Acoustical Solutions or Auralex LENRD bass traps

Check out http://www.auralex.com/testdata/test/lenrd.pdf

for technical data on the absorbtion band distribution of the Lenrd traps

Stevecham,

I looked the numbers compared to these

Tri-traps

Test were made in the same laboratory but sample size was different and one was corner tested and the other against a wall.

Here are the results at 100HZ;

64 linear feet of Auralex LENRD Bass traps = 60 Sabins (A test)
32 linear feet of GIK Tri Traps = 98 Sabins (J Test)

The Tri-Traps are slightly bigger 17" by 17" on the triangular sides versus 12" by 12" for the LENRD's.

The J test is done in the corners = relative advantage to Tri-Traps test.

The A test is done simply against a wall = relative disadvantage to LENRD test results

Very roughly speaking the A Test (against wall) has HALF the absorption compared to a corner at 100 Hz, as the corner is a more advantageous position for bass trapping. (This is a gross approximation)

Normalizing the above data (very very roughly) - here is the conclusion;

One linear foot of GIK Tritrap is very roughly equivalent to 1.6 linear feet of Auralex LENRD in absorption at 100Hz. (when both placed in corners)

It is probably the higher density of Tri-Traps and the fact that they are slightly bigger, which gives them the edge.

Obviously the difference can be evened out by applying 60% more LENRD coverage than Tri-Trap for a given room.

=> the implication is that both options can work equally well and choice comes down to aesthetics/practical issues. In reality, neither will do much for sub 100 Hz room modes for which I think the only practical option is room design and a PEQ. Both should help dramatically with reverberation above 100HZ when appropriate corner coverage is implemented(all four corners treated).

Of course, other absorption designs from other reputable acoustic companes such as Realtraps will work very well too. These are certainnly not necessarily the best options....just a couple of examples. I do not endorse either product and have absolutely no affiliation with either. (Caveat my math might be rusty....so don't take this too literally)

You may want to check out the following links. If you're in to simple DIY you can equal or better about anything commercially available.

http://forum.studiotips.com/viewtopic.php?t=536

This one illustrates the relative cost of room treatment normalized to the effectiveness of the absorber.

http://forum.studiotips.com/viewtopic.php?t=534

http://forums.studiotips.com/viewtopic.php?t=535

http://www.bobgolds.com/AbsorptionCoefficients.htm

TONS of info here for those so inclined.

Thanks Shadorne for extensive analysis. In my room, the Lenrds work well and I found them conveninet and ost effective for my set up. I certainly realize there were other options and for me it was a matter of conveneience and experience with Auralex's products in my home recording studio that led me in that direction. I'm a happy camper in any case. They certainly do make a positive difference in my listening room. Could it be better? Of course! That's one of the reasons why I enjoy this hobby.

I really appreciate the very useful information that all of you have provided. You have helped me a great deal!
Craig