Another benefit to Tecsound is it's pretty malleable and comes in (very) sticky backed version. Makes it quite versatile alongside just adding mass & damping between various layers. I've found it useful to wrap up and over sides/corners/weird planes, weird bulkheads/air con ducting, pipes and other difficult to fit drywall to places. Have also installed directly under a floor above in tight situation/no access to above floor (stuck under that floor with tile backer washers as 2nd mechanically fixing in case glue fails over yrs), adding a mass layer (and some impact damping) directly below floor with wide air gap/insulation, then the normal dense drywall back onto ceiling below. The Tecsound 50 is easiest to mould around shapes, but doable with the Tecsound 100 too which is double the thickness and offers best sound reduction of the two (is also a tecSound70 which not tried, presumably in between the 2 mentioned).
While I really appreciate you on being one of the few people in our industry who's NOT spreading BS unlike the major youtube educators, but here I share an opinion in disagreement, and hope you take it positively. MLV/Asphalt/Rubber sheets these are just as you said - damping agents. More precisely said - Constraint layer dampening. The key to understand here is, they dampen the movement (caused by transmitted sound vibrations) of the adhered layer by acting as a constraining layer and not directly the vibrations anyway. Hence, they are not soundproofing material technically, but decoupling material, easily said damping material. These can't be compared in a scenario where mass is concerned. For blocking transmission of sound, you need mass. For blocking the vibrations to travel through the structure, you need mass along with a cld or any viscoelastic barrier to constraint that mass to be affected by the vibrations of a magnitude that the system is not capable to resist mechanically. It sort of acts as a mechanical barrier for the vibrations to travel through. As if it made the walls even stronger to be moved. It can't be compared in terms of mass. It's the visco-elastic force that's working here, NOT mass. Lastly, about the cost, you don't necessarily need to add full sheets of MLV on the entire wall. CLD layers work by sandwiching them between 2 layers. Decoupling, resilience! And there, you can basically add strips of CLD throughout the perimeters and some in between to form some sort of airtight frame between the two layers that would help in maintaining the airborne isolation, and the 2 walls won't touch either. The air cavity formed inside the windows of MLV strips will act as a spring just like MLV. Just like in floating floors! You have trapped air cavities which work like spring. But they move the resonant frequency of the system wildly away from what you might have calculated, that's why ventilation is provided. While it's much complex with floors and floated bunkers, with walls the purpose and application is rather simpler. You don't necessarily need to worry about resonant frequency unless the walls further are connected to an exterior coupled structure!
Sound like you know what you are talking about. I appreciate your input. I think my take is still keep it simple, do what we know works. If you could show me exact comparisons with and without MLV in your description I would do it, but there is too much risk and money in home studios to just play with materials.
@@soundproofyourstudioAbsolutely correct! It's not meant to be experimented along in a DIY home studio build. It WILL Fail. Simulations, precise calculations and then very accurate execution based on proven and compatible designs is what would make it work. (My intention behind the comment was to share the exact good reasons to use it for, and not for mass, which is usually the case with DIY builds, and a lot of money is wasted). Unforunately, I don't think anyone in our small niche has been able to compare the measurements of a same room build with and without MLV. It would be a costly affair, haha.
Good read but In my opinion there's a key point being missed. While Tecsound acts as a damping material, it also has mass concentration (Why?). It performs different than an open-cell rubbery sponge or decoupling alike resilient bars. kinda of a good of both worlds. Just as it can block water it can also block air (Maybe not in full but close to drywall) for high-frequency noise, due to its density. So, it's not just about vibration damping. It also blocks airborne sound. Drywall isn't very effective at dealing with impact noise because it doesn't offer much mechanical damping due to its lack of elasticity. Drywall's mass alone isn't sufficient to block high-energy frequencies, especially in the low octave bands (30-300 Hz). As frequency decreases, the importance of damping increases significantly. When discussing damping and deadening sound, It will be about aspect but it's important to analyze the sound patterns (incoming noise) in a range of octave bands. Only after than you know what you're dealing with and can do the cost analysis to address the specific frequencies involved. I hope I didn't come as arrogant because I get that sometimes.
I put a few layers of this down on a floor where conversations could be heard clearly. Not exactly what it’s made for but just if anyone else is considering it. Made ZERO difference conversation can be heard clearly still through 3 layers - I wouldn’t bother with this stuff it’s super heavy annoying to use and does very little if anything.
That’s the thing, a lot of people tend to forget that it’s not as simple as just applying / filling a void or so with material. Its completely useless if you’re not considering: • Acoustic Sealants • Covering ALL gaps / leakages … Etc. Airborne noise will make its way one way or another if you don’t apply it properly.
