Arman Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 Hi all, I came across these on Ebay...and the price just knocked me out! http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7335696983&category=3278&ssPageName=WDVW&rd=1 What do you all think, too good to be true? Let me know! -Arman 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyjoe72 Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 Feedback is good, 8 pieces of 12x12x24. What the heck give it a try and let us know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironwoods Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 Hey, it's cut foam, the seller or manufacturer is making a killing. If you know the price is usually higher elsewhere, then you're stealing. What species of Bass, do you fish for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 Foam doesnt trap bass waves. The NRC ratings they include show that the bass traps dont attenuate low bass frequencies! In fact, they affect the low-mid range the most! Go here for accurate information on what you really need: http://www.realtraps.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olorin Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 I think it's well worth trying. I've got some nasty echo in my room, and 48 ft^2 of their 2" foam for $37 looks hard to beat. Thanks for the link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 echos are not bass waves, some real bass traps and/or some foam will damp higher frequencies. You really should test your room to see where the bright spots are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olorin Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 I know echos are not bass waves. That's why I mentioned the 2" foam, not the bass trap. The bass trap, incidentally, looks almost just like Auralex's LENRD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 at the very least, go here and find out what the nulls will be... http://www.harman.com/wp/index.jsp?articleId=131 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 ---------------- On 7/15/2005 9:19:29 AM Colin wrote: Foam doesn’t trap bass waves. The NRC ratings they include show that the “bass” traps don’t attenuate low bass frequencies! In fact, they affect the low-mid range the most! Go here for accurate information on what you really need: http://www.realtraps.com/ ---------------- The NRC ratings they include are identical to the Auralex LENRD bass traps. They're even using the same dimensions and density foam. I'm curious as to what you would suggest from realtraps. None of their stuff is very broadband and thus is going to make it sound wierd. Narrowband solutions tend to have a more noticeable effect on the sound so they inheritanly have a bigger initial "wow factor". But just because there's a bigger noticeable difference doesn't mean that it's a better improvement. I PM'd Arman that I was skeptical just because they're so much cheaper than any of the namebrand stuff and I don't think their middleman excuse can account for the 2.7 times difference in cost. It's just that the more I compare specs and build materials, the more I can't see them being full of crap. So I would vote to go for it and let us know your results. I'm sure a lot of people would be interested if this turned out to be a good product. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formica Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 ---------------- On 7/15/2005 10:23:03 AM DrWho wrote: The NRC ratings they include are identical to the Auralex LENRD bass traps. They're even using the same dimensions and density foam. ... I PM'd Arman that I was skeptical just because they're so much cheaper than any of the namebrand stuff and I don't think their middleman excuse can account for the 2.7 times difference in cost. It's just that the more I compare specs and build materials, the more I can't see them being full of crap... ---------------- They do seem quite interesting... and 2.7x times doesn't seem that bad considering that mass-market consumer-products are usually marked up about 2x in retail stores. Specialty products, like cables *cough*, are marked up much more. Anyone email the retailer for more info? Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJ51 Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 ---------------- On 7/15/2005 6:43:34 AM Arman wrote: Hi all, I came across these on Ebay...and the price just knocked me out! http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7335696983&category=3278&ssPageName=WDVW&rd=1 What do you all think, too good to be true? Let me know! -Arman ---------------- Hi Arman, I purchased product from this company and was very happy doing business with them. As another poster noted, they are very similar to Aurelex product. Their website is http://foambymail.com/ so you can compare this to how much it normally sells for. They sell this in 12 different colors. I did not pick the charcoal gray. I had very good results treating some specific issues in my room with their product. I am using the bass traps in 2 corners of my room and they did provide excellent results in cutting down a booming problem that I was having. I am also using some