my Michael so they are probably fine, but many try and pass off simple packing foam, as acoustic panels.
On the fabrics, make sure it's acoustically transparent - not so important for the bass traps perhaps, but certainly for broadband absorption panels.
Also be careful about acoustic panels you buy off eBay, that trader is recommended my Michael so they are probably fine, but many try and pass off simple packing foam, as acoustic panels.
On the fabrics, make sure it's acoustically transparent - not so important for the bass traps perhaps, but certainly for broadband absorption panels.
michael hoy
Well-known member
Chewy said:
Hi Chewy,
The acoustic panel company was recommended to me, and their service is very good, although a little high on delivery cost sometimes.
The fabric company do have acoustically transparent material.
Mocked up the traps using a slightly different approach but when finished they should look a bit more other-half-friendly. With so much RS60 for less than £20 I will also make a 'temporary' rear baae trap. A 4" slab. I need to listen more and complete the project but first impressions seem ezcellent. Tighter, clearer, better soundstage. I will report later with pix but for now I am fairly sure of some significant improvement. My very precise, technically acurate scientific evaluation instrument is presently making dinner.
Corner traps don't have to be triangles they can indeed be square. The mprotance when treating bass in corners is the depth form thew front of the trap into the corner. You also don't need to use dense rockwool you can use the fluffy loft insulation style, the density itslef makes little difference its more of a case of getting mor ein the corners and the fluffy stuff is simply cheaper.
As for the the foma v rockwool, look up on the net results for tests on these and its clear to see.
Camira Cara is an excellent fabric btw, Lucia is very nice too but quite pricey
As for the the foma v rockwool, look up on the net results for tests on these and its clear to see.
Camira Cara is an excellent fabric btw, Lucia is very nice too but quite pricey
Thanks Sheggs. I guess my design brief was to make them as insignificant as possible hence the pyramid. Diffixult to ignore raised brows. Thanks for the info it may still effect the final design. Cheers
RobinKidderminster said:
If you don't get raised eyebrows, you haven't gone far enough!
@ Sheggs - that is a surprising comment, it was my understanding that the higher density rock wool was significantly more effective at lower frequencies (i.e. higher absorption coefficient at frequencies below 250Hz) that the lighter loft style installation?
You guys at GIK are the experts on this, so I'd welcome your clarification on this?
It depends on what type of trap you are building or using -
If you are using a panel straddling the corner then the higher density will be effective but with a corner trap style it is the distance from the front to the back corner which is important so filling the area is more important. We always suggest you make them big. Generally speaking tests have shown when dealing with corners that there is not a lot of difference in the results between the densities, the fluffier stuff is just cheaper
If you are using a panel straddling the corner then the higher density will be effective but with a corner trap style it is the distance from the front to the back corner which is important so filling the area is more important. We always suggest you make them big. Generally speaking tests have shown when dealing with corners that there is not a lot of difference in the results between the densities, the fluffier stuff is just cheaper
It depends on what type of trap you are building or using -
If you are using a panel straddling the corner then the higher density will be effective but with a corner trap style it is the distance from the front to the back corner which is important so filling the area is more important. We always suggest you make them big. Generally speaking tests have shown when dealing with corners that there is not a lot of difference in the results between the densities, the fluffier stuff is just cheaper
If you are using a panel straddling the corner then the higher density will be effective but with a corner trap style it is the distance from the front to the back corner which is important so filling the area is more important. We always suggest you make them big. Generally speaking tests have shown when dealing with corners that there is not a lot of difference in the results between the densities, the fluffier stuff is just cheaper
Thanks again sheggs. My original ideas are tricky to implement due to the nature of the RS60. Current thinking is a solid triangular prism with a front freestanding baffle to make it look ok. Already finding subjective comparisons difficult so I recon this project is going a bit longer term! On the wall behind the setee I am experimenting with a 4'' panel resting on the setee rather than a permanent fixture. This angles upwards which doesnt seem right but I will keep going.
Cheers
Cheers
I saw a desing very similar just recently.
A 4" inch thick panel straddled in the corner (you need to make sure that it is actually touching both sides of the wall) has been orven to be very effective at 60hz. The corner trap wil tackle even lower though. we recommend using a 4" inch panel for corners if not going for a superchunk. The RS60 will be ideal for this
A 4" inch thick panel straddled in the corner (you need to make sure that it is actually touching both sides of the wall) has been orven to be very effective at 60hz. The corner trap wil tackle even lower though. we recommend using a 4" inch panel for corners if not going for a superchunk. The RS60 will be ideal for this
O dear! Now I wonder if my solid triangles will be less effwctive than a panel maybe 4''. The triangle is less than ideal at 12x12x16'' and 20'' tall. I guess if I cut the back of the triangle then I get a panel. Mmmm.
Maybe I've been misunderstood here, a panel is not more effective just an alternative if you haven't the space / money they are cheaper and are quite effective I have also seen several designs recently that has a panel front and the triangle behind. What you are doing sounds great I would always recommend a superchunk style first
I would always recommend a superchunk style firstCowboys and Aliens just gave my system a thourough workout. Sounded brilliant. I'll post some pics when I get the cloth fronts fixed but I am really delighted so far with my days work ! Went for a corner trap and panel/baffle front (2" RS60) in the end and it is working out well.
Similar threads
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram