Author Topic: Home Studio room acoustics: Hard wood or Carpet floors?  (Read 8454 times)

Nico Hartt

  • Subsonic
  • Posts: 17
  • Honor: 3
  • Beginner Trance producer/DJ
    • https://soundcloud.com/nicohartt
    • Twitter is https://twitter.com/nicohartt
    • View Profile
Home Studio room acoustics: Hard wood or Carpet floors?
« on: February 03, 2016, 08:54:04 pm »
Hey guys!

I have a basic home studio set up. iMac, HSM80s, nothing fancy but have been trying to learn more about room acoustics and treatment in order to get the most out of the space I'm working with which brings me to a very short question.

Is carpet floors or hard wood floors better for the overall sound in a room, especially when it comes to mixing? Or is there really any noticeable difference in the way sound travels through the room?

lopryo

  • Guest
Re: Home Studio room acoustics: Hard wood or Carpet floors?
« Reply #1 on: February 03, 2016, 10:56:00 pm »
this is probably the best free resource I've ever found regarding room acoustics: http://ethanwiner.com/acoustics.html

here is a section specifically on the benefits of hard wood floor over carpet:
Quote
The following is from an exchange that took place in the rec.audio.pro newsgroup in May, 2003:

Bill Ruys asked: Why it is recommended to have bare (un-carpeted) floors in the studio? One web site I visited mentioned that a bare floor was a prerequisite for the room design with diffusors and absorbers on the ceiling, but didn't say why. I'm trying to understand the principal, rather than following blindly.

Paul Stamler: Carpet typically absorbs high frequencies and some midrange, but does nothing for bass and lower midrange. Using carpet as an acoustic treatment, in most rooms, results in a room that is dull and boomy. Most of the time you need a thicker absorber such as 4-inch or, better, 6-inch fiberglass, or acoustic tile, and you can't walk around on either of those. Hence the general recommendation that you avoid carpet on the floor and use broadband absorbers elsewhere.

Lee Liebner: the human ear is accustomed to determining spatial references from reflections off of side walls and floor, and a low ceiling would only confuse the brain with more early reflections it doesn't need. Everywhere you go, the floor is always the same distance away from you, so it's a reference that your brain can always relate to. Top

John Noll: Reasons for having wood floors: they look good, equipment can be rolled easily, spills can be cleaned up easily, provide a bright sound if needed, sound can be deadened with area rugs.

Ethan Winer: In a studio room, versus a control room, a reflective floor is a great way to get a nice sense of ambience when recording acoustic instruments. Notice I said reflective, not wood, since linoleum and other materials are less expensive than wood yet sound the same. When you record an acoustic guitar or clarinet or whatever, slight reflections off the floor give the illusion of "being right there in the room" on the recording. It's more difficult to use a ceiling for ambience - especially in a typical home studio with low ceilings - because the mikes are too close to the ceiling when miking from above. And that proximity creates comb filtering which can yield a hollow sound. So with a hard floor surface you can get ambience, and with full absorption on the ceiling you can put the mike above the instrument, very close to the ceiling, without getting comb filtering.

Dave Wallingford: I've always preferred wood floors for a few reasons: 1) It's easier to move stuff around, 2) You can always get area rugs if you need them, And the main reason: 3) Pianos sound like crap on carpet. Top

Shew

  • Sub Bass
  • *
  • Posts: 114
  • Honor: 11
    • iamshew
    • alexshewraymond
    • View Profile
Re: Home Studio room acoustics: Hard wood or Carpet floors?
« Reply #2 on: February 03, 2016, 11:22:35 pm »
thanks for the link lopryo, i'm looking into acoustically treating my apartment so this could be really helpful
Twitch Music love | always trying to channel my inner Martin Doherty