Anti acoustic treatment philosophy - does this exist?

[ReelZerosAndOnes]

Hey Tape world,

I'm wondering if there are certain schools of thought that are not into acoustic treatment? I've recorded in both pro facilities and at various home studios and in all honesty I prefer the sound of my voice when there's a bit of "room" there so long as it's not overkill in the shower type thing. When I've tried using reflection filters and DIY treatment I don't find it enhances the sound. Quite the opposite I get a lot of mid range uglyness. I've also tried proper vocal booths but again I find the sound good but unnatural. I'm a folk muso so that kind of pop sound isn't really what I'm after. I'm just wondering have I lucked out with ok rooms that by chance happen to have wonky enough walls and fluked positioned bookcases for the outcome to be ok to my ears or do I just have really weird sonic taste? Are there certain camps that are into this sort of thing. Working woth the verb rather than against it? Thanks

[kslight]

I think a lot of the function of acoustic treatment is to correct, alter, or otherwise control a room that was built with compromises (not designed for audio, not able to build out, limitation of size, change of plans, etc).

In my experience in the pro studio (not talking about home studios), acoustic treatment is most customary in the control room environment, where you don't really want the sound of the room coloring your listening ability, but outside of iso booths and studios stuck in the 70s, its not unheard of to have an "untreated" live room (or minimally treated to create an acoustically ideal but still "live" room) and other relatively lively spaces?just up to the personal preferences of the studio's owner. I personally enjoy recording in a really well designed live room?but sometimes it is "easier" to make a dead room than a really good live room.

[Snarl 12/8]

I believe Nick Sevilla's mixing room has no "treatment," per se, although it was carefully constructed from the studs up to sound good. I've always wanted to ask him to talk more about it. He's had good results in there too.

[JWL]

It's called ignorance, frankly. Of course I am biased so take it with a grain of salt.

If you have tried various products or treatments and haven't heard an obvious improvement, then you are using the wrong products or treatments.

[JWL]

Most live rooms with a reputation for good sound have treatment in them, sometimes extensive treatment.

Remember, it's not just a matter of "live vs. dead" (ie, controlling reverb time), but also controlling frequency response and ringing.

One example is Sound City's old live room.... they had a ton of absorption on the ceiling in that room.

[JWL]

Bottom line for me is this: no matter how good an untreated room sounds, it can always be better with appropriate treatment.

[SafeandSoundMastering]

If there is it would be nonsense. As a room can be any dimension, volume and of any shape and of any surface materials you need to start with a base/known reference.

That is essentially as close to linear response as possible within the realms of practicality. Additionally... ideally with an even as possible time domain decay response (with longer decays in the low end tapering to the highs). When this is achieved it can be tweaked for taste.. i.e. a little more live or dead sounding using absorbers/diffusion.

If we do not have a base reference to work from there is less chance of satisfying most listeners to any given piece of music/audio in any of the multitude of spaces it will be listened in.

Hope that explains.

cheers

Barry Gardner
SafeandSound Mastering
Audio mastering studio tour

[roscoenyc]

Bottom line for me is this: no matter how good an untreated room sounds, it can always be better with appropriate treatment.

Agreed.

Sometimes you come across what I call a "fluke" room that sounds pretty good as is.

Every one of them I've ever been in sounded even better with some well place treatment.

[vvv]

If we do not have a base reference to work from there is less chance of satisfying most listeners to any given piece of music/audio in any of the multitude of spaces it will be listened in.

Audio mastering studio tour

I have not seen that said better.

[Nick Sevilla]

I believe Nick Sevilla's mixing room has no "treatment," per se, although it was carefully constructed from the studs up to sound good. I've always wanted to ask him to talk more about it. He's had good results in there too.

Hi,
My room is a converted garage, the construction is from 1951, and we took it down to the frame.
Changes included making the ceiling open up, hugging the original roofline, and not using a fake flat ceiling. This made for more unequal reflections coming from the ceiling.
The walls and ceiling were built as a one layer isolation treatment, which was as follows, from the outside wall in:
Rockwall, 3/8"
Original wall frame reinforced from every 24" to every 12" having a vertical stud.
Insulation batting rated at 31dB of isolation.
1lb/sq ft mass loaded vynil. We put it on every wall and the ceiling, completely covering everything, except for the holes for electrical conduit. There were about 500lbs of it total.
Auralex channel frames, made of steel, for hanging the next layers. This was every 16" vertically, all over the walls and ceiling.
Double layer of standard drywall, mounted on the Auralex channels. This decoupled the inner wall surfaces from the vynil and the outer walls, and created more isolation.
We also used flexible caulking, which helps dampen vibrations between drywall edges, furthering the isolation a little bit more.
The floor was done floated, with special rubber u channels that support the floor beams. 2"x6" floor beams every 16"; and regular flooring afterwards, I.e. plywood subfloor, followed by moisture barrier and IKEA wood flooring on top.

I measured the original garage before doing this treatment, and got a difference of 42dB isolation, which was close to my goal of 45dB. If I had needed more than this, it would have gotten ridiculously expensive, requiring a double wall construction to get only 6-8dB more isolation.

As to room treatment, as in acoustic panels, after using the room for about 10 months, I installed some Auralex foam and a wood frame behind the speakers, to lessen the reflections coming from the walls back to the listening position.
Other than having furniture all along the back wall, there is no other treatment. The room is a nice combination of live sound inside, with the added convenience of isolation from the outside world.

Cheers!

[JWL]

Nick, no bass traps in your room? That's surprising to me.....

[joninc]

read the brad wood tape op interview. he talks about how he likes his live room with no treatments...

[tjcasey1]

A live room is a lot like a favorite reverb - it works well for some recordings, but it sucks when it doesn't work and it's printed on the tape. You can't adjust it or get rid of it.

On the other hand, if you always like the way your room sounds, good for you. It's better (and easier on the wallet) than always HATING the way your room sounds!

[accordion squeezist]

here's some room treatment for people who just wanna play and have some goddam fun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7s9A3s8iv8

[JWL]

Nice vid. That room suits that style of music for sure (assuming the recording was actually made in that room, and that room is what I'm actually hearing).