Why is my $$ investment in SONEX now worthless .... ???

[jr]

..... because all the panels are now disintegrated after 15 years.
Crumbling dross everywhere you look.

Nowhere does this product in it's spec sheets show a rating of life
expectancy. When I spoke to them about it they just laughed and said
"what do you expect - for it to last forever?".

No, but a rating would be nice so I know what I'm getting into for my
investment BEFORE I buy.

Same thing with my JBL PROFESSIONAL studio monitors (No life expectancy
rating and major attitude when it's brought to their attention).
IMO, these companies suck for lies of omission. BEWARE!

Any tips on a proper iso room diffusor that will stand the test of time?










--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[david correia]

In article >,
jr > wrote:

> .... because all the panels are now disintegrated after 15 years.
> Crumbling dross everywhere you look.
>
> Nowhere does this product in it's spec sheets show a rating of life
> expectancy. When I spoke to them about it they just laughed and said
> "what do you expect - for it to last forever?".
>
> No, but a rating would be nice so I know what I'm getting into for my
> investment BEFORE I buy.




Wow. I've got now 26 year old sonex on some gobos and moveable panels
that have seen lotsa use, and they're still fine.

Wonder if they started making it cheaper, or if something wierd happened
to yours ...



That said, the sonex on the walls of the Next Generation Enterprise's
transporter room still looks good. (If you never noticed it, next time
take a look.)





David Correia
www.Celebrationsound.com

[David Morgan \(MAMS\)]

"jr" > wrote in message...

> .... because all the panels are now disintegrated after 15 years.
> Crumbling dross everywhere you look.


Do you allow smoking?

[will]

Smoking - good point. I also have Sonex that's well over 20 years old
in my place and it's just fine. It's a no smoking studio.

> From: "David Morgan \(MAMS\)" >
> Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
> Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 06:43:22 GMT
> Subject: Re: Why is my $$ investment in SONEX now worthless .... ???
>
>
> "jr" > wrote in message...
>
>> .... because all the panels are now disintegrated after 15 years.
>> Crumbling dross everywhere you look.
>
>
> Do you allow smoking?
>
>

[Richard Crowley]

"will" wrote ...
> Smoking - good point. I also have Sonex that's well over 20 years old
> in my place and it's just fine. It's a no smoking studio.

Were there versions that had (or NOT) flame-retardent
chemical treatment? I wonder if it might be an unfortunate
reaction between the foam and the flame-retardent chemistry?

OTOH, back 30 years ago, JBL would replace the crumbling
foam surrounds of their hi-fi woofers under warranty.
I don't think they do that anymore.

[Mike Rivers]

jr wrote:
> .... because all the panels are now disintegrated after 15 years.
> Crumbling dross everywhere you look.

I have some 20 year old Sonex that's kind of gummy, but it's still
holding together. It's just not very nice to handle any more, but since
it's on the ceiling, this is rarely a problem.

Up until fairly recently, plastic foams have contained acetic acid (or
maybe they make acetic acid when they age) and eventually destroy
themselves. My worst experience was with the foam in a box for an AKG
mic capsule. I took it out one day after not using it for about six
months and found that vinegar smell and the surface of the housing
nicely etched and dull. Fortunately the diaphram seemed to be OK, but I
tossed that box.

[Richard Smol]

jr wrote:

> .... because all the panels are now disintegrated after 15 years.
> Crumbling dross everywhere you look.

Maintanance is a bitch.

RS

[hank alrich]

jr > wrote:

> Same thing with my JBL PROFESSIONAL studio monitors (No life expectancy
> rating and major attitude when it's brought to their attention).
> IMO, these companies suck for lies of omission. BEWARE!

There is nothing "investment" about tools. How the hell would JBL know
how you are going to use the speakers? Reading your screed here, I'd say
the ones you bought should probably have had the warranty waived as they
went out the shop door.

All foams are subject to degradation from chemical agents in the
environment in which they are installed. Rotten air rots the foam (hint,
hint). Some folks have gotten decades of good use from Sonex. Look to
your room and the air within. The problem is not with the Sonex.

