To clarify to the beginners, that's not showing percentage on the vertical axis, but rather a coefficient that shows effectiveness. The traps don't absorb 100% of frequencies in that range, they're just very effective. you really want to shoot for an absorption coefficient of greater than 0.5 to consider the effective in a given range. But this is a basics vid. Just wanted to bring to the forefront something that might cause some folks serious confusion later on. Great video!
percentage is no proper unit, but effectiveness is also not defined. what we should be talking about here is power density W/m3 over multiple frequency ranges.
Bass Trap as a term has so many issues! If we need a definition I would suggest at minimum it should have maximum abortion Q at or below 100hz. Physically if absorptive it should have volume akin to a closet or room cove as a minimum. If membrane or other it’s about how well it absorbs at and below 100hz! Ie the vast majority of panels are NOT bass traps!
Thank you so much for doing this! I found you through Mr Drako and just skimmed over your bass trap PDF guide. It's pure gold and suffices to say, I think you just saved me from spending a healthy amount of money on some useless grey wedges (if you know what I mean). On a larger note, I really appreciate your whole philosophy on this subject - taking into account the looks, budget expectations etc. Grade 'A' stuff!
Thanks for the talk and also the link to the calculator. If people want measured data, GIK Acoustics is the only firm I know that posts actual test results for most of their products. Since all 6" panels are likely to be similar, I check the GIK specs often when I'm thinking of adding treatment.
I'm in the process of treating my studio. Currently making 10 wide range porous absorber panels, but am interested in doing some measurements and maybe add some bass traps. Will look in to your guide, thanks!
Step 1: Win lottery. Step 2: Install as many RPG Modex plates that can be properly placed in your room. TRUE low bass absorption in only 4" of depth. Can be used in conjuction with velocity based absorption, doesn't have to be either/or. John Sayers style angled slat wall (helmholtz function), should be great for evenly controlling 150-500 Hz, without losing mids and highs in room. Along with breaking up standing waves between parallel walls.
I’m building a new studio space, and i hung velvet curtains in each corner, spanning a meter-3 feet across. But i did it to stop flutter echo, not necessarily bass nominees. It worked very well, in conjunction with ceiling clouds and wall panels. But, I’ve noticed I’ve actually ‘lost’ a little bit of bass response through my monitors- Adam audio t7’s- crazy… so, better for vocal tracking, a little harder to mix with. Hahaha
I would like to extend my sincere appreciation for the informative video you provided. It has been a valuable resource. However, I would like to express a concern regarding the pricing of the products featured in the video. It has come to my attention that the prices of these items have seen an increase since the video was originally uploaded.😫
This is in my living room. I have a coffee table that's 2 foot by 4 foot and about two feet off the ground. What if I filled the entire area underneath that with absorbing material? With that have any effect? I know it's reducing the surface area that is facing the Soundwave. The largest surface area would be under the table top. What if I only made it one foot thick and let the rest be air gap to the table top? Would that help or is this whole idea not right because it needs to face the wave head-on with the largest side?
WOW, so helpful! Thank you for clarifying this especially confusing situation for those of us who are musicians without an advanced audio/acoustical engineering background. You just saved me a load of money, time, extra headaches and degradation of the aesthetic of my living room/recording studio! Perusing the bass trap guide now for the most appropriate solution to attenuate cello/bass buildup. :)
Nice with a calculator for the panels. But you showed us also the circular tube traps that is put into a corner. Is there any calculator on how far from the corner walls the tube trap is placed?? (It would be nice to see what happens at 0 cm and 34 cm from the walls with that type of treatment on a diagram 😉 ) Yeh I know I could bring out and set up my equipment with REW to find out but a mathematical model of how it reacts with different distances is good to speed up the understanding.. Thanks for the video!
Tack för ditt svar. Jag har ju liksom gått genom delen att leta upp bästa "möbleringen" av rummet. Kvar var basen som inte låter helt OK. Jag tror att problemfrekvenserna ligger på typ 50 Hz, 125 Hz samt någonstans ännu lägre. Inväntar en XTZ room analyzer så jag får se vad reslutatet blr av det (och om jag förstår att tolka det;)).
Almost as efficient... it also has to do with the quarter wavelength of frequencies. When sound waves 'enter' the porous absorber they encounter friction and energy is transfered into heat. After passing the absorber it bounces of the wall back into the absorber again. The thickness of the absorber and the distance from the wall determine for which (quarter wavelength) frequencies it's most efficient. The bigger the airgap, the longer the quarter wavelength, hence the lower the frequency is affected. To a point. That's why he shortly mentions that if the absorber is too thin compared to the airgap you get some losses in the lower mid frequencies. Hope this makes sense to you.
