Weasel9992

24/44.1...always. Frank

Mechanical Bride Recorded Sounds Frank

Mechanical Bride Recorded Sounds Frank

. That could work well if it's properly executed, but you have to be careful. If the plywood is too thick it'll be reflective just like another hard boundary layer, rock wool notwithstanding. Plywood will also resonate along a fairly narrow bandwidth based on density and thickness, so it'll act more like a tuned absorber than a broad band panel. An open-back trap design has proven to be more reliably and generally effective in lab testing, which is why we use it. Frank

Don't odd-shaped rooms generally reduce room modes? Hence why people build studios without parallel walls, etc. Well, yes, but there's a trade off in terms of loss of volume. In this case there are indeed fewer parallel surfaces, but the volume is so small that it creates other problems that are just as bad. Frank

What is the thinking behind putting the thickest traps on the back wall instead of in the corners? Thanks for your advice, by the way. There are different schools of thought on this, but mine is that the back wall will be the first hard boundary layer the low end energy will encounter. Yes, sub-100Hz frequencies are essentially omnidirectional, but they are still propagated *in* a particular direction based on the location of the transient emission source...the speakers. There are some speaker designs that go a different way (Martin Logan dipoles, for example), but point source speakers like yours will behave this way. I'd rather get the most absorption up on the back wall, which will be the source of some of the deepest valleys and highest peaks....the front wall will be the second boundary, so the 244's will attenuate the low end response further. Frank

I was going to put the Monsters in the front corners - you think the back wall is a better placement for them? As for the back corners - I could take advantage of the 1 foot clearance above the window frame and door frame and hang traps from the ceiling straddling the 3-way corners. What do you think of that approach, and would 244's or Monsters be better? I'd try the Monsters on the back wall first...244's on the front wall, in the front corners and at the wall/ceiling corners in the back. You can always switch the Monsters for the 244's in the front corner later on if you want to...they'll mount exactly the same way. I'd still do the wall/ceiling corners for a couple of reasons: first, doing the tri corners like that will take up A LOT of real estate, and second, I don't think it'd make a big enough difference over the regular wall/ceiling corner to make it worthwhile. Frank

The problem with the back of the room, as you can see in the pictures, is that in one corner I can't do a corner mount at all because of a door being in the way and in the other corner there is a window a few inches away from the corner so the corner mount would have to be asymmetrical (more along than back wide than side wall). Any tips on how I should treat these areas? Yeah, I see your problem. You can either do stands in those areas or go to the back up position, which is the trap the wall/ceiling corners in the back of the room, put the Monsters on the back wall (with a couple of inches of space behind them if you can), then do 244's in the front corners and on the front wall behind your monitors. 242's would go around the listening position, of course. Frank

I'm ready to make an investment into acoustic treatment for my home studio. My budget is about $1000. I record and mix in this room, but I don't think it's realistic to aim to improve the room for both purposes. So my goal is to make the room as good for mixing as possible by deadening it. I'll have to get my reverb/room ambience via effects. I don't record drums, just vocals and guitars (acoustic and amp'd), so I think this is ok. I attached pictures of my room below. They're composites which I just pasted together using MS Paint, so sorry for the crappy quality. The front/rear walls are about 13.5' long, and the side walls are about 12'. The ceiling is the standard 8' high. I have issues in both rear corners - one has a door which leaves no room for a corner mounted bass trap, and the other has a window which does leave a few inches but not enough to mount a corner trap symmetrically. I've been researching the different options for a while and I'm leaning towards GIK Acoustics. Ethan, if you read this, I like what I've read about your products but it's too expensive for me. I don't like Auralex at all - the look, the price, and the fact that you have to permanently glue it to the walls. I also looked into PrimAcoustic, but I like what I've read about GIK's products better. My plan is to get 2 Monster Bass Traps (2' x 4' x 6" thick) to mount in the 2 front corners about halfway up the wall. I'll also get 4 of the 244 Bass Traps (2' x 4' x 4" thick). 2 will go on the front wall, mounted vertically, roughly behind each speaker, and the other 2 will go on the rear wall more or less mirroring the placement on the front wall. And finally I'll get 3 of the 242 Acoustic Panels (2' x 4' x 2" thick). One will go on the right wall above the guitars, one will go on the left wall between the windows, and one will go on the ceiling above the seating position. How does this plan sound? I'm not sure what to do about the rear corners so any advice there would be appreciated. Any and all feedback is welcome. Acoustic treatment is a new field for me, so I want as much advice as possible before I commit. Thanks in advance, and sorry for the long-winded post. That sounds like a good plan. You *might* have to move the Monsters from the front to the back of the room...I'd try it both ways to see where you get the best gains. The rest of it sounds great. Let me know if you have any questions or need any more help with placement. Frank

