Justdafactsmaam
Addicted to Fun and Learning
That definitely won’t work.Right, I get that. But most people are putting standard rockwool in the corner, not a trap that will actually work correctly for the application.
That definitely won’t work.Right, I get that. But most people are putting standard rockwool in the corner, not a trap that will actually work correctly for the application.
However, what has not yet been discussed is whether a panel trap works better on the wall or in the corner. Is there a comparison between the effectiveness of the two, in terms of attenuation and size? i.e. can you get away with a smaller panel trap if it is placed in the corner?
However, what has not yet been discussed is whether a panel trap works better on the wall or in the corner.
Is there a comparison between the effectiveness of the two, in terms of attenuation and size? i.e. can you get away with a smaller panel trap if it is placed in the corner?
This is not strictly true; it depends on the thickness. The better products are 10-20" deep so they do provide absorption in the room. I have measurements showing midbass absorption with corner traps.Useful responses: pointing out that velocity absorbers in corners do not work, you need pressure absorbers.
Yes. It will be one or the other. Probably not the answer you want.
It’s too complicated to predict. Unfortunately trial and error is the final arbiter.
What I can say with confidence is don’t skimp on the quality of the trap based on the idea that positioning will give you better results. Size is only part of the formula for pressure traps.
Get traps that target the trouble frequencies, offer the best objective absorption and experiment with placement until you get the best results
This is not strictly true; it depends on the thickness. The better products are 10-20" deep so they do provide absorption in the room. I have measurements showing midbass absorption with corner traps.
I get it. It’s a sucky answer. I don’t like it either. But as simple as the math is when it comes to waves in a three dimensional space (I joke, not simple) mathematical modeling generally assumes smooth simple boundaries and infinite rigidity. Real world spaces are ridiculously complicated and really screw you on predicting room behavior.If "trial and error" is the answer I do not want, then I definitely do not want that answer!
But if you are saying that a wall bass trap vs. a corner bass trap is too complicated to predict, I can deal with that.
For me (and I suspect many people), room intrusiveness and effectiveness are the main consideration. I want the minimum impact into living space and aesthetics but with maximum acoustic impact. This is why I have left off any bass room treatment and only relied on DSP, but DSP can only get you so far.
What do you think the inputs that would be required to predict whether a wall trap is more effective than a corner bass trap, assuming both are pressure absorbers?
Anyone who has the time, tools and skills should DIY! I’d avoid the Helmholtz. By everything I have read and heard they are so specific that they miss the mark more often than not.What I have been thinking of for some time is to DIY my own bass traps, either a membrane absorber or a Helmholtz resonator. It would need to be tuneable. I am leaning towards a Helmholtz because it is easier to construct and easier to make it tuneable. All I need to do is to construct a box and place 5-10 BBQ air vents like this (if a bigger hole is required, I can simply remove some air vents). But I am not sure whether it a Helmholtz resonator would be more compact than a panel absorber, or whether corner placement would make it more effective.
The rules of thumbs are good but not entirely on the money with velocity absorption. One thing to remember is velocity absorption absorbs all kinetic energy but never completely. None of it is all or nothing. Wavelength matters. But it’s all in degrees.Velocity absorbers depend on thickness and the air gap from the wall, it needs to be 1/4 wavelength of the lowest frequency desired to be effective, and it rapidly loses efficiency under that. At least, that is my understanding.
This video by John Brandt and Richard Lenz of Real Acoustix explains problems and findings of testing diaphragmatic absorbers with the ASTM C423 standards and effects of positioning:However, what has not yet been discussed is whether a panel trap works better on the wall or in the corner. Is there a comparison between the effectiveness of the two, in terms of attenuation and size?
I had 4 commercial helmholtz resonators to try in my room before buying, they kind of worked but very unpredictably. Didn't buy them.I’d avoid the Helmholtz. By everything I have read and heard they are so specific that they miss the mark more often than not.
I believe that differs from my question in that tube traps are pressure-absorbers, whereby this thread seems to have established that corners are points of maximum pressure and are best treated with said pressure-absorbers such as tube traps.Years ago I built big tube traps, 24" diameter, 7' tall, put them in the corners and they made a big difference, both measured and audible.
Is the gist of this discussion that they could make even more difference if I moved them out of the corners into the middle of the walls?
It’s useful. Just not very useful. Ironically just like my answer.What about the case of having something the size of a 2' by 4' GIK Monster bass trap "straddling" a corner? Is the argument here only about the placement of something like a velocity-absorbing soffit or triangular trap right into a corner dominated by pressure? Is "straddling" a thick velocity-absorbing panel across a corner with sufficient air gap still useful, or is this thread debunking that common recommendation?
I thought they were velocity absorbersI believe that differs from my question in that tube traps are pressure-absorbers, whereby this thread seems to have established that corners are points of maximum pressure and are best treated with said pressure-absorbers such as tube traps.
Yes, TubeTraps are velocity absorbers. And, the work in high pressure zones because they force velocity to happen when they are exposed to rapid pressure changes. The whole concept of separating trap designs this way is not particularly useful. Almost all traps are designed to work in pressure zones. A velocity zone trap could be made, but I don't think that many of them are out there, especially for bass use.I thought they were velocity absorbers