Alright, you guys know those cupholder-trays you get at fastfood restaurants when you go through the drive-thru? You know the ones that you could put four drinks in? Anyway, i know how to get a ton of those and i was wondering if that stuff would help at all in reducing the echoes and stuff in my room/studio? Or what about that coney foam you get at like fabric stores? I'm not sure is it density, shape, material etc. that matters? Let me know what you think.
Cup holders as studio foam???
- Thread starter Srshwa
- Start date
missdjcoley-cole
Banned
Well at least I know u went to see "Hustle and Flow".
ONe
p.s. That movie just helped McDonalds Out!!!(lol)
ONe
p.s. That movie just helped McDonalds Out!!!(lol)
NOTABLEMAGNIF
New member
LoL mannn i saw that crap on Hustle and FLow. Cupholder wont work they got holes in them too. Plus your room is gonna look like a dump.
M
mistaox
Guest
Take ur behind to the local Home Depot..look for a Product called "R-MAX R-Matte Plus 3 Warmwall"
its actually thermal insulation but..It works wonders..they sell it in 4X8 Ft sheets for $10.00 each...its basically 3/4" foam laminated with aluminum foil..its light and very effective.
Then you can cover that with Accoustic foam pads...Most music gear stores sell that for $4.00 a pop.
its actually thermal insulation but..It works wonders..they sell it in 4X8 Ft sheets for $10.00 each...its basically 3/4" foam laminated with aluminum foil..its light and very effective.
Then you can cover that with Accoustic foam pads...Most music gear stores sell that for $4.00 a pop.
Last edited by a moderator:
Srshwa said:
Actually depending on the desing of the cupholders there is some functionality to using these to reduce echo.
See, what happens is the sound travels in though the slots but cant escape as easisly (gets trapped inside the cone like shape) as it went in...So, depending on the design yes it "can" reduce echo.
Foam materials act more to deaden sound (or reduce reverb), which is seperate form killing echo.
I say give it a shot, and if it works it works right?
NOTABLEMAGNIF
New member
Don't try to justify using you Mc Donanld and Burger King Trash. lol Just get the real ISH.
how will it look when someone walk in your lab and see that crap on the wall. I be thinkin THIS Dumb a** is a joke. Save your Dough get real Foam. Real sound Proof looks alot neater,.
how will it look when someone walk in your lab and see that crap on the wall. I be thinkin THIS Dumb a** is a joke. Save your Dough get real Foam. Real sound Proof looks alot neater,.
NOTABLEMAGNIF said:
I don't know about you but I'd rather save my dough for gear instead of overpriced pro audio acuoustical treatment.
If you're operating a commercial studio that's one thing, but if a little ingenuity results in cost savings and functional results then, kudos to you. If you can afford the good stuff then bravo!
If it works who gives a sh*t? Especially it your product comes out hot.
I'll be the first one with to have pictures in my liner notes of me in the lab with Checker's crates all over the wall right next to a gold plaque...
Now that's grimey!
M
mistaox
Guest
The Aurelex foam is less than $4.00 a square foot at Sam Ash...
http://www.samash.com/catalog/showitem.asp?ItemID=27912&TempID=2&departmentid=6
if you cant spend $50.00 to sound proof a booth the right way, then dont bother...you might as well just staple crumpled up newspaper to the walls....shyt why are you even recording.
http://www.samash.com/catalog/showitem.asp?ItemID=27912&TempID=2&departmentid=6
if you cant spend $50.00 to sound proof a booth the right way, then dont bother...you might as well just staple crumpled up newspaper to the walls....shyt why are you even recording.
Last edited by a moderator:
First of all lets get one thing straight...
Foam does absolutley nothing to "soundproof" anything...
Complete Acoustical treatment requires different materials for different results.
If you your looking to "soundproof" then you should be looking for dense, heavey materials...foam is the opposite of dense.
If you're looking to deaden the travel of sound waves then foam of various shapes and placement is what your looking for.
To diffuse heavey echos and reverbs in large rooms then you need some sort or device that "catches" those types of waves. Much to the cupholder concept, but they do make professional boxes that work based on that same theory.
