Armstrong Soundsoak equivalent ?

mistertones · Post by **mistertones** » Fri Jan 27, 2006 1:07 am

Hi All,

In one of our old studios we used a product called Soundsoak on the walls. This essentially consisted of low density fibreboard panels with two different layers, one of which had many small holes drilled into it, and faced with a "hessian" style fabric. It worked quite well in calming down the "liveness" of the room, ie. it absorbed a fair bit of upper-mid & high frequency energy, without making the room sound entirely "dead".

Ideally we would have liked to use it in our new room, as well, but unfortunately Soundsoak as a product doesn't seem to exist any more.

Can anyone recommend or suggest a suitable alternative ? There are some fairly limited specs here:

http://www.owenscorning.com/around/soun ... abrics.pdf

We had I think the Soundsoak 60 product in an "A" mounting.

We have found something called "Softsound" made by Hodgson & Hodgson:

http://www.acoustic.co.uk/literature/softsound.pdf

but the sample they sent us is a mineral fibre product rather than the boards we were looking for, and I'm worried it may actually be more absorbent than we want. It's also seriously expensive...!

Thanks for any comments or ideas,

Cheers,

Ian

AVare · Post by **AVare** » Fri Jan 27, 2006 2:57 am

I am not clear on what you mean by "I'm worried it may actually be more absorbent than we want".

Andre

knightfly · Post by **knightfly** » Fri Jan 27, 2006 3:40 pm

IF you use standard 3 PCF mineral wool with a cloth cover, putting thin painter's drop cloths ( about 1/2 mil plastic) on under the cloth will keep some of the room's brightness. Typical cost for 2" mineral wool would run around .45 a square foot, plus the cloth... Steve

You can experiment with the "treble" control by trying different thicknesses of plastic BEFORE you add cloth; go just a bit brighter than you like, and the cloth will reduce it a small amount.

mistertones · Post by **mistertones** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:25 am

AVare wrote:I am not clear on what you mean by "I'm worried it may actually be more absorbent than we want".

Andre

Well, the room is a decent size, has "ideal" average dimensions, splayed walls, a sloping ceiling and we will be building broadband absorbers & corner traps so I'm confident that the LF behaviour will be reasonable.

In the higher frequencies, I personally I don't like the sound of a room lined entirely with mineral wool - which is what the "SoftSound" product is - I feel it sounds too dead. True we could always add diffusers afterwards to liven it up again, but this seems backwards when it's been lined with something costing £32 a square meter...

knightfly, interesting idea about the thin plastic under material, thanks...

Ian

AVare · Post by **AVare** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 5:45 am

Thanks Ian, makes sense now. Have you considered covering the absorbent material with slats to reflect and diffuse the highs?

Good luck!
Andre

mistertones · Post by **mistertones** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 7:39 pm

AVare wrote:Thanks Ian, makes sense now. Have you considered covering the absorbent material with slats to reflect and diffuse the highs?

Good luck!
Andre

Thanks ! Yes, we may use wood to liven things up if necessary. The nice thing about the "Soundsoak" material was that it was a great product straight out of the box - we covered three walls with it and once all the gear was in there was a nice balance of live/dead without the need for any extra panels or diffusers - quick and straightforward with a great result, which is why I was hoping to find it's successor or an equivalent...

Cheers,

Ian