Tube Trap Isothermal Stuffing

[gg85]

I'm in the process of making some tube traps to help with low-frequency issues in my studio. I have some rock wool available to me to use as isothermal stuffing. The density of the rock wool is 60km/m³.

Firstly, is it better to use lower or higher density material for this purpose? And secondly, how do I determine the correct amount of stuffing to use, and is there a problem with putting more than what is required?

Thanks!

 

[tomlinmgt]

The acoustic gurus say lower density with LOTS of thickness for absorbing energy below 80Hz.They actually say pink fluffy is better than rockwool or rigid fiberglass at absorbing in the low bass region...but the catch is that it has to be VERY thick. How thick depends on several factors, but figure on at least 16". Also, keep in mind that it's pretty much impossible to absorb the really low stuff with a porous absorber. For the low stuff, you need something with a membrane.

 

[Bob in WI]

I'm in the process of making some tube traps to help with low-frequency issues in my studio. I have some rock wool available to me to use as isothermal stuffing. The density of the rock wool is 60km/m³.

Firstly, is it better to use lower or higher density material for this purpose? And secondly, how do I determine the correct amount of stuffing to use, and is there a problem with putting more than what is required?

Thanks!

Let us know what you do & how it works out.
My bass traps are not as effective as planned & I'm looking for something better.

And, welcome to AK.