avatar

podgorny

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 2,352 Member Since: 27/01/2011

Lead

Feb 28 16 11:22 PM

Tags : :

Hey Thomas, I'm curious what is your take on this. I've seen a few of WSDG's recent rooms with ceilings like this, and I'm assuming it's an attempt to maintain stereo image toward the back of the room? Thoughts?

image
Quote    Reply   
avatar

thomas northward

Silverado

Posts: 140 Member Since:10/02/2011

#1 [url]

Mar 2 16 5:17 AM

I can't see any obvious use for such structure. It's not diffusion, or with very very limited efficiency / scattering. It's too shallow, too wide and bottom of wells are (time) aligned. It's not a good absorber either. Has shallow layers of what looks like foam (Basotect like I guess). Has an office type of false ceiling right above - which are usually very poor absorbers centered around 500Hz to enhance speech clarity in office environments. So it's very unlikely the interaction of the back of the suspended panel is calculated to have any sort of membrane effect wrt to the false ceiling. And traditional membranes would need a sealed cavity and rockwool like material in there to lower the frequency and widen the Q - to make them work sufficiently well (unlike micro-sloted type of systems that look like membranes but aren't and work at a distance from a bare wall). "Weird" impedance of the ceiling would also make it hard to get any such thing working. The long 'fins' also considerably rigidify the back panel but to a varying degree with various depth and in one axis, in such ways that it would be very difficult to have a any sort of reliable and useful modal behaviour from the back plate.

The back plate is also very thick (looks like 28mm or 30mm), with added rigidity, I can only guess it creates serious LMF & LF issues.

It could be that the area between the fins is opened to some degree though, giving access to ceiling treatment. But why go through all that trouble when there are much more efficient ways to go about these things.

This is unlikely to enhance stereo perception in the back of the room. A good RFZ, or proper wall treatment will do that just fine.

My guess is it's only an attempt at preventing flutter echo (or cleaning it after the facts) at sweet spot. Or plain visual improvisation...

Last Edited By: thomas northward Mar 2 16 5:19 AM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

thomas northward

Silverado

Posts: 140 Member Since:10/02/2011

#2 [url]

Mar 2 16 5:29 AM

​The thing we did that comes visually the closest to that ceiling panel is this diffusor design on the walls that is calculated to work within particular incidence angles limit. It is a lot deeper, narrower and a lot more complex. Took me many days to calculate the sequence. It's still very different from the WSDG panel.image

Quote    Reply   
avatar

maarvold

Aqua Marine

Posts: 3,205 Member Since:23/01/2011

#4 [url]

Mar 4 16 1:51 PM

thomas northward wrote:
​The thing we did that comes visually the closest to that ceiling panel is this diffusor design on the walls that is calculated to work within particular incidence angles limit. It is a lot deeper, narrower and a lot more complex. Took me many days to calculate the sequence. It's still very different from the WSDG panel.image

I'd like to hear that room!!  Also like that the glass reflects sound up... I don't understand why more people don't do this.  

Quote    Reply   
avatar

podgorny

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 2,352 Member Since:27/01/2011

#6 [url]

Mar 4 16 2:36 PM

maarvold wrote:
Also like that the glass reflects sound up... I don't understand why more people don't do this.  


Acoustically, it makes perfect sense. However, many designers opt to not use it because it tends to acumulate dust more quickly, and has a tendency to reflect overhead lights (which it appears was taken into consideration when choosing where to place the lights in this studio).

Kyle Mann :: www.kylemann.com

Quote    Reply   
avatar

maarvold

Aqua Marine

Posts: 3,205 Member Since:23/01/2011

#7 [url]

Mar 5 16 10:12 AM

podgorny wrote:

maarvold wrote:
Also like that the glass reflects sound up... I don't understand why more people don't do this.  


Acoustically, it makes perfect sense. However, many designers opt to not use it because it tends to acumulate dust more quickly, and has a tendency to reflect overhead lights (which it appears was taken into consideration when choosing where to place the lights in this studio).

 
Hadn't thought about the lights... probably because I have a one track mind when it comes to sound.  Thanks for pointing that out.  

Quote    Reply   
avatar

weedywet

Ruby Baby

Posts: 6,005 Member Since:20/01/2011

#8 [url]

Mar 13 16 11:53 PM

podgorny wrote:
...I've seen a few of WSDG's recent rooms with ceilings like this, and I'm assuming it's an attempt to maintain stereo image toward the back of the room? Thoughts?

 

 
i'm assuming it's because it "looks like a studio'

Quote    Reply   
avatar

thomas northward

Silverado

Posts: 140 Member Since:10/02/2011

#9 [url]

Mar 14 16 7:13 AM

maarvold wrote:

thomas northward wrote:
​The thing we did that comes visually the closest to that ceiling panel is this diffusor design on the walls that is calculated to work within particular incidence angles limit. It is a lot deeper, narrower and a lot more complex. Took me many days to calculate the sequence. It's still very different from the WSDG panel.image

I'd like to hear that room!!  Also like that the glass reflects sound up... I don't understand why more people don't do this.  

I don't either.

Room is fairly short, with ER aimed at drums enhancement. 
 

Quote    Reply   
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help