Under my bed, gathering dust, are two large boxes of cassette and reel to reel tapes. Every now and then I have a listen to some of the old song ideas to see if I may missed any gems (forever hopeful!) The old four track tape formats sound pretty good, very forgiving. And such a simple way of recording. This is what I used to record with before Protools! James
(the Melos echo was great!)
Room modes (peaks and dips in frequency response) are directly related to the dimensions of the room. Room mode calculatorThis room mode calculator is helpful to determine where the problem frequencies are in your room. Another method to determine the problem frequencies of a room is to acoustically measure a room with a calibrated mic and software. There are many software programs on the market, and even combined with a budget calibration mic, will provide useful information about the acoustics of your room. The main issue is that rooms with larger peaks and dips (nodes) provide a more challenging starting point than a room with less severe and more dispersed room modes. Rooms that are reasonably flat to begin with require far less acoustic treatment to achieve an accurate listening environment that a “lumpy” room. Also, lower frequency room modes are more difficult to tame. A 50Hz peak is significantly more difficult to control than a 100Hz peak. When facing a losing battle it may be necessary alter the internal dimensions of a room by building additional angled walls, so as to disperse room modes.
I’ve had a bit of break from the blog, so my apologies! We have recently released a new compact panel which I prefer to call an “acoustic block” as it’s pretty chunky. The idea behind this one was to be able to offer a high performance panel at a reasonable price. It offers absorption approaching the SA600-75 broadband panel, as well as looking pretty funky. Being quite a tall panel (90 mm max) it casts a significant acoustic shadow. The value of this in a small footprint panel (300 x 300) is that they can be spaced up to 100 mm apart for increased efficiency. The Soundbite is perfect for treating first reflections in a project studio, listening room or home theatre. They also work well and look great as a ceiling cloud, mounted on MDF. $99 for 12
I recently had a customer ask me whether I thought the Auralex Mopads are worth the money. Wouldn’t any old piece of foam do?
It’s a good question. Essentially the theory is if you decouple the monitors from the supporting furniture it will improve the focus and accuracy of the monitors. I have the Auralex Mopads myself, and they are a well designed products that perform as advertised. I did an experiment with different grades of foam in place of the Mopads to see if they would perform as well. I must say, it does depend on the thickness of foam and the density. It is possible to make your own, but it takes a degree of experimentation.
The one thing Auralex Mopads won’t do is influence the acoustics of your room. If you have significant room modes and low frequency problems, isolation pads will make negligible difference.
A customer requested I modify a BT120/80 bass trap so he could use two of them as an vocal isolation area. The rear of the BT120-80 was covered with 3mm MDF, with some also inserted for extra rigidity. When it’s not in use it can be placed in a corner as a bass trap to help with the mix! This also makes a great wide frequency Gobo. If I get any more requests maybe this could go into production. 
I have to admit it, I’m a gear snob. Not an outrageous snob (if it’s not Neve or Neumann it’s rubbish!) but if it’s chinese I generally consider it to be crap. I’ve had a bit of Behringer gear for non-critical applications and it’s generally fine. But I’ve tried some Chinese microphones and I find them generally pretty harsh and over hyped in the top end. Pretty bad. Recently I decided to add a tube mic to the collection, as a “character mic”. I looked at the Rode NTK (good mic – but I have plenty of Rode mics already) the AKG Solidtube and the CAD M9. After doing the usual forum trawl I thought I might take a punt on the CAD.
Anyway, it arrived yesterday and I eagerly set it up side by side with a Rode NT2-A and ran both channels through the FMR Really NIce Pre. First I recorded some acoustic guitar, and then some vocals. The CAD sounded a pretty nice, better than expected. Not hyped, and with a very similar tonal balance to the Rode, and just a hint of valve “fizz”. And a bit noisier, but not too bad. I can see myself using it fairly regularly. I must just have to re-think my gear snobbery!
I recently had the opportunity to pre and post test a room that had been treated with the CSR Soundchek plaster system which involves hanging plaster on channels supported by a rubber insulation system. It’s a very easy system to use and reasonably economical. While it won’t completely soundproof a room with high SPL’s, such as a drum room, it certainly reduces transmission of sound significantly. http://www.gyprock.com.au/resources/filemanager/datasheets.aspx?fileIteration=155
The alternative to this system would be to use Green Glue with plasterboard.
Does anyone else suffer from gear performance anxiety? Like us all, I get lots of emails regarding performance in the sack (the bedroom that is), but really, its the performance of my gear in the rack that keeps me awake at night. I was scouring the forums to get a few opinions on my Protools 96 interface, and how it compared to the 192. Many opinions of the 96 rate it as barely better than a 002! So, is it time to panic? Are all those recordings I have done substandard? Have I sabotaged a hit single along the way? Could I have had fame and glory, only to be cut off at the knees by some dodgy converters? Hmmm….I’m not so sure that is the case. Sure, now I want a 192, but I have recorded some very nice drums even with a Digi 001. I even didn’t mind the Audiomedia 111 card. So, in the general scheme of things, how would you rate the following in terms of importance.
The artist. The song. The producer. The mix. The recording gear. (I’ve lumped a few factors together here).
I recently visited a very well equipped home studio (more like a professional studio built on a home!) which consisted of a control room,a drum room, an iso booth and a vocal booth. The client had noticed that low frequencies were an issue in the vocal booth. That is, certain frequencies taking off, and an overall sense of “boxiness” in the room. When the vocalist backed off the mic, the take was virtually unusable. The dimensions were 1 x 1.5 x 2.4m. The booth was mostly brick and glass, and about 75% of the walls had been treated with 50mm Sonex acoustic foam. Sonex is good quality foam, but like all relatively thin acoustic foam, the Sonex was absorbing virtually none of the low frequencies. This is a very common scenario, and when you buy an acoustic product make sure to look at the absorption coefficients across the spectrum. Total NRC rating is pretty much useless for audio applications. A 50mm product will typically absorb around 25% (.25 AC) at 200Hz and 10% (.1 AC) at 100hz, which is pretty much ineffective. We tried a few thicker panels, but ended up installing the SA600/150 (600 x 600 x 150mm) acoustic panel. We only needed to install three of these panels on the door to effectively control the low frequency resonance. The SA600/150 absorbs at 100 % at 200Hz and 60% at 100hz. This is a good example of how bass absorption should be considered a necessary part of vocal booth acoustic treatment. A brick or concrete voiceover booth will be more reflective than a plasterboard booth, but both situations require bass control.
A friend of mine called me yesterday and said he had $1900 to spend on a microphone and a mic pre. He asked me whether he should spend more on the microphone, or more on the pre. The mic is to record vocals and acoustic instruments, standard home studio applications. This is a really good question and I would love some opinions on this. Personally, this would be my choice. Firstly, a nice clean neutral sounding mic like a Rode NT2-A (there are a couple of others in this price range as well) for around $600. I would then spend the remaining $1300 on a good quality straightforward mic pre like the Focusrite ISA – One. There are other budget pre’s which are good such as the FMR Really Nice Pre, which is great value. Any thoughts?
Sound Acoustics Twitter Feed