Quantcast
New Live Room at Giant Wafer Studios - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
New Live Room at Giant Wafer Studios
Old 8th September 2012
  #1
Lives for gear
 
TornadoTed's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
New Live Room at Giant Wafer Studios

Hello folks, I have just started a photo diary over here,

https://gearspace.com/board/photo-di...extension.html

I have been talking with DanDan for the last 8-9 months and acoustic treatment is pretty much decided. the correct way to go about achieving isolation is a little less decided and that is where I thought maybe some folks around might help. As I said on the photo diary intro I don't need to go nuts with isolation as I live in a very remote location and maybe 10 vehicles go past in an average day. I have lost one quiet classical guitar take once because of a loud tractor in 10 years! I would like it to be quite a bit better than it is now however and the ceiling will be very important. It rains all the time in Wales and I definitely want to get rid of the rain noise on the roof.

I will be back with more info soon. I have concrete coming for the slab in 15 minutes!
Old 11th September 2012
  #2
Lives for gear
 
TornadoTed's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Ok so I am not 100% on getting the best isolation possible without spending the Earth.

When the shell is up I will have a single skin 6" concrete wall on all 4 sides, my plan was to build a room within a room.

Originally we had decided on one stone wall but for various reasons it wasn't practical so settled on one end wall made from RPG Diffusorblox sat on this,

SWW Masonry Isolation - Mason UK - Acoustic Engineers

The other 3 walls will be 6" x 2" timber inside out walls with 2 sheets of plasterboard facing the cavity, we plan to do this so the acoustic treatment sits between the studs to save space. I planned to sit them on this,

W Pad - Mason UK - Acoustic Engineers

Most of the walls will have 4" of RW3 with a 2" air gap behind and cloth and wooden slats over the front. I have also come up with a novel diffusor panel made from oak offcuts they sell as firewood. I will try to get a picture up today.

I intend to sit 9" x 2" purlins on the 2 side walls just under the current roof, again an inside out design so the acoustic treatment can fit betweeen the purlins. On the lower parts of the ceiling (anything below 12' or so) we intend to use 3" DIY Space Couplers, 3" RW3 and a 3" air gap behind which will fit perfectly betweeen the purlings. I have bought some bamboo sheets to make the couplers, I did try a couple of prototypes over here,

SPACE COUPLERS. Theory, construction and effectiveness on traps.

The higher part of the ceiling will either be left as plastered with exposed purlings or perhaps have some poly diffusors installed. I haven't quite decided on that yet.

I then planned to float a 20mm toungue and groove floor with 20mm oak bonded to it and use this underneath,

http://www.rpginc.com/PDFs/Isolation...20profile).pdf

So is this a good plan?

Is there a better or maybe cheaper way of achieving the same result?

Any potential pitfalls to watch out for?

All suggestions and feedback welcome.
Old 11th September 2012
  #3
Gear Nut
 
🎧 5 years
6 inches.... I assume you're going to use a double layer of 440x215x100mm blockwork?

You will save build time by simply laying them flat, and also give yourself a total of just over 8 inches instead of 6 for the same money.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #4
Lives for gear
 
TornadoTed's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Comport ➑️
6 inches.... I assume you're going to use a double layer of 440x215x100mm blockwork?

You will save build time by simply laying them flat, and also give yourself a total of just over 8 inches instead of 6 for the same money.
No only single layer of blockwork, the inner wall will be timber and plasterboard. The current live room has 6" single skin walls so it makes sense to mirror that on the new half.
Old 9th May 2013
  #5
Lives for gear
 
TornadoTed's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I'm trying to wrap my head around sealing an inside out wall!

I understand with a standard wall you put the plaster board on and mud the joins and backer rod/caulk the edges.

This isn't possible with an inside out room being built in an existing space as the plasterboard is the cavity side of the wall so you can't get to it.

Anyone got any details on sealing inside out walls?
Old 10th May 2013
  #6
Lives for gear
 
TornadoTed's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I figured I may get a better response with some picture describing what I mean.

I plan to build a room within a room from timber panels with plasterboard attached to the back. You can't get to the joins to mud them so I came up with the idea of machining a small groove where panels will join so that they can be sealed with backer rod and then caulk.

Anybody have any comments on if this is the best way to seal an inside out wall?
Attached Thumbnails
New Live Room at Giant Wafer Studios-wall-plan.png   New Live Room at Giant Wafer Studios-wall-panels.png   New Live Room at Giant Wafer Studios-inside-out-wall.png  
Old 10th May 2013
  #7
Lives for gear
 
Rod Gervais's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
The concept is sound - you just need to flush out the details.....