It is also rule of thumb that you should avaiod parallel shaped rooms (ie box shaped) to further deaden the refection or sound waves.
So to all who think foam is an all purpose sound treatment is highly mistaken.
BTW,
Auralex foam a $4/sq ft is rather expensive compared to like materials and suppliers and the amount you'll need to effectively treat a good sized room.
Also consider I could tile or carpet my house for about $1/sq ft, if that puts it into perspective.
Sound waves can't read brand names!
Foam does absolutley nothing to "soundproof" anything...
Complete Acoustical treatment requires different materials for different results.
If you your looking to "soundproof" then you should be looking for dense, heavey materials...foam is the opposite of dense.
If you're looking to deaden the travel of sound waves then foam of various shapes and placement is what your looking for.
To diffuse heavey echos and reverbs in large rooms then you need some sort or device that "catches" those types of waves. Much to the cupholder concept, but they do make professional boxes that work based on that same theory.
It is also rule of thumb that you should avaiod parallel shaped rooms (ie box shaped) to further deaden the refection or sound waves.
So to all who think foam is an all purpose sound treatment is highly mistaken.
BTW,
Auralex foam a $4/sq ft is rather expensive compared to like materials and suppliers and the amount you'll need to effectively treat a good sized room.
Also consider I could tile or carpet my house for about $1/sq ft, if that puts it into perspective.
Sound waves can't read brand names!
Covert Ops...
New member
Bravo(1) said:
You're somewhat correct. Since the cardboard in the cupholders is a basic pressed cardboard and it is extremely thin, it is not going to absorb to much, and the frequencies that it will absorb will probably be over 20k. Also, Low frequencies will pass right through it because the have enough energy too.
It might be able to do a little diffusion, but not enough to be effective because of its thickness and mass.
The only reflection you will get out of it again is the hig frequencies.
You really should think of acoustics as another piece of gear that can dramatically improve results. There is a reason that Pro Studios drop over half their budget on acoustics. It has a drastic affect on how you hear thing, even more so than your monitors, therefore you shouldn't cheap out on acoustics, if you really are serious about your music. Altho i guess if you REALLY are serious about your music, you should be going to a pro studio in the first place.
Covert Ops... said:
Well,
Actually I wasn't refering to the material of the cupholders but more to the shape of the cup holders...
The professional device that the cupholders are trying to emulate are made of wood so the actual density of the material wont come into play there.
My point was more to support the acoustical theory that sound from the source travels in a given direction easily...in this case though the slots of the cup holders but reflected sound doesn't travel with the same energy. So once the sound has been projected, passed though the openings of your "wave trap", it cannot pass out of the same openings that which it entered with the same energy as it entered...said waves become trapped and therefore your echo is eliminated.
Last edited:
Covert Ops...
New member
oh. you're talking about a trap. well then you're WAAAAAY off.
these cupholders don't meed ANY of the requirements for an effective trap
1. they aren't an enclosed space
2. they have no absorption properties
3. they have no mass
4. the distance inside them is only about an inch or so, and for a trap to be able to "trap" something, the size needs to be equal to 1/2 the wavelength of the lowest frequency to be absorbed.
this means that a 1 inch trap will trap everything above 13,000hz. Not very effective.
these cupholders don't meed ANY of the requirements for an effective trap
1. they aren't an enclosed space
2. they have no absorption properties
3. they have no mass
4. the distance inside them is only about an inch or so, and for a trap to be able to "trap" something, the size needs to be equal to 1/2 the wavelength of the lowest frequency to be absorbed.
this means that a 1 inch trap will trap everything above 13,000hz. Not very effective.
Covert Ops... said:
Yeah,
When people were using egg crates and cup holders this is what it was more comparable to...not foam. And being raised a studio baby I do remember when people used things like that!
I suppose at that time there was some audible difference due to only what I presume was the quantity of the the stuff they put up on the walls.
So would 100 mini traps be as effective as one large professional one? Probably not, but would there be an audible difference? Just ask anyone who used the stuff at that time...
I am by no means trying to position this stuff as a quaity alternative to traps, auralex and the like. I'm just trying to remind folks of the days prior to the commercialization of Pro Home Audio when you worked with what you had and at the end of the day you make some damn good music!