If I am building a superchunk “bass trap” what density of rock wool would u recommend? Some say lighter is better than heavier. I intend to build a 30x30x40 cm ones.
This is not a bass trap but for yes lighter Flow resistivity is better for bass. 4000 Pa.s is good, I don’t know if you have ISOVER in your country, that come in 45 milimiter panel and it is a 4000Pa.s
Fascinating insights. Thank you 🙏. Would the same concept of having a gap behind the porous material apply to absorbing the back-wave of a woofer in a large box speaker?
One of the Best Ideas of SoundProofing is "SoundProof Curtains" it actually Block outside Noise coming from Windows. Check Here: livesoundproof.com/best-soundproof-curtains/
Question, i have a big big couch with leather/microfiber combo. And a proper filling. Would this count as a basstrap of sorts? It's my living room so prefer to use normal items for acoustics. Like a heavy cotton wall carpet behind me (kills slap echo). No need to be absolutely perfect. But sorta 'secret' camouflaged acoustics sound fun. Any other suggestions?
Not really, do some measurement and look at your RT60, standard for mastering is 30-40ms on ALL frequency. You will never see that in your room without specific bass trap like Helmhotz resonator/slat bass trap/perfored bass trap…. :)
Staffan Olofsson för 11 timmar sedan How shall I interpret this? I have problems with some peaks in the bass and to me it looks like if I put in broadband absorbers it will absorb more in the frequencies that I don't have problems with. Which should give more/other problems. Please someone enlighten me. Sorry I happened to post this comment in response to David Dunne. I can add that I had a relatively good sound except for the bass. So I wanted to try to fix this and was persuaded that I should buy a bass trap, of a certain brand, 15 cm thick and in two pieces, 60 cm x 100 cm, which are supposed to be placed on top of each other in a corner. The only thing that happened was that voices (and everything else in the same range) got thin. I was told to try change the positions of the listening place and the speakers. It only got worse. I understand that I can feel that the voices becomes thinner if the lower bass has become suppressed, but the lower bass was not suppressed.
Staffan, since no one has responded and you have a legit issue- I'll take a crack at it. It's true- porous absorbers absorb ALL frequencies. It's a point that often gets overlooked. For porous style absorbers to reach the bass frequencies they have to be VERY thick. Depending on how low your issue is, it might not even be attainable with this approach (the double tall corner trap you purchased- I'm assuming it's filled with insulation/porous material). It certainly has a massive effect, however, on all the frequencies along the way from highs through the mids and then finally down to the bass. And if you were happy with where all the highs and mids were sitting, by introducing that "bass trap" you've ultimately changed the entire image of those highs and mids. Just in a effort to reduce the bass. That being said, you'd have better results with a "tuned" trap. There's various ways to achieve this- I'm sure all of them in the Acoustics Insider guide: helmholtz resonator, membrane trap, etc... But these kinds of traps can actually target the frequency in question without affect everything else. but you'll first have to measure the room with an Omni mic and some software In order to know exactly where the problem is. I think Room EQ Wizard and Sonnarworks could be a couple decent programs to check out for this. Hope this helps you!
@@bryanguest2807 Sorry. English is not my native language, What do you mean. If I have more than four sub woofers? No I don't use any. I replaced my easy chair with a two seat sofa and got a much better base. It works like a bass trap, But still there are a minor problem with the bass.
30 % of the sound velocity that *hits the bass trap,* I assume. Your whole room will not be covered with the bass trap so the total effect on the bump at the specific listening location will vary.
One of the Best Ideas of SoundProofing is "SoundProof Curtains" it actually Block outside Noise coming from Windows. Check Here: livesoundproof.com/best-soundproof-curtains/
How shall I interpret this? I have problems with some peaks in the bass and to me it looks like if I put in broadband absorbers it will absorb more in the frequencies that I don't have problems with. Which should give more/other problems. Please someone enlighten me.
