| Author |
Thread: Sound Proofing?? |
    
New member Username: Vexhold
Post Number: 3
Registered: Jul-05
|
| Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2005 - 12:38 am: |
|
Ok this is my plan for the single wall atatching my theater to my house...
12" concrete wall
2-4" air pocket
2x4 studs with poly insulation in between each
2 layers of QuietRock overlapping
carpet
Drapery
Hows that look?
Only problem now is the ceiling and the door..
Any ideas? |
|
|
|
Bronze Member Username: Em69
Post Number: 12
Registered: Mar-05
|
| Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2005 - 08:18 am: |
|
To make it even more effective:
1. Delete the 2-4" air pocket, but add resilient channels to the studs on the walls and ceiling. This provides the separation and increases your useable space.
2. Use batt insulation instead of poly
|
Silver Member Username: Joe_c
Oakwood,
Ga
Post Number: 624
Registered: Mar-05
|
| Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2005 - 09:14 am: |
|
I disagree, I left a 5-6" pocket between my insulation and the firm board mounted on the back side of the studs. If you read about sound travel, a small open space inbetween sound proof areas is more effective than filling the whole space. I live in a townhome and I have had this thing up to 122db at 12:30am and they coudn't hear a peep. |
Silver Member Username: Joe_c
Oakwood,
Ga
Post Number: 625
Registered: Mar-05
|
| Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2005 - 09:16 am: |
|
Also , if you can float the ceiling. That is to create new runners connected to the side walls onlyfor the ceiling. And for the door buy a solid composite door from home depot/lowes , they rn about twice as much as the std doors but are worth it. |
Bronze Member Username: Em69
Post Number: 14
Registered: Mar-05
|
| Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 07:38 am: |
|
5-6" of air pocket is unecessary and inefficient. The resilient channels provide a sufficient air space, plus, it reduces the transfer of vibration.
I've done plenty of research on sound travel. |
Silver Member Username: Joe_c
Oakwood,
Ga
Post Number: 674
Registered: Mar-05
|
| Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 08:00 am: |
|
That's ok, we can disagree. |
New member Username: Vexhold
Post Number: 8
Registered: Jul-05
|
| Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 11:15 am: |
|
so explain what you mean by the resiliant channel |
Bronze Member Username: Em69
Post Number: 15
Registered: Mar-05
|
| Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 07:36 am: |
|
Resilient channels are typically constructed from 25-gauge sheet steel and contain holes in the web of the channel to provide flexibility. The fundamental purpose of the resilient channel is to provide a means for attaching gypsum board to the supporting structure without actually permitting the board to directly contact the structure. It is the de-coupling of the gypsum board from the framing that provides the improved sound transmission loss.
|
Silver Member Username: Joe_c
Oakwood,
Ga
Post Number: 682
Registered: Mar-05
|
| Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 01:11 pm: |
|
em69, I agree that resilient channels are very effective, I just think for this application a pocket will suffice. Given the cost and labor going into the alternative. That was my disagreement. |
New member Username: Vexhold
Post Number: 10
Registered: Jul-05
|
| Posted on Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 11:31 pm: |
|
this is what i originally planned |
Silver Member Username: Joe_c
Oakwood,
Ga
Post Number: 720
Registered: Mar-05
|
| Posted on Friday, July 22, 2005 - 11:23 am: |
|
Looks good to me. |
Bronze Member Username: Em69
Post Number: 16
Registered: Mar-05
|
| Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 07:19 am: |
|
Staggering the studs is the best way of doing it. |
Upload