You don't need the caulk between the studs..... you do though need to make sure that the routed joint is large enough to include backer rod as a part of the equation.

This has to marry not only the vertical joints - but the corners/floor/ceiling intersections as well.

If you don't include backer rod as a part of the equation the caulk joints will eventually develop cracks in the length of the joint - which will be a point of failure for the level of isolation.

3 sided caulk joints do not fare well.

If you can get it in your area "Big Stretch" caulk is the best I have ever seen and recommend it highly...

Big Stretch

Rod
Old 10th May 2013
  #8
Lives for gear
 
Rod Gervais's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
One other comment here - and that is that I would not build the walls as a series of small panels - I would construct them in their entirety and then stand them up in place..... you will achieve higher levels of isolation with staggered joints than with a series of vertical joints..... you minimize the losses that way....

Rod
Old 10th May 2013
  #9
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Materials

It amazes me how a relatively normal product in one land can be unheard of in another. Resilient Channel in effect barely exists here, and that only recently. Most builders are astounded at the concept. Similarly Backer Rod. Vital for the survival of caulked seals as Rod has explained many times. Never heard of it here.
But you should be OK TED http://www.amazon.co.uk/Everbuild-Jo.../dp/B004QHC4P2
DD
Old 10th May 2013
  #10
Lives for gear
 
Rod Gervais's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Big Stretch caulk on the UK site as well:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_...tretch%20caulk

Rod
Old 10th May 2013
  #11
Lives for gear
 
TornadoTed's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Thanks for the advise Rod and thanks for the links Rod and Dan.

What size backer rod would you suggest?
Old 10th May 2013
  #12
Lives for gear
 
Rod Gervais's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
The backer rod size is dependent on the width of the joint - the depth of the joint is dependent on the size of the backer rod.

For example: If you routed a 5/16" caulk joint you would need 3/8" backer rod - and the depth of the routed channel should be roughly 5/8" deep........ that would leave you with a caulk joint that was a 1/4" deep before tooling.......

BTY - "tooling" the caulk joint is an important part of the process to assure a good seal.... don't just fill the joint with caulk and then walk away......

As is the case with most things having to do with isolation - the devil is in the details....

Rod
Old 22nd June 2013
  #13
Lives for gear
 
TornadoTed's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Right so onto the next area I need to address.

I have a composite roof, tin on the top layer, 65mm of solid foam insulation and tin on the bottom layer as shown in the photo. I am building a room within a room but want to beef up the outer skin as much as possible. I will use 2 layers of plaster board which ever method I use. Would it be worthwhile to use Green Glue between the 2 layers?

I have attached a link to the build diary with a picture of the ceiling.

I have thought of 4 options and would love some feedback.

a) Plaster board the under side of the roof and screw into the tin.

b) Plasterboard the underside of the tin and build a 2" x 2" frame underneath the plaster board to keep it there.

c) Fill between the purlins with 9" of Rockwool and then plasterboard onto the timbers. Would this create a 3 leaf problem, roof sheet, insulation, plasterboard, insulation, inner room plasterboard?

d) Use Genie clips and hat channel to suspend a ceiling from the purlins and have that as the inner skin ceiling.


https://gearspace.com/board/8610112-post18.html
Attached Thumbnails
New Live Room at Giant Wafer Studios-composite-roof-panels-7.jpg  
Old 22nd June 2013
  #14
Lives for gear
 
Rod Gervais's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
In your case I would probably head towards option C - you've already said you don't need a ton of isolation - the Genie Clips are pretty decent products.....

Rod
Old 22nd June 2013
  #15
Lives for gear
 
TornadoTed's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Thanks Rod, I should have said that the one thing that does concern me isolation wise is rain noise, unfortunately it does little else in Wales!

Do you think option C would be enough to bring heavy rainfall to workable levels?

Of course I just realised that I have the option of combining options A/B with option C. Beefing up the underside of the tin and using the Genie clip drop ceiling.
Old 22nd June 2013
  #16
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Upgrading

Hi Ed, I think I can assume that you are hearing the rain loudly now and it has become a worry. DOH, but you are wisely paused and reconsidering the priority level.

It's been a long while and most of our work was verbal. But I have some notes and recollections.

