Bass Traps: DON’T use ALTERNATIVE (eco-friendly) INSULATION materials!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 фев 2024
- ►► Don't know which bass trap to get and where to put it? Get the FREE Complete Guide to Bass Traps → www.acousticsinsider.com/bass...
Learn how to build your own professional-looking broadband bass trap that works down to 40Hz and a diffusor front that keeps your high-end lively:
→ www.acousticsinsider.com/bbt
You might be surprised to hear that I don’t recommend using alternative or eco-friendly insulation materials in your DIY bass traps and absorbers.
Despite the fact that there are plenty of examples out there of non-mineral wool products that are great at absorbing sound!
And especially, if you’re health conscious, surely they’re the better choice?
Right?
Well, my recommendation on this matter has little to do with the better health aspect or the sound absorbing properties of individual hemp or sheep wool products.
Then why do I STILL think you should stick to stone wool or fiberglass when you’re building your acoustic panels?
In a nutshell it’s because of:
- Accessibility
- Reliability
- Price
So if you’re thinking about using recycled jeans in your next acoustic build out, please watch this week’s video first.
Related blog post on Acoustics Insider:
www.acousticsinsider.com/blog...
Acoustics Insider on Social Media:
/ acousticsinsider 
Развлечения
![mgk - I Think I’m OKAY (with YUNGBLUD) (Sad Version) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/7AC1uqQLIg4/mqdefault.jpg)
Thats a bit of a click bait to be honest…there are a few eco friendly materials and products out there that offer techical data and absorption vs frequency graphs and are readily available. The title is misleading to say the least
Who gives a shit. The guy’s an actual expert and has the most informative home studio treatment content online for free. He has a website where he pretty much goes over how to do everything for free. He offers a course if you want to be an expert or something but doesn’t even push it on you. And your whining about one thumbnail that could be interpreted in the wrong way?
Examples?
he addresses this in the video..
@@user-th6rh8zp3t the title literally reads dont use eco friendly materials.
I'd look at getting eco friendly materials - are there any that you particularly like?
Here in Europe at least, I don’t think anything can beat Geopannel (recycled cotton fibers). Acoustic specs are very similar to mineral wool, price is just a bit higher but it’s been a pleasure to treat my studio with it. Results are stunning. Easy to buy, cheap and safe.
Which Geopannel model did you use?
@@marioferre6253 geopyl 40mm wide stacked in 30-50 cm depth, depending on the zone
What did you use? Does it leak particles or fibers?
@@hjkhhjkh3635 It’s called Geopannel, I think it is sold in places like Leroy Merlin, Bricodepot and so. It’s 100% recycled cotton fabric, no particles at all, no smell, no skin irritation. 100% safe, and sound absorption are almost 100% the same as rockwool, being the price just a tad higher, but still very affordable.
In fact it is quite easy to get information on alternative materials. Echo Eliminator publishes their data for cotton based 1", 2", 3lb 6lb material. If you are building your own traps, you may want to really think about what material you feel comfortable working with. Cotton pleasant and easy to work with. Once it is wrapped and installed, I would believe that any of the popular materials are not a risk if they are not exposed to direct airflow.
How is 1 inch or 2 inch data applicable when we are talking about bass traps?
@@yellowledbutter Yes, looking at its specifications, it doesn't perform well at low frequencies as you'd expect with just 2 inches thick. It would be good if they did a test for 4 panels stuck together
Not to mention the fact that Stone Wool is actually manufactured as a sound absorber product as well, with the associated data set. Whether there is actually a difference between the insulating and the sound absorbing stone wool is debatable. I highly doubt there is actually any difference except the fact they tested it and published the appropriate data. Of course they charge more money for that so you can save money buying the insulation variety rather than the "sound absorbing" version. If anyone can point to any actual difference, I'd like to know.
The specs I’ve seen for recycled jeans show it working better than rock wool. It’s just more expensive and heavier.
Well, my recommendation (as an acoustics geek) is to simply buy some samples, and test them. It's what I've done. It really gives a good sense of f.e. where to use melamine foam vs "regular" foam (poly-XYZ types) and where rockwool is a better choice, and so on.
Being constrained to one material = is narrow-mindedness - and you lose out on the benefits that various materials are optimal for.
Melamine / basotect is f.e. not as good as regular foam for lower frequencies. But it can be dyed, painted on, easily cut in any shape you want, etc etc.
This whole mentality of "I only use PET for acoustics" and "I recommend only using mineral wool" and "I hate foam" belongs in kindergarten, and among hooligans, and religious fanatics ("my dad, team, God is better than your dad, team, God").
Can you explain your test methodology? I’m not aware of anyway of testing low frequency absorption accurately from a small sample
@@Tazmanian_Ninja im curious what sort of regular foam you are referring to when talking about lower frequencies? i was under the impression that melamine foam, though expensive, has a great gas flow resistivity for lower frequencies (assuming you use a lot of it). if there's a cheaper foam that's better for low frequencies specifically that would be great news.
@@Tazmanian_Ninjahow do you test? I'm also not familiar with such testing methodes
I came here to say this as well - UltraTouch tests very well for even sound absorption, and it's pretty damn cheap in the US, and available in most cities at Lowe's. The downside is that it's extremely floppy, so less convenient to work with. Also it's not fireproof unlike mineral wool, so there's the fire hazard aspect too. But it does work well
Hi, Thanks as always for your videos. Great channel :)
I have a noise coming into the house from a local industrial estate. It is bang on 90hz and is 24 hours a day. I'm trying to persuade them to either move the generator or do some absorbing around it, but until then I am suffering a bit. Would you say that a tuned absorber would magically remove the noise if I tuned it to 90hz? Like as a noise cancelling exercise? Or is that only going to absorb 90hz from the music I may wish to play through my speakers? Th incoming sound might be coming in airborne or through the ground, not sure which.
Be really interested in your thoughts on this. Thanks again :)
Thanks, very interesting! I used to find hemp-based, and wood-based absorption materials potentially useful as well (products like "Thermo Hanf", or "Steico Flex", to provide specific examples). But then I realised there is a major catch -- another, even more relevant aspect that you don't seem to consider at all, and that's *safety* -- when choosing a material, you may want to decide on how much additional fuel you want to put into your room to feed a potential fire. This is, of course, not a problem at all with mineral wool and some (!) synthetic materials (such as the Polyester-based "Isobond").
I'm aware that many people prefer not to think about fire safety at all. But things look different when your studio is part of your home which is also inhabited by, among others, your children and other people whom you're responsible for. Particularly when you look at the statistical data: in Germany alone, there are about 200.000 fires (of all sizes) in people's homes each year, effectively meaning that more than 1/3 of people in Germany experience a fire in their home at least once in their lifetime.
Hemp wool insulation can be fire resistant. I find that it is sometimes tricky to find stone wool not as dense so it would work better in thicker panel and not reflect bass instead. But I also saw some people propose sheep wool for bass traps - instant hellfire🔥
I don’t know about Isobond but the polyester fibre I have used in the past is euro class B fire rated
I have some leftovers from my thermal isolation with coton wool panels, pretty fortunate as this is an amazing material to handle without the need of masks and protection, and is quite effective to absorb mid and high frequencies. It's not so bad looking either. It's too dense for bass traps tho so I used rock wool for bass treatment as it has an AFR < 4 .
Thanks for all the insight and treatment options here.
My question is: Even though I have my room treated fairly well (measuring with Room EQ Wizard) I am wondering if a hardware EQ (like a 31band stereo) would help more like SoundiD/Sonarworks ?The idea being that since it’s between the interface and monitors you are less likely to accidentally leave the correction “on” when rendering out, and you never have to turn it on.
Do the cuts and shapes of acoustic foams actually make any difference at all? For eg: compared to a thick block of 2 inch acoustic foam , is a 2 inch pyramid foam better or worse?
Or is it a marketing strategy to make less amount of foam more appealing by saying : more cuts means more surface area means more absorption etc?
In your video at the HEDD studio, you tested desk reflections with basotect. What are your thoughts on basotect? It is designed specifically for absorption and although, not as efficient as rockwool, also not far behind either. Basotect is more expensive but has less handling risk and also does not require framing and upholstery like rockwool.
Ich frage mich was mit Steico Flex ist? Diese sind nicht wirklich teurer und zudem haben sie einen kpa kleiner als 5 im vergleich zu Rockwool mit kleiner als 6.
Würdest du das nicht zumindest als alternative betrachten? Zumindest eben für den Bau von tiefer wirkenden Absorbern?
Wood Fibers does work okay if space is an issue. 8cm SteicoFlex, thin frames, tight cloth to keep it in and just hang it off nails. Can’t really go much thicker though, it’s just too dense.
I think and data shows that SteicoFlex 036 is working very well at 160-180cm depth
You can is simulators for porous sound absorption on the web.
For wall absorbers denser materials like recycled cellulose have a higher flow resistance and absorb a little less highs and more lows.
For thick corner absorbers the flow resistance of glass fiber is best for bass absorption as sound waves can penetrate deep into it.
Let's also not forget diaphragms which are very effective and take less space.
The problem is not many factories have tested for gas flow resistivity, and besides, the results of calculations based on this are not exactly reliable
I've used Acoustisorb (Polyester Fibres) a product made in Australia. They used it extensivly in an IMAX in Sydney. Absolutly great.. I also built 2 studios using this product. Semi Rigid.
Is it like Panasorb with Basotect ?
Caruso ISOBOND is probably what I will use as it is not expensive and the specs seem great.
That seems like a reasonable one, do they have test data below 100 Hz? And for reasonable thicknesses?
Hello folks. I made a few for two audio stores. They love them tooken to the shows.
Using the pink I use chicken gage mash wire on the outside to hold the shape.
Rockwool can order with a round shape not flat sheets.
You can use a fine wrap then a coarse over. You know the air filter in your house it has a wax coating dip. It's thin this should stop any dust for getting out.
Ride Easy
In the last week or so I've finally dived down the acoustic rabbit hole. ! bought the behringer mic, downloaded REW and I have watched hours of Jesco's great videos as I came to realise everything about my music room was wrong
I'm not sure of this take though. I can understand why he can't recommend a particular product, because he doesn't feel he has the data to vouch for it, or doesn't want to talk about something 99% of views can't get.
But I don't understand the blanket advice not to use them. If I can access it and afford it, and there is data to back it up, I'd rather use something other than rock wool or fibreglass. If I'm going to spend hours in a room every day, I don't want a nagging doubt at the back of my mind that I'm breathing in the new asbestos. Which is what we're worried about. After all they were designed to be stuck behind dry wall.
I think this is very different to say, refusing a vaccine because of a 'nagging doubt'. The worst thing thing that could happen if you don't take a vaccine is that you die and infect others. In this case, what's the worst thing about using an eco-friendly product that works? It costs more? - I've spent so much money on gear I didn't need, I think I'd like to avoid buying that next guitar and spend it on eco-friendly absorbtion instead
Dead rats might be great sound absorbers too, and I'm sure there is very little chance of getting bubonic plague from them, but I wouldn't like to have them all over my wall and ceiling, even if they have a layer of fabric and plastic on them.
I think you should try sone of these products Jesco and test the results.
The problem with testing outside the lab is that the results are not particularly useful when treating spaces with different model frequencies
If people really care why not use the Knauff ecose versions that GIK uses where the binding agent is supposedly free of nasties ie. There may be trace amounts of formaldehyde residues in normal rockwool. Might cost more for all I know. But you have the option. Then theres also ROCKWOOL AFB evo. I went with GIK panels myself so maybe I fell victim to marketing :) But this is easy to google, from the official rockwool page: "Standard ROCKWOOL products do currently use a phenol formaldehyde binder during production. During manufacturing, the binder is cured at very high temperatures leaving only trace amounts in the product after it is produced."
I went with the Knauf Ecose as well and I do recommend it too. I could not stand the oil like odor (smells like bicycle chain to me) coming from panels that I originally built from standard however extreme high density rockwool. That’s when I discovered that the Knauf Ecose labeled products do not have any added formaldehyde and rebuilt all my panels with the Knauf Akustik Board. My only wish for it would be to be rock wool instead of glass wool, as rock wool (heavier) seemed to result a deeper low end than glass wool but I’m happy with it. I do have health concerns with the whole thing in general but since it does not have added formaldehyde and I have a Philips air purifier in the room that filters out particles of more than 3 nanometers (not just 3 microns like cheaper purifier products), I hope all will be fine 🤞🏻. I tried to wrap it all in plastic but even a thin sheet would reflect high frequencies in a comb filter / phaser like way. Perhaps adding the final layer of fabric would have absorbed that, which I haven’t tried. I now have two layers of fabric with batting and a perforated sheet of wood in between the layers to reflect some of the mids/highs that would be absorbed way too much by all the panels. Hope this helps someone!
This is also something I'm considering. The factsheets indicate comparable values to those of the rock wool sonobase. I'm glad to hear that some individuals have experimented with it and achieved positive outcomes. However, I also wish Jesco would consider testing at least one panel to thoroughly evaluate the advantages and disadvantages.
@@norbertm121 Could you point us to this Akustik Board.product online?
Caruso Iso Bond comes in comes in 3 variations of density and is a lot safer for the health
Are you referring to Defi Acoustic panels
how about caruso isobond
Basotect is working fine :)
@@LunaticDandy basotect is not very good at low frequencies
@@yellowledbutter By my experience they are ok starting at 120-150Hz to 8k (Higher up, we enter frequencies which are sometimes quite difficult to fix. We underestimate the work of high frequencies !).
Anything below 150hz requires techniques specific to each environment. We come out of the material itself in my opinion.
Fact is: mineral wool is bio-soluble. Cellulose fibres (although natural) and cotton fibres too, I THINK (not sure, OTOH) are NOT.
That said, mineral wool MAY have nasty chemicals ADDED.
But as he says in the video: there's probably not much to worry about, with stationary bass traps, etc.
most alternative eco products can be visually viewed buy eye to be very inconsistent in density imho
I just finished treating my studio with : Basotect®
I made some DIY pannels using this foam and others healty product. It work like a charm !
Note: This materials is used in airplanes, cars and so one...
health comes first, end of story
Mine are filled with goose down and duck down! 😁
@@chinmeysway They're some of those old school down pillows that are like bags of cement, and some of the down filled doonas/quilts all packed tight into 4" wooden frames covered in a few layers of the more modern padded bed covers or light quilts.
I was worried about the fibres from rock wool, which was the only insulation available locally, so I covered the entire frames in a few layers of quilted material thinking that the fibres would not make their way through several layers of padding, but in the end, I thought I'd just fill them with the down pillows and quilts as I never seemed to have the money for insulation batts. All of the materials came from the Dog Bedding bin at the local charity shop, and the wood was from old pallets, so apart from staples and screws, the 3' X 4' panels probably cost less than $5 aud each.
I haven't tested them apart from with my ears, but I can now mix at a very low volume and hear everything clearly, and there's no noticeable bass build up at a high volume, so I think they're doing their job. With the extra padded coverings they're nearly 6 inches thick, and I've left a 4" gap between the panels and the walls, which tests on RUclips channels like this show has the same effect as having thicker panels flush to the wall, up to the point where the gap is equal to the thickness of the panel. Above where I sit I have a padded single bed cover (like a fitted sheet) filled with just your average pillows and cushions because I didn't like the idea of a heavy panel suspended above my head. There's a few other thick cushions and pillows stapled to the ceiling at the back of the room where you might expect a build-up of certain frequencies, and a few other bits and pieces of 'treatment'.
I'm only recording vocals and perhaps some harmonica with mics, the guitar and bass are straight into the interface, so they're serving my needs, which is mostly just mixing. It's a bit of a hit and miss approach, but it's made a huge improvement, I can now mix so low that you can barely hear it from the doorway, and yet, still hear everything with a great deal of clarity. The room is not dead, but it's close to it, I'm hesitant to put anything more up.
I build my own basstraps with rockwool A-Batts with wood and fabric and after a year i had breathing problems. They worked well and the sound was awesome but I had to take them down do to health concerns. After I removed them my breathing became better.
I missed the good sound after six months so decided to redo them with thin film around the rockwool but the breathing problems occurred again.
Consider a good quality polyester fibre, perhaps just a thin layer as a facing for your existing traps
@@yellowledbutter I think I might be done with DYI traps for now. ´
Another thing with my DIY traps; they smelled like old attic.
You can't take away the effect of the traps, it's night and day. This is the best upgrade you can possibly do to your studio/hifi-room.
@@chinmeysway plastic wrap. I'm a not a smoker or have any other health issues.
I actually went to the trouble and redid the basstraps again (third time), adding more plastic wrap and vacuumed them on the inside and out, but the breathing issues came back.
I could send you some photos if you want to?
Also, I'm not challenging Jesco's expertise, this is simply my experience.
Ecose is an easy winner.
You have some german accent, are you from Germany? :)
You are misleading and unsettling inexperienced people here! Products like Steico Flex works like a charm, all data available, it´s inexpensive and available all over Europe. I built two studio with it and the measurements are on target.
Man you speak 10 minutes telling us nothing at all. Clickbait