Anyone ever used this wall treatment for the front wall behind a pair
of electrostats (like Quads)?

http://www.silentsource.com/afoams-p...tter-wall.html

I'm consider this or other kits on the same site. I'd like to hear
folks experiences.

Thanks,

ScottW

I've never tried that product but it looks like a good idea on paper.

"S888Wheel" wrote in message
...
I've never tried that product but it looks like a good idea on paper.

What do you think of the pricing? Seem reasonable?

ScottW

Check out Auralex products. I have dealth with them, and been very happy.
Their staff is VERY knowledgable. It's a little on the expensive side, but
worth it.



ScottW wrote in message
om...
Anyone ever used this wall treatment for the front wall behind a pair
of electrostats (like Quads)?

http://www.silentsource.com/afoams-p...tter-wall.html

I'm consider this or other kits on the same site. I'd like to hear
folks experiences.

Thanks,

ScottW

"ScottW" wrote in message
om
Anyone ever used this wall treatment for the front wall behind a pair
of electrostats (like Quads)?

http://www.silentsource.com/afoams-p...tter-wall.html

I'm consider this or other kits on the same site. I'd like to hear
folks experiences.

It's a drop in a bucket - just 18 or 24 square feet of absorptive material.
Mostly for looks in that tiny of a dose unless your room is exceedingly
small.

First rule of thumb is that the effectiveness of absorptive material in a
room varies with the ratio of the surface area of the absorptive material
divided by the surface area of the room. Run the numbers for your room...

If you check out the manufacturer's web site, this is just a small part of
what they consider to be a full treatment. Please see
http://www.primacoustic.com/index.html .

If you want to spend this kind of money but get more benefits - check out
http://www.silentsource.com/silentsource-closeouts.html . The sonix
pyramids don't look nearly as cool, but you get more than twice the square
footage for the money.

What do you think of the pricing? Seem reasonable?


I didn't catch the price. What I have in my room cost less than 150 bucks and I
would bet is at least as effective if not much more effective. I suspect what I
have done doesn't look as good though. Some day I will fix that.

(S888Wheel) wrote in message ...

What do you think of the pricing? Seem reasonable?


I didn't catch the price. What I have in my room cost less than 150 bucks and I
would bet is at least as effective if not much more effective. I suspect what I
have done doesn't look as good though. Some day I will fix that.


Do you know who the manufacturer was and the supplier where you got
it?

That looked like quite a few square feet of material for $150.

There is quite a variance in absorbtion data on the sites I've
looked at (particularly the freq at which it begins to have an
effect). I don't have any method of determining what would benefit my
room.
I'm torn between just giving it a shot or spending some money first
to actually characterize the room. Still I long ago realized perfect
accuracy doesn't always equate to good sound.

ScottW

Do you know who the manufacturer was and the supplier where you got
it?

That looked like quite a few square feet of material for $150.



I was including the cost of the rug hanging behind it. The foam was 80 bucks.


There is quite a variance in absorption data on the sites I've
looked at (particularly the freq at which it begins to have an
effect). I don't have any method of determining what would benefit my
room.
I'm torn between just giving it a shot or spending some money first
to actually characterize the room. Still I long ago realized perfect
accuracy doesn't always equate to good sound.

ScottW





The frequencies at which absorption starts to take place is related to the
thickness of the foam. It think that is why the rolls of foam in the corners
work so well for me. The rear wave is pointed directly at those rolls. Any
first reflections have to go through a lot of foam. The rest of he foam just
deadens the ambient reverb of that end of the room. The curtains and the record
shelves with all the collectibles on them further deaden and diffuse the room.
I'm sure you noticed there were no empty walls.

S888Wheel a écrit :


The frequencies at which absorption starts to take place is related to the
thickness of the foam. It think that is why the rolls of foam in the corners
work so well for me. The rear wave is pointed directly at those rolls. Any
first reflections have to go through a lot of foam. The rest of he foam just
deadens the ambient reverb of that end of the room. The curtains and the record
shelves with all the collectibles on them further deaden and diffuse the room.
I'm sure you noticed there were no empty walls.

Since he started his therapy with me, Scott "Lunatic" Wheeler stopped
smashing his head against the walls... I guess that soon he will not
need anymore wall foam. :-)

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"ScottW" wrote in message
om
Anyone ever used this wall treatment for the front wall behind a pair
of electrostats (like Quads)?

http://www.silentsource.com/afoams-p...tter-wall.html

I'm consider this or other kits on the same site. I'd like to hear
folks experiences.

It's a drop in a bucket - just 18 or 24 square feet of absorptive material.
Mostly for looks in that tiny of a dose unless your room is exceedingly
small.

First rule of thumb is that the effectiveness of absorptive material in a
room varies with the ratio of the surface area of the absorptive material
divided by the surface area of the room. Run the numbers for your room...

If you check out the manufacturer's web site, this is just a small part of
what they consider to be a full treatment. Please see
http://www.primacoustic.com/index.html .

If you want to spend this kind of money but get more benefits - check out
http://www.silentsource.com/silentsource-closeouts.html . The sonix
pyramids don't look nearly as cool, but you get more than twice the square
footage for the money.


Anyone care to comment on this info included on the ETF Acoustic
site on measuring and correcting room response.

Do not be fooled by advertisers peddling 2 inch thick absorbers as
having great effectiveness at low frequencies. The methods use to
derive this specification are in no way similar to this application.
The lowest frequency of absorption is dependent apon absorber
thickness rather than "exotic high end technologies". A 6 inch thick
absorber can be very effective down to approximately 600 Hz - 800 Hz,
a 3 inch thick absorber can be effective to frequencies as low as 1200
Hz - 1600 Hz.

ScottW