Your ceiling absorption and scatter treatments will need some way of hanging.
You could install a second set of beams. These could be resiliently decoupled where they are attached to the walls for extra certainty. This would replace the proprietary expensive suspension/isolation system with something simpler and intrinsically more reliable over time. Layers of plasterboard ON TOP. You may recall talk of 'Inside Out' The underside of these beams could now contain say 6 inches of fibre. Plus ready to go support for your Space Arrays, Slats, Diffusion, lighting and other services etc. etc.

The gap between the steel roof and this new isolated ceiling should be as big as is practical.

The void between should be nicely filled, but not stuffed, with attic insulation, or sheep.....
Note in any/all of your options, the void should be thus filled. This resonance damping filling can cheaply add up to 9dB of isolation!
In practice and at LF, less, but it's free lunch.

You could go probably go further with little enough extra expense.
i.e. Beef up the outer skin. Ideally using the normal damped gap plus mass layer. This would require a frame to create the gap, say 50mm. Again fill this void with fibre, but not compressed. Plasterboard or cement board.

I have to ask this. In terms of beefing up the outer skin, would it be more practical to remove it and install a layer of mass and possible some anti drumming sheet? Have a look at Revac. If you want to get into this I can research it for you properly.

Such extensive work is necessary to effectively soundproof AND acoustically treat.
It will result in a very warm room. You will need a cooling plan. Again something simple to do or plan for at this stage but a nightmare retrofit. Holes and ducts can be included now to just allow some escape and flow. The 'plant' can be added later, say in a little outside shed.

DD
Old 22nd June 2013
  #17
Lives for gear
 
TornadoTed's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Hey Dan,

The rain hasn't become an issue now, it has always been my biggest worry isolation wise. My next stage will be to complete the outside shell including the roof so that is why I am thinking about it now. While I do get low flying jets and the odd tractor they are so infrequent it doesn't bother me but the rain can go on for weeks in Wales!

The roof is new and solves a huge problem in other areas of the building with condensation. I used to get condensation dripping through the ceiling with the old mineral fibre roof.

Yes you are correct the internal room will have 'inside out' timbers on the ceiling to install the treatment between as we discussed. Even if I ended up with the Genie Clip route I would still have timbers straddling the inner walls on the ceiling for the Space Arrays etc.

When I was looking at the roof yesterday it occurred to me that there are several ways to do the same job but I am a little confused as to the best and most cost effective way to do it.

My plans too weren't very clear above and I will change them when I get chance as A, B & D don't show the 'inner' room and insulation in the void.

Funnily enough my mind has been getting round to thinking about ventilation. At the moment I don't have any, if it's getting a bit stuffy we open a door or a window. Wales only gets about 20 warm days a year so it's never seemed like a problem. of course with the new build being far better isolated and insulated it might just cause a problem so I have come round to the decision that I need to make provisions for it. That will be for another day though I think!
Old 22nd June 2013
  #18
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Cost

I don't have the build experience to guess cost effectiveness Ed. However in your case, labour seems to be a very small part of the cost.

I can keep you apprised of the principles at play. Rod or others may come back with real world recommendations.

It boils down to Mass, Air, Mass. And preventing a conduction path between the two mass layers. More of any or all is better!

How much void can you have between your interior beam frame and the roof?

Could you record the rain and post say 10S of it here?
I would like to see the spectrum of that.
Let's figure out how much Isolation at what frequency that you really need.

DD
Old 22nd June 2013
  #19
Lives for gear
 
TornadoTed's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Great idea Dan, so obvious but I wouldn't have thought of that, just not how my brain is wired.

I will make a recording the next time it rains, knowing my luck it will be dry for weeks, ha ha!

I have an Earthworks Omni that's pretty flat, how close should I go to the ceiling, a foot, 6 feet?

I also have a crude SPL meter so I will try to get some figures with that also.

The main roof purlins are 9" so I had planned to build the inner roof a couple of inches from those so roughly 11" void. I could come down more but that would make the ceiling lower inside. With an 11" void my internal ceiling would be 9' to the bottom of the acoustic treatment at the lowest point and about 14' at the highest point.
Old 23rd June 2013
  #20
Lives for gear
 
jhbrandt's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Ted,

Hang on a minute... What are you going to do with the walls? are you building them 'inside out'? Is that why you are talking about router edges, backer rod, and caulk?

