Floor: wood, tiles?
Home > Home Recording Forum > Live Sound Reinforcement > Floor: wood, tiles?
Posted on Dec 11, 2008 11:29 pm
Moonbathing
Inactive Since: Jul 30, 2008
Hello everybody,
First of all I would like to say hi –I’m new in this forum and this is my first posting.
I’m about to renovate a small room in order to make it my first home studio, and would like to ask you about the kind of floor I should (try to) have. Now, this is a small room (9 x 16 ft, the ceiling is a little bit more than 7 ft), with walls made of brick and/or concrete blocks, a metal, garage-style door, and a window (mostly glass and metal, no wood).
I have a concrete floor (old, dirty, uneven) so I’m thinking of having a new floor made of… wood? Tiles? Linoleum? I’m asking if it makes sense to invest a lot of money (an important variable) in a wooden floor for such a small room; or maybe it does, and more than that, a wooden floor is the only kind of floor that will work.
According to what I’ve been reading:
• Wood absorbs and diffuses sound. (What about tiles? Are they a bit like glass or metal, reflecting everything?)
• Wood also gives a ‘warmer’ sound.
• Linoleum might reflect sound just like concrete.
Along these lines wood would be better, right? However, according to Paul White (‘Basic Home Studio Design’, Sanctuary Publishing, UK, 2000) “… wooden floors can be a real problem... it’s very difficult to get rid of boomy resonances.”
I am… puzzled. I’ve found this kind of mixed evidence many times. Any kind of advice, information, comment, etc. will be appreciated.
Thanks a lot,
Moonbathing
[ Back to Top ]
Dec 12, 2008 01:37 am Wood doesn't really absorb and diffuse much under 25kHz... Nor does it really give a 'warmer' sound. It reflects high end very efficiently (just as drywall does).
That said - I love wood floors. And arguably, the fact that wood floors are floated to some extent could arguably give them - well, "give" - which could explain less "ping" at some frequencies (though real data doesn't support that).
So if you like wood or wood laminate, go for it. I find it more "cozy" which is part of the comfort, which in a small way is part of the process.
The big thing is broadband absorption -- By far, the most neglected part of most home (and many smaller professional) studios.
No disrespect with Paul, but we disagree wholeheartedly on wood floors - They don't cause "boominess" in a room, just as carpeting won't remove it. Broadband trapping and nothing else, will. You can't overdo it (as you can so easily ruin a room with foam), you can't really "improperly" place them (although certain placement is much more effective than "less efficient" placement).
A room with boomy resonances is going to have them no matter what the floor material is. It might be more apparent to the ear and have a slightly longer decay on wood, but that's where it ends.
More reading (which will undoubtedly lead to even more reading) here if you're bored:
www.massivemastering.com/...Room_Setup.html
Dec 12, 2008 09:28 pm Hi there Massive Master,
Thanks for replying. Yes, sometimes (or, uh, many times) experimental/statistical evidence doesn’t support what we see as very evident truths.
I’ve already taken a look at the link you posted and I don’t think it’s ‘dumbed down’ as you wrote there –at least for me it isn’t. I’ll keep on reading it, and read more books and articles too, but I’m starting to think I might spend less money on the floor (meaning I’ll end up choosing tiles) and invest what I save in acoustic absorbers.
Moonbathing
Dec 13, 2008 01:18 am If I wanted a cheap, good floor, I'd probably roll out the linoleum over wood subfloor. Just for a little "give" (and slower heat transfer from the cement below).
No doubt on broadband absorption though -- GIK would be a top choice on quality *and* affordability. If you can muster it, go with their TriTraps in the corners... I started out with their 244's in the corners (before they offered the TriTraps) and upgraded to the TT's this year. Big deal, worth it in every way.