--
ha

[hank alrich]

Richard Crowley wrote:

> Were there versions that had (or NOT) flame-retardent
> chemical treatment? I wonder if it might be an unfortunate
> reaction between the foam and the flame-retardent chemistry?

Sonex offered only fire-retardent treated panels. That was one of things
that distinguished them from the low priced fire-trap stuff.

--
ha

[Scott Dorsey]

Richard Crowley > wrote:
>OTOH, back 30 years ago, JBL would replace the crumbling
>foam surrounds of their hi-fi woofers under warranty.
>I don't think they do that anymore.

They won't, but Cardinal Sound and Motion Picture in Maryland will replace
the surrounds of JBL monitors for a very reasonable price.

The urethane breakdown problems that caused old surrounds to fall apart,
urethane pinch rollers to get gummy, and older (pre-1980s) foam to
disintegrate are very closely related to the same mechanism that causes
sticky shed syndrome on recording tapes. As such, I would suspect ambient
humidity would accelerate the breakdown.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Paul Stamler]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
ps.com...

> Up until fairly recently, plastic foams have contained acetic acid (or
> maybe they make acetic acid when they age) and eventually destroy
> themselves. My worst experience was with the foam in a box for an AKG
> mic capsule. I took it out one day after not using it for about six
> months and found that vinegar smell and the surface of the housing
> nicely etched and dull. Fortunately the diaphram seemed to be OK, but I
> tossed that box.

Focal Point, the arts center I work with, has a couple of 20-year-old SM81s,
and the foam in their boxes has in the past year turned utterly revolting.
Gotta go in there and replace it one of these days, but I'm not looking
forward to the job.

Peace,
Paul

[Tim Padrick]

"hank alrich" > wrote in message
.. .
> jr > wrote:
>
>> Same thing with my JBL PROFESSIONAL studio monitors (No life expectancy
>> rating and major attitude when it's brought to their attention).
>> IMO, these companies suck for lies of omission. BEWARE!
>
> There is nothing "investment" about tools. How the hell would JBL know
> how you are going to use the speakers? Reading your screed here, I'd say
> the ones you bought should probably have had the warranty waived as they
> went out the shop door.
>
> All foams are subject to degradation from chemical agents in the
> environment in which they are installed. Rotten air rots the foam (hint,
> hint). Some folks have gotten decades of good use from Sonex. Look to
> your room and the air within. The problem is not with the Sonex.
>
> --
> ha

I disagree. I've seen the foam inside sealed boxes turn to goo, too. It's
the formulation of the old foams - I've seen it on stuff from the US and
from the UK.

If the foam cannot withstand a normal, forseable environment, the maker
should stand behind it in some fashion (replacement at cost if nothing
better), in spite of the fact that they likely did not come up with the
formula, and perhaps did not actually manufacture the stuff.

[Richard Kuschel]

jr wrote:
> .... because all the panels are now disintegrated after 15 years.
> Crumbling dross everywhere you look.
>
> Nowhere does this product in it's spec sheets show a rating of life
> expectancy. When I spoke to them about it they just laughed and said
> "what do you expect - for it to last forever?".
>
> No, but a rating would be nice so I know what I'm getting into for my
> investment BEFORE I buy.
>
> Same thing with my JBL PROFESSIONAL studio monitors (No life expectancy
> rating and major attitude when it's brought to their attention).
> IMO, these companies suck for lies of omission. BEWARE!
>
> Any tips on a proper iso room diffusor that will stand the test of time?
>


>
>
>
>


It is probably crumbling because the material is being destroyed by the
atmosphere in your studio.

Are you using an electrostatic precipitator to keep the air clean? If
so you are loading the room full of tons of Ozone (O3) which oxidizes
the foam.

Just ambient ozone and oxygen will have the same effect, it just takes
longer.


I would recommend Owens Corning 703 for my absorbtion, the Sonex foam
is not a diffusor. There are a lot of diffusors that do not break down
from exposure to air. RPG and others.