Cheers,
John
Old 23rd June 2013
  #21
Lives for gear
 
TornadoTed's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Yes John, the inner room will have 6" x 2" inside out walls and 9" x 2" inside out ceiling.

Dan and I decided on this route rather than building a conventional room and then having to mount all the acoustic treatment to the surfaces.

The ceiling will have 3" air gap, 3" insulation and 3" Space Coupler in the lower aprts of the room and possibly polys or nothing in the higher parts of the ceiling.

The walls will have various treatments but I think the main body of the room will have 2" air gap, 4" insulation and wooden slats. I am pretty set on building VPR's for the corners.
Old 23rd June 2013
  #22
Lives for gear
 
jhbrandt's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Ah.. okay. Thanks Ted.

Well, I would never recommend this 'inside-out' technique for many reasons. 1. difficult to build and problems associated with it - ie; post #6-8, 2. Isolation obtained with this method will always be LESS than the 'standard' building method. Doubling or halving the air space will result in +/- 5dB in the STL every time you do it. So, a normally constructed wall of 2 X 6s and a 2" gap from the studs to the masonry wall has basically 7 1/2" of air space. - Reducing the air gap down to 2" is a reduction of 2 halvings of the original space.. so you're losing about 10dB right there. 3. You may need a lot more than 5 1/2" of absorption.

My 2 cents.

Cheers,
John
Old 23rd June 2013
  #23
Lives for gear
 
TornadoTed's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Thanks John, that has certainly threw the cat among the pigeons but I think Dan and I are pretty set on the inside out room. I would love to hear other peoples thoughts on it though.

I have re-drawn the 4 different roof options as it wasn't very clear before as I didn't have the 'room within a room' included in the drawings showing insulation and number of leaves.

a) Plaster board the under side of the roof and screw into the tin.

b) Plasterboard the underside of the tin and build a 2" x 2" frame underneath the plaster board to keep it there.

c) Fill between the purlins with 9" of Rockwool and then plasterboard onto the timbers. Would this create a 3 leaf problem, roof sheet, insulation, plasterboard, insulation, inner room plasterboard?

d) Use Genie clips and hat channel to suspend a ceiling from the purlins and have that as the inner skin ceiling.
Attached Thumbnails
New Live Room at Giant Wafer Studios-roof-option-.png   New Live Room at Giant Wafer Studios-roof-option-b.png   New Live Room at Giant Wafer Studios-roof-option-c.png   New Live Room at Giant Wafer Studios-roof-option-d.png  
Old 23rd June 2013
  #24
Lives for gear
 
gullfo's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
you should probably check the sound levels of the rain to determine if you need the extra mass on the composite roof or not. if so, the adding the mass to the underside of it should help. having the large air gap then (as in option B) with the inside out ceiling should also be ok. i've used inside-out quite a bit and while harder to build it does work pretty well - one key aspect is to make sure your air space between the walls is not constrained - i.e. make sure you have air flow all around the inner room - this avoids compression on the air spring which reduces your isolation. this is true is all build but more so when dealing with narrower air gaps.
Old 23rd June 2013
  #25
Lives for gear
 
jhbrandt's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Glenn,

I'm sorry, but I have to sort-of 'get into this' here.

My question is: Do you have STL data - from testing this configuration. "Does work pretty well", just doesn't work for me. I mean, IF it paid out with improved 'something' then I wouldn't oppose it.

It's only 'on the surface' that it would seem to 'save space' or 'provide room for treatment'. But if were asked to build something like that, I'd really need to know WHY it was better and get some concrete reasons with some figures to back it up. Say, comparison testing at a lab for the exact same walls in the two different configurations. I wouldn't take the job without the 'proof'. WAY too much trouble and potential problems down the road.

Also note, and this is a FACT; without absorption IN the air cavity, the spring resonance WILL be higher and the Low Frequency STL will suffer... This is in ADDITION to the loss of STL due to gap width.

Cheers,
John
Old 23rd June 2013
  #26
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Committee

Ted has been very clear that Isolation from anything but rain is absolutely not an issue he can afford, or wants to consider 'properly'.

Some context here. This is a very well put together, well equipped, EXTREMELY affordable studio.

My TL reservations were made abundantly clear and a reasonable compromise has been planned, informed by actual testing.
Extensive SPL Egress testing was done by Ted with my guidance. Even without the secondary inner walls the roof is the by far the most leaking part of the building. By a long long shot. And as Ted said, quietness reigns outside except for the very rare jet or tractor.