All gaps were sealed, skirtings removed and masonary re-plasterd to just above the newly applied part E approved direct to joist subfloor which was perimeter sealed. The tecsound was purchased to improve that system on the advise of the acoustic consultant who also approved the detail drawings for the subfloor. It made no difference whatsoever.@@ShakzT
Thanks for letting us know. I was going to get this stuff for my bedroom. Just because I can hear the tv very clearly from downstairs. Now I know not to bother with it.
Rub er does release the most of the energy in form of kinetic energy in the opposite direction its magnituds worse than Butyl or Tecsound. Don't use rubber for dampening.
Thanks! What about the theory that but putting it in-between your two drywall layers creates another decoupling effect (thus further dispersion) and the MLV also being a different material to the drywall attacks frequencies differently? just wondering based on other youtuber videos. :)
Yes, you are right on that rec sound or MlV acts as a constrained layer damping system. This can help with isolation. I think my big thing is looking at cost benefit since MLV and tecsound can be expensive. I am also finding that with acoustics you can use MLV to great affect for low to mid bass absorption with drywall. The two system s work together for both isolation and acoustic control. Lots to think about on this subject
I haven’t seen much discussion about how to manage The top-plates of double wall construction. Do you lay rafters over both decoupled walls (in which case are they not now coupled?) or do you couple the ceiling to the innermost wall and just cap air gap? Seems like a trade off between rigidity and bracing vs. Inadvertently undoing the decoupling that helps so much in the first place.
i just wanna say that my studio space is 2400mm x 2400mm so having this much mass in 15mm thickness is super important to me. but i live in one of the most expensive cities in the uk. it makes sense theyre making tecsound in the uk cuz we dont have huge spaces for our studios or whatever. i just started tecsounding my studio and my godx is a roll of tecsound 100 heavy
What about using on a double wall system, outside 5/8” OSB and Hardy board siding with 2”x 6” stud wall with open cell spray foam to fill to the depth of the stud (5.5”) then inner wall 2”x4” stud with unfazed fiberglass insulation, 2 layers of 5/8” drywall staggered joints between layer and acoustic seal caulk on the joints, then plywood paneling of at least 1/4” or 3/8” for the inner finished wall. Would that get me closer to STC level of 70 ?
Even if it magically works, 65 is the highest STC rating there is! Practically, depending on the precise construction and dimensions of the space, you might achieve an STC of 45-50
@@grayveeacoustics on his chart of double wall insulated double Sheetrock he gets stc levels of 63. Open cell foam 5” deep or slightly more has a better stc level than just fiberglass or rock wool. The 5/8” osb outer wall with 3/4” thick hardy board (a cement material) meets or slightly exceeds the dual 5/8’s Sheetrock so you are matching density for density inner wall vs outer wall. Slightly or better absorption and air tight with the open cell spray foam. I just measured some engineered paneling and it’s a 4’x8’x7/16” thick sheet, as heavy as 5/8” Sheetrock so essentially my inner wall would have 3 layers. And the stc chart goes higher than 70. If I achieve 65 or higher I will be happy. This is in a professional recording studio 40’x36’ with a mechanical room with bathroom, live room roughly 24’x28’ then a vocal booth, lounge roughly 12’x16’ and master control room roughly the same size, this does not take into account of wall thickness. Exact measurements will be after the final coat of paint is applied
@@stevereese6488 part of the reason why double wall double sheetrock is seen to be achieving such high numbers is the partial M-S-M functioning that allows for a good isolation in low end, and less real estate needed for internal acoustics too. You need to get it right with decoupling all the external structuers, CLD, and routing the Ducts very strategically. Say, if you have no connected structures, a perfectly floated floor on which the walls are built, and no ducts going through the walls, and you have made the wall leaves resilient enough, then sure you can achieve a high STC rating, but once all these practicalities flow in, not everything works out as efficient. Where I come from, building brickwalls, RCC structures isn't a problem, so it's rare that I have to build studded walls, a handful of situations where I built one, I found the mess it is to work with. It's not easy to evade flanking transmission with drywall as it is with brickwall. Sure, room modes are stronger, more real estate needed to tackle with resonances, but in isolation, it's worth it! on a side note, try to give your CR a little larger space.
