@audio2design Thanks -- I’m trying to correlate the factors you mention. The room is quite irregular in some ways, so it’s lack of closed-ness and rectangularity makes it hard to know what the standards might be. I know there are ways to do it, but I’m quickly getting over my head.
I have one sub dedicated to listening and another in the house I can try out along with the first to do measurements. I am convinced about swarms/arrays but I cannot go there, in this room. I will do it eventually, but for now, I’m optimizing a less-than-perfect room.
Thanks for the info, re: Foley.
This seems like the mortal blow, since this technology is their killer app (if I gleaned their message correctly):
I have one sub dedicated to listening and another in the house I can try out along with the first to do measurements. I am convinced about swarms/arrays but I cannot go there, in this room. I will do it eventually, but for now, I’m optimizing a less-than-perfect room.
Thanks for the info, re: Foley.
This seems like the mortal blow, since this technology is their killer app (if I gleaned their message correctly):
Aside from all that - what do you all think about using activated carbon in bass traps? For me it of itself makes some senseActivated carbon actually does have some useful acoustic absorption properties. That much is true. Somewhere I have a couple of papers and some research on that. It is even used in some types of "ear defender" headsets, for industrial hearing protection. It's better than foam for that. However, in studios, it does not perform better than more traditional bass traps, and doesn't even get to the same level of efficiency. Then there's the cost, and the weight... it would have to be much, much better than other types of bass trap to be justifiable.Comparing my local prices for materials it would be ca. 10x more expensiveAnd there you have it! It mostly certainly will not be ten times better, nor five times, nor even twice... To justify an increase of ten times in the cost, one would expect to have a rather substantial increase in performance. That isn't the case. There are already very good bass traps that can do the same job for a fraction of the price, and at a fraction of the weight: panel traps, limp membrane traps, Helmholtz resonators, even plain old porous absorption. All are proven to work at low frequencies, and to work effectively, at lower cost and lower weight. So there's no real benefit here... except to the pocket of the manufacturer!