@@staffanolofsson8342 Om du har toppar på vissa frekvenser tex +10 dB @ 50 Hz. Då som du ser är detta inte vägen att gå. Jag hade gått tillväga så här: No1 testa olika positioner (högtalare o sweatspot) o möbleringar (lång väg o kortvägg) så att du får plattare frekvensåtergivning o lägre toppar. Därmed får du enklare o bättre förutsättningar att behandla dem med olika åtgärder i No2. No2 för att ta ner toppar på specifika frekvenser. Då gäller Helmholtz eller membran absorbenter mfl som justeras exakt till den frekvensen som du har toppen på. Dvs INTE bredbands absorbenter.. Finns mycket att plugga på där angående dessa typer av absorbenter som är inte bredbands utan specifika för en given frekvens.. Om du tittar på videon igen så säger han det INDIREKT. Men är svårare att fånga när man inte vet vad han pratar om. Ladda ner o läs hans PDF. Det du också lär dig indirekt av videon är att alla bredbands absorbenter du skaffar bör vara så djupa/tjocka som möjligt o helst tjockare än 10 cm. (Dvs om du klär stora delar av arean av alla dina väggar o tak med 4 cm tunna skivor/absorbenter. Då har du behandat allt utom bas frekvensregistret! O med stor risk har du ett dött rum med fortsatta o obehandlad bas problem.. så man skall alltid sträva efter att ha så djupa/tjocka absorbenter som man kan komma över. För basen är där mest energi finns och är den mest svår behande frekvenserna som vi har att göra med.) Lycka till!
To clarify to the beginners, that's not showing percentage on the vertical axis, but rather a coefficient that shows effectiveness. The traps don't absorb 100% of frequencies in that range, they're just very effective. you really want to shoot for an absorption coefficient of greater than 0.5 to consider the effective in a given range.
But this is a basics vid. Just wanted to bring to the forefront something that might cause some folks serious confusion later on. Great video!
percentage is no proper unit, but effectiveness is also not defined. what we should be talking about here is power density W/m3 over multiple frequency ranges.
I like this Porus Absorber Caculator. I'd like to know how to calculate triangle shaped bass traps though.
Omg yes that would be actually awesome
So the triangle shape is not needed. A 6 or more inch deep rectangle in the corner will do the trick? From ceiling to floor?
As always your presentation is clear and precise. Thank you for sharing your time and expertise with us. Much appreciated.
Great guides, thanks a lot this is clearing the voodoo away.
Bass Trap as a term has so many issues! If we need a definition I would suggest at minimum it should have maximum abortion Q at or below 100hz. Physically if absorptive it should have volume akin to a closet or room cove as a minimum. If membrane or other it’s about how well it absorbs at and below 100hz! Ie the vast majority of panels are NOT bass traps!
Thank you so much for doing this! I found you through Mr Drako and just skimmed over your bass trap PDF guide. It's pure gold and suffices to say, I think you just saved me from spending a healthy amount of money on some useless grey wedges (if you know what I mean). On a larger note, I really appreciate your whole philosophy on this subject - taking into account the looks, budget expectations etc. Grade 'A' stuff!
Which video are you referring to at 8:30? Why it's the right strategy for small rooms?
Are porous absorber bass traps more effective in corners? or should they be kept at first reflection points?
but is it because of the corner vs wall placement, or the gap between them?
Thanks for the talk and also the link to the calculator. If people want measured data, GIK Acoustics is the only firm I know that posts actual test results for most of their products. Since all 6" panels are likely to be similar, I check the GIK specs often when I'm thinking of adding treatment.
I'm in the process of treating my studio. Currently making 10 wide range porous absorber panels, but am interested in doing some measurements and maybe add some bass traps. Will look in to your guide, thanks!
So at which point does the air gap between the panel and the backwall have to be for it to be ineffective?
So stuffing two matrasses in two corners makes for a good first experiment. ^^
Outstanding. Clear, informative, very helpful. Most grateful to you for doing this.
Brilliant information. Thank you Jesco!
Step 1: Win lottery. Step 2: Install as many RPG Modex plates that can be properly placed in your room. TRUE low bass absorption in only 4" of depth. Can be used in conjuction with velocity based absorption, doesn't have to be either/or. John Sayers style angled slat wall (helmholtz function), should be great for evenly controlling 150-500 Hz, without losing mids and highs in room. Along with breaking up standing waves between parallel walls.
I’m building a new studio space, and i hung velvet curtains in each corner, spanning a meter-3 feet across. But i did it to stop flutter echo, not necessarily bass nominees. It worked very well, in conjunction with ceiling clouds and wall panels. But, I’ve noticed I’ve actually ‘lost’ a little bit of bass response through my monitors- Adam audio t7’s- crazy… so, better for vocal tracking, a little harder to mix with. Hahaha
I would like to extend my sincere appreciation for the informative video you provided. It has been a valuable resource. However, I would like to express a concern regarding the pricing of the products featured in the video. It has come to my attention that the prices of these items have seen an increase since the video was originally uploaded.😫
Fun fact 😁💗 Bruce Swedien was using Acoustic sciences tube traps to surround Michael Jackson when recording
I always get a sense that he... KINDA... knows what he's talking about. I would love to know what his qualifications are.