broadband absorption and wall tiles. I recommend that you go study Aurelex's website though if you are considering treating your room. They have a good paper called Acoustics 101 and it will give you some idea of what to do. I also used Aurelex product in my room treatment and was very pleased. In my case, I was treating a bass problem in one part of the room, early reflection and ringing in another part of the room. My results were better than I expected. Also, you need to be careful not to kill the room by using too much absorption. I hope this helps. John. PS. Hi everyone. I just joined this forum and want to say thanks and what an awesome forum this is. I have learned so much from so many of you and have been reading this forum for about 2 years. Sorry to offer advice on my first post. Nothing worse than a newbie with advice. I'll try not to let it happen again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.4knee Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 DRWHO is correct they very much resemble the Aurlex LENRD bass traps. Yeah give it a shot. If they don't work or do not work as well as you would like you are not out a ton of money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arman Posted July 15, 2005 Author Share Posted July 15, 2005 Thanks for all the help! You're right - $69 is nothing - so if they don't work...no biggie. I'll prob wait a week or 2 before placing an order - I just received my amp last night and hooked it up - WOW - the bass is so crisp and tight and slamming and strong, etc... Anyhow - let me see if any problems arise after a week or so...I might take the plunge. Thanks for the advice John - let us see what happens! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffinator Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 ---------------- On 7/15/2005 10:23:03 AM DrWho wrote: I'm curious as to what you would suggest from realtraps. None of their stuff is very broadband and thus is going to make it sound wierd. Narrowband solutions tend to have a more noticeable effect on the sound so they inheritanly have a bigger initial "wow factor". But just because there's a bigger noticeable difference doesn't mean that it's a better improvement. ---------------- The reason Ethan Winer & Co (Realtraps) focus on narrowband solutions is not for an increased "wow" factor, but rather because they market to a group of consumers (pro audio people) that use RTAs and other equipment to determine what is actually wrong with the room, and need something narrowband to fix it without screwing up what isn't wrong. Sorry if I sound a bit snippy, but Ethan is a friend of mine, and his business practices are very much above board. If anything, the broadband solutions offered by Auralex et al are dishonest marketing strategies - if your room has a standing wave at 400hz, you don't need a trap that absorbs everything from 80Hz-1000Hz - you'll just create more problems... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 Hmmm, is this the same Ethan? http://www.ethanwiner.com/acoustics.html This article supports the use of broadband absorbtion (for the entire audio spectrum). Read his sections on Better Bass Traps and Sidebar: Creating a Refletion Free Zone. The article does talk about narrowband solutions as well, but it certainly doesn't say anything negative about broadband. The problem with narrowband solutions is that they will only work for a single listening position. So yes, it may be useful in the studio but in our homes we have a huge zone of listening positions. I also don't think a broadband solution is necesarily going to screw up something that isn't wrong. For example, let's say you install a typical bass trap in the corner. It absorbs over a large frequency range, but its position in the corner is such that there is more acoustical energy present at the lower frequencies and therefore will have a larger impact in the lower registers (which is where the problem is to begin with). The overall net effect is that the the magnitude of the original problem will be greatly reduced. Broadband absorbtion is also going to improve the RT60 of the room at the same time so it's also a more cost effective approach. The other reason I questioned the real traps is because their NRC's weren't that good in the lower end of the spectrum, thus not making for a very effective bass solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tofu Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 interesting find. i must say, that is quite a nice pricetag if these are on par with auralex's traps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJ51 Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 Great comments by Griffinator and DrWho regarding acoustic treatment. I agree that a professional with the right measuring equipment will give great results in treating the room. Unfortunately in my case, this was way out of my price range. So, I studied acoustics for three months, and took my best shot at treating the room. In my case, I have a living room with wood paneling on three walls and bricks all along the back. The bricks provide some nice free diffusion but I had major issues with the paneling. When my