WOW.....

I just spent an hour reading that.......

Let me let all of you know, that is the first time I have read that. Here's my conclusion:

EVERYONE THERE IS PSYCO!

lol, no not really.

OK:

DP: is this the conversation you were talking about? Seems like a different one.

The first thing i noticed was that Ethan seemed to be the only one in the group that had actually tried 703 or 705. Everyone else was content to bash it, but they never have actually used it.

There was a lot of below the belt shots going on back and forth. A good amount of them were directed at Ethan, but he was dishing a good amount out there himself.

THIS IS BAD BUSINESS.

So in a way, i think there is a side to him that I have never interacted with before.

Alot of things were said about his products: let me try and clear some up because our design is very similar to his:

1.) There is no magic to what we are offering, just a better alternitive to foam products.

2.) Traps are not a new idea, but the use of rigid fiberglass is. It was actually created for acoustic purposes. Originally developed for ceiling tiles, rigid fiberglass is a well developed product that has been tested for specific uses including studios.

3.) Rooms smaller than 1500 cu ft can be treated and made to sound very pleasing. My personal B mix room is below the 1500 mark and when I treated it, all was well, down to about 60-65 Hz.

I am never going to say that treatment can cure any size room, because that is false. ANY room somewhere, at some frequency, will have some problem. That's life, and you learn the quirks of a room and move on.

All we are trying to do is provide people with a great alternitive to foam. Acoustics math junkie or not, when you put them in a room and run a mix with them, you are going to hear way better results than with foam. Not because of what our companies do, but because of what Owens-Corning did.

I hope that this clears things up a little.

I read that whole debate on the acoustics site - for months. Basically you have side one with people who insist on scientific support for everything; there's nothing wrong with that. Then you have side two (Ethan) who makes claims such as "there is a null at all frequencies at a 1/4 wavelength... blah blah blah" I'm with Zumbido - if it works, it's good - There is no question in my mind that Ethan and the side opposite are knowledgeable when it comes to acoustics. They also claimed that Ethan was on their site with the idea to sell his products and didn't support his claims the way they thought he should.

As far as panels are concerned- anyone can make them. Everyone on the acoustics site did agree on the following:
1. All small rooms have problems. 2. Start in the corners with panels made from Owens Corning 703 or 704 compressed rigid fiberglass. This is broad band treatment. Go from floor to ceiling. filling the space behind with loose fiberglass. 3. The corners where the walls meet the ceiling can be treated the same way as the corners. 4. These panels should be covered with cloth but don't need wooden frames. I also learned that OC 703 is expensive and that Roxul RXL-40 is basically the same stuff but a fraction of the price. I think it would be far cheaper to make them - I've got the stuff ordered to do just that. Just my observations.
ceb

Look guy's, I'm not looking to trash Ethan or his "traps". I stated very simply that he does nothing that you can't do yourself very easily, and that his data that supports his claims is sketchy. Yhea the "debate" got pretty nasty at times, but I can honestly say that Eric's side of the argument was based on science, and Ethans was based on emotion and smoke and mirrors - he never actually answered any of the questions asked of him. Regards

I didn't get any of that that from what I read in the thread (not that I 'get' anything).

Blake,
If you really read through those posts for an hour, and came away with the idea that Ehtan Winer was the only person there with any experience with 703 or 705 or any of the Roxul products, then you need to go back and read it again.

Zumbido,
"I visited the www.studiotips.com site. It's riddled with such poor English I left."
Puleeeezzzzzzzzzz !!!! :rolleyes: Sorry, but the internet in general is not the place to be if you're looking for proper English! Remember, www stands for World Wide Web ? At least a few of the folks over there are European so yes their English can be pretty poor. If you can find your way past that, "the facts is the facts" ( how's that for English ? )ie; the science stays the same. Your assertion that the folks at "studiotips" are-" probably a bunch of old geezers with scopes and calculators that have never ACTUALLY realized an idea or product, but are always ready to tell what they know."- is based on what ? Look up Eric Desart and have a look at some of the rooms the guy has designed/built and then re-think your silly statement. I think it's great that you built working absorbers without any acoustic knowledge, but that doesn't give you liscense to say that anyone who uses such knowledge is some kind of quack. I've done the same myself with great success and I don't know the math behind them, but, I'm not selling them, and I'm not making specific claims regarding their performance at any given frequency.

That was merely my observation. No one came out and said that they use 703 or 705 in their studio except maybe one other person I think? If you can find a quote from someone on those posts, shoot it over. I could be wrong, but i can't remember.

Look,

I'm definatley not saying that Ethan is truthful all the time, or that he is always right. What I am saying is that 703 and 705 works. That's why we sell traps using it. I have used foam as well, and the difference between the two is definatley audible, especially around 60-120 HZ.

My intention with this whole ordeal was never to say anyone is right or anyone is wrong. Everyone is going to have their own opinion. What i am saying is that we use 703 and 705 exclusivley. What it comes down to, is making your room sound the same at any place in the room, whether it be a back corner, or the sweet spot. If you can achieve that, your set.

Great traps for Bear and Bison. Not food for Rabbits and Skunk.

.

Zumbido,
"My point is that MANY know-it-alls never actually apply their 'expertise' to a physical product. "
Ok, point well taken and probably true, but as it applies to the acoustics forum, I think you're wrong. There's lots of practical knowledge there if you can get past the bad English

Blake,
I think the general concensus at the acoustics forum is that 703/705 is equal to or better than competing foam products DEPENDING on the application and implementation ( ie: 1"or 2" of 703 probably won't be better than 4" of foam, although depending on how it's mounted [airgap] you may be able to get similar results ). It's also a good deal less expensive, so for the same $$ you can get superior (at least on a quantitative basis)results. As I mentioned in my last post I have built some corner broadband absorbers as well as a couple flat panel absorbers ( you can see them in the photos of my studio in the user archives here ) and am very happy with the resullts - no I don't have any test data - all I can say is that my room sounds good( better than it did without the absorbtion ) Regards

.