I have several panels of 25 year old Sonex. Some are breaking down some
are not. those which are breaking down have been touched quite a bit

Richard Kuschel
"I canna' change the Law o' Physics"--Scotty

[hank alrich]

Paul Stamler wrote:

> Focal Point, the arts center I work with, has a couple of 20-year-old SM81s,
> and the foam in their boxes has in the past year turned utterly revolting.
> Gotta go in there and replace it one of these days, but I'm not looking
> forward to the job.

Been there and done that with the SM7 and the MD441's, and no it is not
fun. But I don't theinks it's Sonex, either. <g>

--
ha

[hank alrich]

Tim Padrick > wrote:

> "hank alrich" wrote...
> > jr wrote:
> >
> >> Same thing with my JBL PROFESSIONAL studio monitors (No life expectancy
> >> rating and major attitude when it's brought to their attention).
> >> IMO, these companies suck for lies of omission. BEWARE!
> >
> > There is nothing "investment" about tools. How the hell would JBL know
> > how you are going to use the speakers? Reading your screed here, I'd say
> > the ones you bought should probably have had the warranty waived as they
> > went out the shop door.
> >
> > All foams are subject to degradation from chemical agents in the
> > environment in which they are installed. Rotten air rots the foam (hint,
> > hint). Some folks have gotten decades of good use from Sonex. Look to
> > your room and the air within. The problem is not with the Sonex.
> >
> > --
> > ha
>
> I disagree. I've seen the foam inside sealed boxes turn to goo, too. It's
> the formulation of the old foams - I've seen it on stuff from the US and
> from the UK.
>
> If the foam cannot withstand a normal, forseable environment, the maker
> should stand behind it in some fashion (replacement at cost if nothing
> better), in spite of the fact that they likely did not come up with the
> formula, and perhaps did not actually manufacture the stuff.

Tim, just to be clear, are you saying you have firsthand knowledge of
this happening with Sonex? Not talking many other brands and types of
foam that I have seen degrade rapidly (though often where smoking was
allowed).

And who knows what that box went through en route? Cardboard isn't quite
impervious to gasses.

--
ha

[Mike Rivers]

Tim Padrick wrote:

> If the foam cannot withstand a normal, forseable environment, the maker
> should stand behind it in some fashion (replacement at cost if nothing
> better), in spite of the fact that they likely did not come up with the
> formula, and perhaps did not actually manufacture the stuff.

Oh, geez, here we go again with "the manufacturer is responsible
forever regardless of the age of the produt." Do you think that Ampex
and 3M is going to replace every sticky shed tape (and what about the
recordings?) Will Lexus relace the tires on my car if I don't get
75,000 miles out of the? Will Sherwin-Williams repaint your house if
the paint flakes after 20 years?

It's stuff that deteriorates. It was a known failure mode 15 years ago.
Would you have had an alternative if you had known that when you bought
the Sonex?

[hank alrich]

Mike Rivers wrote:

> It's stuff that deteriorates. It was a known failure mode 15 years ago.
> Would you have had an alternative if you had known that when you bought
> the Sonex?

Gee, I think O-C might've been offering 703 back then. <g>

--
ha

[Mike Rivers]

hank alrich wrote:

> Gee, I think O-C might've been offering 703 back then. <g>

They did, and I used some of that, too. But what are we going to do
when they discover that it causes cancer?

[Carey Carlan]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in
oups.com:

> hank alrich wrote:
>
>> Gee, I think O-C might've been offering 703 back then. <g>
>
> They did, and I used some of that, too. But what are we going
to do
> when they discover that it causes cancer?

I think laboratory rats cause cancer. <g>

[hank alrich]

Mike Rivers wrote:

> hank alrich wrote:
>
> > Gee, I think O-C might've been offering 703 back then. <g>
>
> They did, and I used some of that, too. But what are we going to do
> when they discover that it causes cancer?

I try to keep it out of my salad, and to remember that life is a
sexually transmitted fatal disease.

It sure did help the situation in my control room, where the ceiling
joists (2 x 12's) are stuffed with that, then cotton batting, then
covered with a tightly woven linen. I live under an absorber.

--
ha

[Lorin David Schultz]

david correia > wrote:
>
> Wow. I've got now 26 year old sonex on some gobos and moveable
> panels that have seen lotsa use, and they're still fine.