he has a protools setup. that software is amazing. what do you mean by pumping? I mean that the whole mix "ducks" when the kick and the snare hit because the limiter is reacting to them. It has a "squashed" feel that lacks some finesse. That tends to be the case when you take a mix and ram it into a limiter for increased volume. Though there is some disagreement here, mastering is an art form...it's very difficult to get volume and maintain the sonic integrity of the mix. That said, heck...for $20 it's just fine. Frank

Sounds pretty good, but it's mastered too hot. It's pumping like crazy...it also has a fatiguing feel to it...kinda peaky. How did he master it, do you know? Frank

The pitch software is mainly something for budget studios or home recording where the singer may be one step up from a karaoke singer. Often the bands cant pay much and expect alot. Even then if the person is off alot it wont fix it. The only time I use it is when I know the singer sucks and wont be able to hit certain notes nomatter how many tracks they do. Thats usually the point where I cant hack hearing them sing anymore so I tweak it in instead. What I'd like to tell them is go take lessons and come back when you learn how to sing and ocassionally do if its got no chance. Are you really suggesting that most of the HUGE label albums aren't comp'd for timing and auto-tuned? I'm not saying that there aren't fantastic singers out there who don't *need* it, but they get it anyhow. Keith Urban, Gretchen Wilson, Amy Lee, Chris Tomlin...not to mention the teen stuff like Hannah Montana (ugh) and Averil Levigne...the list goes on and on, every vocal processed to meet consumer expecations. Frank

Tweaking something in is time consumimg, and in a pro situation relates directly to $. Tweaking a track in for minor problems isnt a big deal or cost. If the problem is worse, then getting a person to retrack a part may be a cheaper option. There'a a guy thinking like a studio owner. It's all about the benjamins, as they say. If the client is willing to pay $45 an hour for editing, then I'll grid-edit/auto tune with the best of 'em. No scruples about art or anything like that. If it's real, *real* bad then it might be cheaper for them to re-track, and I always give the client that option if it's cheaper. The bottom line is running this thing profitably, but ethically..being willing to give the client what he/she wants if possible, but always with their best interests in mind. Now, if it's your own project and you've got all the time in the world, I'm a big believer in getting the best performance, doing some mild editing, but not worrying about getting everything grid perfect. Then again, if you want it *perfect* and are willing to edit your own stuff to death, be my guest. I will tell you this: I guarantee that just about every big budget record that come out of Nashville, Hollywood or New York is grid edited to the 'nth degree and auto tuned like crazy. Don't feel like the the big boys dont' do it, because they most certainly do. Frank

You can use plant-hanging hooks in the ceiling...the heavy duty sort, not the little while pot-metal ones. Put four eye hooks in the back frame of the trap, string picture wire down the side and put it up on the hooks. This works perfectly with our panels, but they're only about 15lbs each (the 2" panels). You can use muslin, burlap or any other breathable fabric to cover the panels. There's Guilford of Maine too, but they're a more expensive option. Frank

I saw that yesterday on another forum I frequent. I'd love to see some test numbers on it...that'll be interesting. Frank