The inside out suggestions in this design were always an INTERIOR ADDITION . In other words they are always inside a wall layer of mass AND a damped airgap to the outer shell.
Some more context Ted, in an extraordinarily skilled and innovative builder.

Now let's wrap this up.
A Horse designed by a committee is a Zebra.
Ted, I have no issue with second opinions. These guys are friends who I have consulted with on occasion. And debated courses of action in public fora. But not when one of us was already on the job.
I must ask that any further 'debate' on our existing 'plans' be in private, be it with me or anyone else.
Without the full information and context, there are some understandably misguided opinions being expressed here, which is good for nobody.

DD
Old 23rd June 2013
  #27
Lives for gear
 
jhbrandt's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
+1

Gotcha Dan! I trust you on this and I know you know what you are doing.

I just had to make that point because I feel that it is an important issue for OTHERS to be aware of.

Cheers,
John
Old 23rd June 2013
  #28
Lives for gear
 
gullfo's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
John - i don't have STL data on inside-out but have used it in a number of tight situations where even loud volume levels inside are sufficiently attenuated so it meets the client expectations. and by that a i mean you might hear "something like a small radio" just outside (say < 3-5ft) but after stepping away 10-15ft there is nothing.

keep in mind except for the air gap depth, the amount of mass used and air cavity damping etc are nearly identical to a normal construction. so the only significant potential for loss comes from the smaller air space (which for me is minimally 2" but could be up to 5").

as i'm in touch with some folks who have used this type of construction in their studio, i'll see if during their next session with full drums or amps going, if they could take some snapshots of the internal levels and the exterior levels in a couple of places.
Old 23rd June 2013
  #29
Lives for gear
 
Rod Gervais's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
John Sayers uses the inside out approach a lot (I had a close up look with one of his project in MA when I did a code consultation with one of his clients (at his recommendation.)

As with any design approach - it has it's challenges - and attention to detail is key to effective isolation levels. If properly implemented it will work exactly as good as any other system given the same mass - air cavity, & insulation within the cavity...... There is absolutely no difference in isolation levels given the same parameters, sound doesn't "know" which side of the wall frame the drywall is on.

If you are looking for a (relatively) deep cavity to use for room treatments inside of the room - it is a very cost effective design.

The isolation levels in the finished space in MA were every bit as good as they would have been using a more conventional approach......

Now - due to the fact that I am inspecting buildings "at a distance" - I personally feel much more comfortable using a more conventional approach to this - however that is simply a personal preference - i does not suggest any deficiency with the design.....

Edited afterthought:

By the way - again - if you are looking for deep traps inside the room - there really is no reason to use a narrower cavity in the wall - in which case the isolation levels should be exactly the same - the huge gain is in the labor and material savings when you don't have to frame the additional walls inside the rooms to create treatment cavities..

Rod
Old 5th July 2013
  #30
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Public Interest

I thought this would be of wider interest.
Ed recorded the rainfall and sent it to me. I was able to use iTunes to play it on a loop while viewing the Spectrum Analysis in REW.
Cool or what....
New Live Room at Giant Wafer Studios-rain.jpg

A very well built, stiff roof, with little enough LF.

Note FuzzMeasure also features a Remote Sweep facility, where I can send a Wav to a client. They play it in their DAW and make a normal recording, send it back, FM does the Math.

Considering the spectrum and well, everything, I have recommended that applying mass to or close to the steel between the beams is probably not an efficient use of resources. Similarly simply sheathing the underneath of the beams with a layer of plasterboard would diminish the void between outer and inner leaves somewhat. So I am recommending a separate stud frame to support two or three layers of board. Gap as big as poss obviously.
Choices remain. e.g. Build this new ceiling as normal and hang treatment beneath it. OR I/O with large beams which would perform as a grid for all the treatments envisaged. This will of course depend on whether I/O is actually doable, or worth the extra effort. I am doubtful, but I have seen Ed's ingenuity first hand, so this is still open.
I recommend keeping an eye on his build diary. https://gearspace.com/board/photo-di...extension.html
DD
πŸ“ Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 99 views: 29629
Avatar for energizer bunny
energizer bunny 20th August 2012
replies: 2619 views: 475417
Avatar for S21
S21 22nd March 2021
replies: 23 views: 1943
Avatar for decoder23
decoder23 23rd February 2017
replies: 88 views: 5871
Avatar for TobyB
TobyB 1 day ago
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump