I do some tech work at this University's recording studio here in town, and in studio A instead of a "live room" we have one of those medium sized wenger rooms. I'm not exactly sure about the dimensions (I have to check on them).

The guys who previously maintained the room hung these wooden 4'x4' panels from hooks in the wall, with acoustic foam on one side of the panel and flat thin plywood on the other side. Based on my observations of seeing people do sessions in this room, I'm guessing the motivation for creating panels like this was that if an engineer wanted to make the small room (which is barely big enough to fit a jazz trio in) sound more "live" he/she would hang the panels with the plywood side facing out and the foam facing the wall. The reverse could produce a more "deadened sound."

Now, after reading Ethan's articles on acoustics and a few acoustics books to boot, I've figured out that this is not exactly the right way to go about doing things in this situation. For one, the acoustic foam is so old and abused that it is actually falling in dusty pieces onto the raddy, thin carpet that lines the floor of the wenger room.

My question is this: should I suggest taking these panels down from the wall, and replacing them with different, more diffusive panels? Or are wenger rooms not really meant to be "re-treated" acoustically in this way? Is there a better way to open up a wenger room like this, or should I focus on more important things in these studios like getting rid of the horrible comb filtering coming off of the console which is way too close to the glass? Keep in mind that the budget is EXTREMELY TIGHT in this studio!

I know this is a lot to ask in one post, but after reading your articles on acoustics I'm really very humbled by your knowledge on the subject matter.

I spec similar panels all the time - but larger, and with cotton or 703 on the soft side. Normally, I spec these for situations where tracking and mixing must be done in the same space so acoustical requirements are very different.

Also, with the floor standing panels, you can easily use them not only as reflective, but you can also angle them to help minimize some slap. Not sure if your space has that option or not - maybe another hook on the ceiling would allow an angled hanging?

Kevin,

> should I suggest taking these panels down from the wall, and replacing them with different, more diffusive panels? <

In a small booth you generally want absorption rather than diffusion. And usually as much as possible. As I often say, "Small room ambience is bad ambience."

> Or are wenger rooms not really meant to be "re-treated" acoustically in this way? <

I'm pretty sure that booth would benefit from more, and thicker, absorption than what it came with. If you have only a small budget and need to DIY your own panels, check Bryan's site Sensible Sound Solutions for prices and delivery options. The link is right under his alter ego Shirley's name above.

--Ethan

ok, thanks a lot for your replies and advice!

a couple of things. I really need to keep the cost down of materials for rebuilding these panels, so should I go with the cotton on the soft side or should I just stick with 1" OC- 703? The cotton definately seems more cost effective but will the quality of the absorbtion be compromised? Thanks again for your help, Ethan and Bryan.

nevermind. I think I made a mistake with the cost difference of cotton versus 703. The better question is should 1" be sufficiently better than the acoustical foam that previously lined the absorbtion panels, or would 2" do the job right?

1" 703 will do a better job than the foam that was there. If it were me, I'd have a mix of 1" and 2" so you can 'tune' things as you need to based on the situation.