Please confirm you want to mark all posts read
Not logged in
With this treatment of the sliding glass door, your lower threshold is125Hz. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t this range address primarily lower midrange and up,
and ignore bass issues.
Couldn’t you make the panel 3″ or 3 1/2″ or use your carbon technology? Is it because to reach bass frequencies yo’d have to make the panels too thick? Sounds like a good challenge to me.
We have done this approach. The weight will be in excess of 500 lbs. for a 24″ x 72″ x 8″ d panel
Thanks for your response. In this application, in front of a sliding glass door, would the carbon technology perform no better than your foam treatment?In any case, 500 lbs hanging from
a curtain rod, and not addressing any spurious bass waves, doesn’t seem a good solution. Would the following configuration using carbon panels in front of the sliding glass door treat the bass
issue? 4 2′ x 5′ x 4″inch deep standing panels??
You are not understanding the difference in treatment types. Low frequency treatment has mass and thus weight. Middle and high frequency energy issues can be treated with lighter and thinner material types. You must define what wall frequency and amplitude issues you are having and then assign the appropriate treatment technology to that wall location. Rememeber that the room only sees energy. It does not concern itself with your wants or needs. Physics is the law. Everything else is just a suggestion.
Devices in use: Phone (3), Desktop (5)