@@grayveeacoustics yes the double walls will be isolated. The live studio room and mastering control room are vaulted ceilings with associated acoustic treatments, clouds,etc. the main building is 12’ high walls, the bathroom, vocal booth, lounge and interlock type access from lounge to either control room or live room are 8’ ceilings, the interlock rooms if you will have 2doors, double walls/ceilings one is rough outside measurement of 6’x8’ to the live room, the control room interlock double door system is roughly 4’x4’ all solid core fiberglass exterior grade doors with acoustic seals. Actually all doors are 3’ wide solid core doors. The control room interlock extends into the lounge. The vocal booth has a small dual window system that each pane is 1/2” thick safety glass like windshield glass that has that film in the middle of the glass and not standard float glass like the glass used in home windows. So there is an inner glass set at an angle leaning out at the top and a control room side glass with the same angle lean, also a small dual window to the live room. But again the dual room system is isolated from the outer walls, not attached. We are going with mass loaded vinyl between the 2 layers of Sheetrock, the inner dual wall base plate will sit on 1/4” rubber or mass loaded vinyl strips then acoustic seal every joint, floor and ceilings. We already have the recording equipment with both analog snakes and Ethernet snakes. All outlets are wrapped with puffy and acoustic seal around it. The hvac is handled by split units that have a quiet mode function, also an ERV unit in conjunction with a dehumidifier that the supply and return ducts for the live room vocal booth and control room go through an insulated box with zig zag inner deflectors to route air (and sound) in a zig zag pattern, flow rate regulated for the fresh dehumidified air between 100 to 200 cfm, anything higher than 250 to 300 cfm will be detected by the recording equipment. I live on Texas gulf coast (liquid air 99% of the year).
FREE Soundproofing Workshop: www.soundproofyourstudio.com/workshop
Another benefit to Tecsound is it's pretty malleable and comes in (very) sticky backed version. Makes it quite versatile alongside just adding mass & damping between various layers.
I've found it useful to wrap up and over sides/corners/weird planes, weird bulkheads/air con ducting, pipes and other difficult to fit drywall to places.
Have also installed directly under a floor above in tight situation/no access to above floor (stuck under that floor with tile backer washers as 2nd mechanically fixing in case glue fails over yrs), adding a mass layer (and some impact damping) directly below floor with wide air gap/insulation, then the normal dense drywall back onto ceiling below.
The Tecsound 50 is easiest to mould around shapes, but doable with the Tecsound 100 too which is double the thickness and offers best sound reduction of the two (is also a tecSound70 which not tried, presumably in between the 2 mentioned).
Great input. My thinking as well. Use it when it is a good product for the job, but not all the time.
While I really appreciate you on being one of the few people in our industry who's NOT spreading BS unlike the major youtube educators, but here I share an opinion in disagreement, and hope you take it positively.
MLV/Asphalt/Rubber sheets these are just as you said - damping agents. More precisely said - Constraint layer dampening. The key to understand here is, they dampen the movement (caused by transmitted sound vibrations) of the adhered layer by acting as a constraining layer and not directly the vibrations anyway. Hence, they are not soundproofing material technically, but decoupling material, easily said damping material.
These can't be compared in a scenario where mass is concerned. For blocking transmission of sound, you need mass. For blocking the vibrations to travel through the structure, you need mass along with a cld or any viscoelastic barrier to constraint that mass to be affected by the vibrations of a magnitude that the system is not capable to resist mechanically.
It sort of acts as a mechanical barrier for the vibrations to travel through. As if it made the walls even stronger to be moved. It can't be compared in terms of mass. It's the visco-elastic force that's working here, NOT mass.
Lastly, about the cost, you don't necessarily need to add full sheets of MLV on the entire wall. CLD layers work by sandwiching them between 2 layers. Decoupling, resilience! And there, you can basically add strips of CLD throughout the perimeters and some in between to form some sort of airtight frame between the two layers that would help in maintaining the airborne isolation, and the 2 walls won't touch either. The air cavity formed inside the windows of MLV strips will act as a spring just like MLV. Just like in floating floors! You have trapped air cavities which work like spring. But they move the resonant frequency of the system wildly away from what you might have calculated, that's why ventilation is provided. While it's much complex with floors and floated bunkers, with walls the purpose and application is rather simpler. You don't necessarily need to worry about resonant frequency unless the walls further are connected to an exterior coupled structure!
Sound like you know what you are talking about. I appreciate your input. I think my take is still keep it simple, do what we know works. If you could show me exact comparisons with and without MLV in your description I would do it, but there is too much risk and money in home studios to just play with materials.
@@soundproofyourstudioAbsolutely correct! It's not meant to be experimented along in a DIY home studio build. It WILL Fail. Simulations, precise calculations and then very accurate execution based on proven and compatible designs is what would make it work. (My intention behind the comment was to share the exact good reasons to use it for, and not for mass, which is usually the case with DIY builds, and a lot of money is wasted).
Unforunately, I don't think anyone in our small niche has been able to compare the measurements of a same room build with and without MLV. It would be a costly affair, haha.
