Talk:Bass trap

Professional sound production Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Professional sound production, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sound recording and reproduction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Professional sound productionWikipedia:WikiProject Professional sound productionTemplate:WikiProject Professional sound productionProfessional sound production articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

‹See TfM›

Physics: Acoustics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Acoustics Taskforce.

External links

--Eggsound (talk) 20:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC) I want to know why the links where removed, they were very useful, I put them back because its hard to find info on the web on this subject.[reply]

You can still find them in previous versions of the page: go back to the article and click the history tab. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.23.87.243 (talk) 19:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--Robert (talk) 17:52, 14 December 2008 (UTC) I wonder about the claimed resonances for bass traps built of plywood sheets. Why would a thicker plywood sheet have a lower frequency of resonance? Thicker sheets are stiffer, and hence resonate at higher frequencies. I don't have the data to correct the error, but clearly the ordering is wrong.[/quote][reply]

because it's mass is greaterVexorg (talk) 20:13, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you followed this comment by removing the section which listed the plywood resonances. I will take this up. Let's say you had three pieces of fine rosewood, shaped 2 inches by 8 inches, and you tuned them each to a particular pitch for Western music. You might even suspend them and place a large pipe resonator below it, but ignore that for a moment, since you need not build a marimba (which see) to conduct this thought experiment.

Now, I will bet you dollars to donuts that the thicker piece of rosewood would resonate at a lower pitch than the thin piece of rosewood, and the medium thickness piece would be in between. In other words, your reasoning is flawed, and when you inculcate "clearly the ordering is wrong," you err. So to answer your question, I would say perhaps you need to consider the way percussion (nay, I should say musical) instruments resonate, and how in virtually every case I can think of, the larger and more massive the resonator, the lower the frequency it produces. I like to saw logs! (talk) 06:04, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this calculation doesn't reflect the resonant freq of the wood, but instead what frequencies are allowed through or filtered through the thickness of the wood. the thicker the wood the higher the filtering allowing lower frequencie to be trapped or absorbed! 187.155.95.109 (talk) 19:18, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs some serious attention

It was written by someone not really understanding the concept. I've corrected some stuff and cleaned up some bad diatribe, but there's a long way to go. Vexorg (talk) 04:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On further inspection whoever compiled this article was in no doubt stoned. I shall try and make some sense of it over the coming weeks. Vexorg (talk) 04:44, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Image of the blue fabric covered panel absorber

I have removed it as it s NOT a bass trap. a slab of mineral wool does not have absorption characteristics conducive to bass trapping in the form it is presented in the picture.

Typical specs. Absorption rolls off consierably belwo 250Hz

http://www.owenscorningcommercial.com/docs/specification/Fiberglas700Series.pdf

To show such a picture in an article about bass traps is grossly misleading. Vexorg (talk) 23:04, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Panels such as this are commonly sold as bass traps. Installed in multiples in rooms they can help control bass, along with controlling mids and highs. There are other bass trap designs, too, some better at attenuation because of placement (like in corners) or construction. These other designs deserve to have an image in the article but none have been submitted. The panel image is fine, and suits the topic well enough. There is no need to remove it so that we have no image.

About the fiberglas image text: panels such as this could contain a number of elements, none of which will be visible to the consumer. It is not necessary that they be filled 100% with fiberglas. Binksternet (talk) 07:31, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So your only real argument is that you don't want an article without an image. Also your argument regarding the contents of the fabric slab is only refinforcing my argument that this image is not suitable for the article. in fact if it's not filled 100% wioth mineral wool it would absorb even less bass

The article needs an image of a bass trap, not an image of a mid-high early reflection panel absorber which doesn't actually absorb bass to any degree. I will try and find a copyright free image of a real bass trap, as should you. In the meantime this image is inappropriate and I shall again remove it. Vexorg (talk) 16:43, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]