Mine went all to rat **** too. Just crumbled into something akin to dry
top soil. It was more than ten years old, but less than fifteen.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)

[William Sommerwerck]

> Mine went all to rat ****, too. Just crumbled into something akin to
> dry top soil. It was more than ten years old, but less than fifteen.

You're lucky it lasted that long. That sort of foam is chemically unstable.

[Lorin David Schultz]

William Sommerwerck > wrote:
>
> That sort of foam is chemically unstable.

Yeah, but so am I so we got along fine.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)

[William Sommerwerck]

>> That sort of foam is chemically unstable.

> Yeah, but so am I, so we got along fine.

Having you ever caught the Sonex swiping Buds from the fridge?

[Michael Wozniak]

"William Sommerwerck" > wrote in message
...
>>> That sort of foam is chemically unstable.
>
>> Yeah, but so am I, so we got along fine.
>
> Having you ever caught the Sonex swiping Buds from the fridge?
>
>
Whereas heavy drinkers tend to deteriorate and get flaky over time....

Mikey
Nova Music Productions

[Brian Running]

> Are you using an electrostatic precipitator to keep the air clean? If
> so you are loading the room full of tons of Ozone (O3) which oxidizes
> the foam.

I was going to say the same thing -- those little ionizer "air
fresheners" fill the air with ozone, which is extremely
chemically-reactive. They'll ruin anything plastic or rubber in short
order -- and foam rubber has much more surface area, so it goes even faster.

Also, exposure to strong UV sources will crumble your foam rubber.

[GregS]

In article >, Brian Running > wrote:
>> Are you using an electrostatic precipitator to keep the air clean? If
>> so you are loading the room full of tons of Ozone (O3) which oxidizes
>> the foam.
>
>I was going to say the same thing -- those little ionizer "air
>fresheners" fill the air with ozone, which is extremely
>chemically-reactive. They'll ruin anything plastic or rubber in short
>order -- and foam rubber has much more surface area, so it goes even faster.
>
>Also, exposure to strong UV sources will crumble your foam rubber.

I had a lot of ionizers that I could not smell any ozone, but the ionizers
help clean up other things that will shorten the foams life, unles the ionized
particles cling to the foam because of the charge. I have
noticed that silicone rtv seems to absorb contaminents over time, and change
colors, as well as loosing its integrity.

greg

[Scott Dorsey]

GregS > wrote:
>>
>>I was going to say the same thing -- those little ionizer "air
>>fresheners" fill the air with ozone, which is extremely
>>chemically-reactive. They'll ruin anything plastic or rubber in short
>>order -- and foam rubber has much more surface area, so it goes even faster.
>>
>>Also, exposure to strong UV sources will crumble your foam rubber.
>
>I had a lot of ionizers that I could not smell any ozone, but the ionizers
>help clean up other things that will shorten the foams life, unles the ionized
>particles cling to the foam because of the charge. I have
>noticed that silicone rtv seems to absorb contaminents over time, and change
>colors, as well as loosing its integrity.

The ionizers are not SUPPOSED to create any ozone, and if they do create
ozone it is a hazard. However, many of the cheap ionizers do actually
create ozone. They also tend to be nasty RFI sources and leak into unbalanced
audio lines too.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Agent 86]

On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 11:15:55 -0700, Richard Kuschel wrote:

> Are you using an electrostatic precipitator to keep the air clean? If
> so you are loading the room full of tons of Ozone (O3) which oxidizes
> the foam.
>
> Just ambient ozone and oxygen will have the same effect, it just takes
> longer.

Better get my Ionic Breeze out of my bedroom before my waterbed mattress
disintegrates and I drown in my sleep!

[Agent 86]

On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 18:47:52 +0000, Michael Wozniak wrote:


> Whereas heavy drinkers tend to deteriorate and get flaky over time....

I resemble that remark!

[Lorin David Schultz]

William Sommerwerck > wrote:
>
> Having you ever caught the Sonex swiping Buds from the fridge?



The fridge? Hell, they're plucking 'em right off the *plant*!

Not that I have any of my own, of course, but this *is* Vancouver. The
damn things are everywhere. They seem to pop up like wee...

Oh, I get it now...

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)