Great Video, trank you !
Why use the parameters of foam when we're talking about rigid fiberglass?
This is in my living room. I have a coffee table that's 2 foot by 4 foot and about two feet off the ground. What if I filled the entire area underneath that with absorbing material? With that have any effect? I know it's reducing the surface area that is facing the Soundwave. The largest surface area would be under the table top. What if I only made it one foot thick and let the rest be air gap to the table top? Would that help or is this whole idea not right because it needs to face the wave head-on with the largest side?
WOW, so helpful! Thank you for clarifying this especially confusing situation for those of us who are musicians without an advanced audio/acoustical engineering background. You just saved me a load of money, time, extra headaches and degradation of the aesthetic of my living room/recording studio! Perusing the bass trap guide now for the most appropriate solution to attenuate cello/bass buildup. :)
Nice with a calculator for the panels.
But you showed us also the circular tube traps that is put into a corner.
Is there any calculator on how far from the corner walls the tube trap is placed??
(It would be nice to see what happens at 0 cm and 34 cm from the walls with that type of treatment on a diagram 😉 )
Yeh I know I could bring out and set up my equipment with REW to find out but a mathematical model of how it reacts with different distances is good to speed up the understanding..
Thanks for the video!
Tack för ditt svar. Jag har ju liksom gått genom delen att leta upp bästa "möbleringen" av rummet. Kvar var basen som inte låter helt OK. Jag tror att problemfrekvenserna ligger på typ 50 Hz, 125 Hz samt någonstans ännu lägre. Inväntar en XTZ room analyzer så jag får se vad reslutatet blr av det (och om jag förstår att tolka det;)).
I'm confused how a panel on a corner with an air gap can be as efficient as a panel that fills the whole corner?
Almost as efficient... it also has to do with the quarter wavelength of frequencies. When sound waves 'enter' the porous absorber they encounter friction and energy is transfered into heat. After passing the absorber it bounces of the wall back into the absorber again. The thickness of the absorber and the distance from the wall determine for which (quarter wavelength) frequencies it's most efficient. The bigger the airgap, the longer the quarter wavelength, hence the lower the frequency is affected. To a point. That's why he shortly mentions that if the absorber is too thin compared to the airgap you get some losses in the lower mid frequencies. Hope this makes sense to you.
This is really confusing topic but you did great information and i appreciate it.
I'm hearing click and pops in the intro. Am I crazy?
You're great man! I'm on stage of studying about the acoustic materials for room treatment. Thank you.
If I am building a superchunk “bass trap” what density of rock wool would u recommend? Some say lighter is better than heavier. I intend to build a 30x30x40 cm ones.
This is not a bass trap but for yes lighter Flow resistivity is better for bass. 4000 Pa.s is good, I don’t know if you have ISOVER in your country, that come in 45 milimiter panel and it is a 4000Pa.s
Very good explanation, thanks.
Fascinating insights. Thank you 🙏. Would the same concept of having a gap behind the porous material apply to absorbing the back-wave of a woofer in a large box speaker?
One of the Best Ideas of SoundProofing is "SoundProof Curtains" it actually Block outside Noise coming from Windows. Check Here: livesoundproof.com/best-soundproof-curtains/
Question, i have a big big couch with leather/microfiber combo. And a proper filling. Would this count as a basstrap of sorts? It's my living room so prefer to use normal items for acoustics. Like a heavy cotton wall carpet behind me (kills slap echo).
No need to be absolutely perfect. But sorta 'secret' camouflaged acoustics sound fun. Any other suggestions?
Not really, do some measurement and look at your RT60, standard for mastering is 30-40ms on ALL frequency. You will never see that in your room without specific bass trap like Helmhotz resonator/slat bass trap/perfored bass trap….
:)
But for slap echo, acoustic foam do just fine
Thank you Jesco! Great video!
Thanks for this clarification 💯👌
Thank you! This helped me very much!
Great video on an important subject!
Very helpful! Thanks!
Great explanation thanks
Perfectly explained 👍
Staffan Olofsson
för 11 timmar sedan
How shall I interpret this? I have problems with some peaks in the bass and to me it looks like if I put in broadband absorbers it will absorb more in the frequencies that I don't have problems with. Which should give more/other problems. Please someone enlighten me.
Sorry I happened to post this comment in response to David Dunne.
I can add that I had a relatively good sound except for the bass. So I wanted to try to fix this and was persuaded that I should buy a bass trap, of a certain brand, 15 cm thick and in two pieces, 60 cm x 100 cm, which are supposed to be placed on top of each other in a corner.
The only thing that happened was that voices (and everything else in the same range) got thin.
I was told to try change the positions of the listening place and the speakers. It only got worse.
I understand that I can feel that the voices becomes thinner if the lower bass has become suppressed, but the lower bass was not suppressed.
Staffan, since no one has responded and you have a legit issue- I'll take a crack at it.
It's true- porous absorbers absorb ALL frequencies. It's a point that often gets overlooked. For porous style absorbers to reach the bass frequencies they have to be VERY thick. Depending on how low your issue is, it might not even be attainable with this approach (the double tall corner trap you purchased- I'm assuming it's filled with insulation/porous material). It certainly has a massive effect, however, on all the frequencies along the way from highs through the mids and then finally down to the bass. And if you were happy with where all the highs and mids were sitting, by introducing that "bass trap" you've ultimately changed the entire image of those highs and mids. Just in a effort to reduce the bass. That being said, you'd have better results with a "tuned" trap. There's various ways to achieve this- I'm sure all of them in the Acoustics Insider guide: helmholtz resonator, membrane trap, etc... But these kinds of traps can actually target the frequency in question without affect everything else. but you'll first have to measure the room with an Omni mic and some software In order to know exactly where the problem is. I think Room EQ Wizard and Sonnarworks could be a couple decent programs to check out for this. Hope this helps you!
Additional subwoofers stacked in the corners make the best bass trap
@@bryanguest2807
Stacked subwoofers in the corners?
How many subwoofers?
And then?
Please explain.
@@staffanolofsson8342 bro, do u even quadruple bass array?
@@bryanguest2807
Sorry. English is not my native language,
What do you mean. If I have more than four sub woofers? No I don't use any.
I replaced my easy chair with a two seat sofa and got a much better base. It works like a bass trap, But still there are a minor problem with the bass.
look at that like ratio!
Depth
Thank you appreciate it
Thank you!
So if your room has a 12 db bump at 100 Hz, the 4 inch think bass trap will absorb 30% of that? I find that hard to believe.
30 % of the sound velocity that *hits the bass trap,* I assume. Your whole room will not be covered with the bass trap so the total effect on the bump at the specific listening location will vary.
Very interesting videos
Great info, thanks!!
It looks like you got a new camera; looks great!
One of the Best Ideas of SoundProofing is "SoundProof Curtains" it actually Block outside Noise coming from Windows. Check Here: livesoundproof.com/best-soundproof-curtains/
thx!
Cheers, bud.
How shall I interpret this? I have problems with some peaks in the bass and to me it looks like if I put in broadband absorbers it will absorb more in the frequencies that I don't have problems with. Which should give more/other problems. Please someone enlighten me.
@@staffanolofsson8342 Om du har toppar på vissa frekvenser tex +10 dB @ 50 Hz. Då som du ser är detta inte vägen att gå. Jag hade gått tillväga så här:
No1 testa olika positioner (högtalare o sweatspot) o möbleringar (lång väg o kortvägg) så att du får plattare frekvensåtergivning o lägre toppar.
Därmed får du enklare o bättre förutsättningar att behandla dem med olika åtgärder i No2.
No2 för att ta ner toppar på specifika frekvenser. Då gäller Helmholtz eller membran absorbenter mfl som justeras exakt till den frekvensen som du har toppen på. Dvs INTE bredbands absorbenter..
Finns mycket att plugga på där angående dessa typer av absorbenter som är inte bredbands utan specifika för en given frekvens..
Om du tittar på videon igen så säger han det INDIREKT. Men är svårare att fånga när man inte vet vad han pratar om. Ladda ner o läs hans PDF.
Det du också lär dig indirekt av videon är att alla bredbands absorbenter du skaffar bör vara så djupa/tjocka som möjligt o helst tjockare än 10 cm.
(Dvs om du klär stora delar av arean av alla dina väggar o tak med 4 cm tunna skivor/absorbenter. Då har du behandat allt utom bas frekvensregistret! O med stor risk har du ett dött rum med fortsatta o obehandlad bas problem.. så man skall alltid sträva efter att ha så djupa/tjocka absorbenter som man kan komma över. För basen är där mest energi finns och är den mest svår behande frekvenserna som vi har att göra med.)
Lycka till!