treatment was complete, my bass issues were gone, my reflections were gone, and the room was slightly changed from an overall sound standpoint. The only drawback to the treatment was that I lost some of the diffusion in the center of the room. (Just slightly less alive) This was not unexpected. I plan to use a diffusor array to address the change brought on by the acoustic foam but $$ are holding me back on that right now. My room acoustics were horrible before I did this and I gained far more than I lost and did the whole treatment for very little money. If your on a tight budget and have room issues, this product may help. Regarding the original post that started the thread, I have used this specific product, and I did get great results. If my budget was higher, I would have used high end bass traps, more diffusion, less absorption. Just my .02 Don't shoot the newbie. Bye. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted July 16, 2005 Share Posted July 16, 2005 Have you looked into the curved masonite panels for diffusion? They're really cheap to build and work rather well. Here is the excerpt from the Dope from Hope: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formica Posted July 16, 2005 Share Posted July 16, 2005 I looked around on the internet, and there are very few people who badmouth foambymail.com . You can always find tons of people who promote any item online, but I find negative feedback is usually more informative on a products limitation, even if you disagree with it. The most interesting info so far would be from forum.studiotips.com (note I have no idea of the accuracy of this info, so take it for what it's worth) Auralex representative's comments about these "knock offs" were principally concerning the density of foam, which he said differs from theirs. Foambymail lists 2lb/ft3 in their executive summary but their detailed spec sheet seems to indicate a density of 1.50 - 1.70 lb/ft3. I could not find the density of the Auralex foam to compare. Someone else seems to indicate the Auralex is the same density in the same 1.50 - 1.70 lb/ft3 range, and shouldn't be compared to the 2lb/ft3 mentioned in the info sheet. The same poster also mentions the foambymail foams are polyethers while "As far as I know the Auralex wedges etc. are polyesters. Polyesters are more expensive." But does it really affect performance? I think the density and size are much more critical, given both are open cell foams. In anycase I sent a friendly email to the retailer, and i'll post up more info when i get it. ---------------- On 7/15/2005 2:42:09 PM JJ51 wrote: I have learned so much from so many of you and have been reading this forum for about 2 years. Sorry to offer advice on my first post. Nothing worse than a newbie with advice. I'll try not to let it happen again. ---------------- The only way of loosing the newbee status is by keeping posting... so welcome on board... Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffinator Posted July 16, 2005 Share Posted July 16, 2005 ---------------- On 7/15/2005 4:25:30 PM DrWho wrote: Hmmm, is this the same Ethan? http://www.ethanwiner.com/acoustics.html This article supports the use of broadband absorbtion (for the entire audio spectrum). Read his sections on Better Bass Traps and Sidebar: Creating a Refletion Free Zone. The article does talk about narrowband solutions as well, but it certainly doesn't say anything negative about broadband. The problem with narrowband solutions is that they will only work for a single listening position. So yes, it may be useful in the studio but in our homes we have a huge zone of listening positions. I also don't think a broadband solution is necesarily going to screw up something that isn't wrong. For example, let's say you install a typical bass trap in the corner. It absorbs over a large frequency range, but its position in the corner is such that there is more acoustical energy present at the lower frequencies and therefore will have a larger impact in the lower registers (which is where the problem is to begin with). The overall net effect is that the the magnitude of the original problem will be greatly reduced. Broadband absorbtion is also going to improve the RT60 of the room at the same time so it's also a more cost effective approach. The other reason I questioned the real traps is because their NRC's weren't that good in the lower end of the spectrum, thus not making for a very effective bass solution. ---------------- Yes, that is the very same Ethan. Point taken about the listening position issue. NRC's at the lower end of the spectrum? What are you talking about? NRC stands for "Noise Reduction Coefficient", and, according to the ATSM standards, is an average of the midrange frequency band (250Hz-2Khz) absorption. It has absolutely nothing to do with low frequency emissions, and is fundamentally irrelevant to comparisons of bass traps. Let's get on the same page on terminology, bro. Absorption rates across given frequency ranges are specified by either Absorption Coefficient or Noise Reduction in Sabins. Either way, the NRC means absolutely zippo to the efficiency of a bass trap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.