Good read but In my opinion there's a key point being missed. While Tecsound acts as a damping material, it also has mass concentration (Why?). It performs different than an open-cell rubbery sponge or decoupling alike resilient bars. kinda of a good of both worlds. Just as it can block water it can also block air (Maybe not in full but close to drywall) for high-frequency noise, due to its density. So, it's not just about vibration damping. It also blocks airborne sound.
Drywall isn't very effective at dealing with impact noise because it doesn't offer much mechanical damping due to its lack of elasticity. Drywall's mass alone isn't sufficient to block high-energy frequencies, especially in the low octave bands (30-300 Hz). As frequency decreases, the importance of damping increases significantly.
When discussing damping and deadening sound, It will be about aspect but it's important to analyze the sound patterns (incoming noise) in a range of octave bands.
Only after than you know what you're dealing with and can do the cost analysis to address the specific frequencies involved.
I hope I didn't come as arrogant because I get that sometimes.
Is it really cold in your listening room?
No
I put a few layers of this down on a floor where conversations could be heard clearly. Not exactly what it’s made for but just if anyone else is considering it. Made ZERO difference conversation can be heard clearly still through 3 layers - I wouldn’t bother with this stuff it’s super heavy annoying to use and does very little if anything.
Interesting! Thanks for sharing
@@soundproofyourstudio no problem, I was quite surprised/disappointed by the performance considering its weight!
That’s the thing, a lot of people tend to forget that it’s not as simple as just applying / filling a void or so with material. Its completely useless if you’re not considering:
• Acoustic Sealants
• Covering ALL gaps / leakages
… Etc.
Airborne noise will make its way one way or another if you don’t apply it properly.
All gaps were sealed, skirtings removed and masonary re-plasterd to just above the newly applied part E approved direct to joist subfloor which was perimeter sealed. The tecsound was purchased to improve that system on the advise of the acoustic consultant who also approved the detail drawings for the subfloor. It made no difference whatsoever.@@ShakzT
Thanks for letting us know. I was going to get this stuff for my bedroom. Just because I can hear the tv very clearly from downstairs. Now I know not to bother with it.
Rub er does release the most of the energy in form of kinetic energy in the opposite direction its magnituds worse than Butyl or Tecsound. Don't use rubber for dampening.
Is there anything you recommend beyond the same setup you end up recommending every time? (I'll give you points for consistency of course).
Haha no, I truly believe everyone overcomplicates an already complicated process. You are a long time watcher so you get it.
Why are so many of these great soundproofing products not available in the USA? Frustrating.
Yes indeed
Thanks! What about the theory that but putting it in-between your two drywall layers creates another decoupling effect (thus further dispersion) and the MLV also being a different material to the drywall attacks frequencies differently? just wondering based on other youtuber videos. :)
Yes, you are right on that rec sound or MlV acts as a constrained layer damping system. This can help with isolation. I think my big thing is looking at cost benefit since MLV and tecsound can be expensive. I am also finding that with acoustics you can use MLV to great affect for low to mid bass absorption with drywall. The two system s work together for both isolation and acoustic control. Lots to think about on this subject
I haven’t seen much discussion about how to manage
The top-plates of double wall construction. Do you lay rafters over both decoupled walls (in which case are they not now coupled?) or do you couple the ceiling to the innermost wall and just cap air gap? Seems like a trade off between rigidity and bracing vs. Inadvertently undoing the decoupling that helps so much in the first place.
Ah yes, check out I-b3 acoustic clips and watch my vid on fire stops.
i just wanna say that my studio space is 2400mm x 2400mm so having this much mass in 15mm thickness is super important to me. but i live in one of the most expensive cities in the uk. it makes sense theyre making tecsound in the uk cuz we dont have huge spaces for our studios or whatever. i just started tecsounding my studio and my godx is a roll of tecsound 100 heavy
What about using on a double wall system, outside 5/8” OSB and Hardy board siding with 2”x 6” stud wall with open cell spray foam to fill to the depth of the stud (5.5”) then inner wall 2”x4” stud with unfazed fiberglass insulation, 2 layers of 5/8” drywall staggered joints between layer and acoustic seal caulk on the joints, then plywood paneling of at least 1/4” or 3/8” for the inner finished wall. Would that get me closer to STC level of 70 ?
Even if it magically works, 65 is the highest STC rating there is! Practically, depending on the precise construction and dimensions of the space, you might achieve an STC of 45-50
@@grayveeacoustics on his chart of double wall insulated double Sheetrock he gets stc levels of 63. Open cell foam 5” deep or slightly more has a better stc level than just fiberglass or rock wool. The 5/8” osb outer wall with 3/4” thick hardy board (a cement material) meets or slightly exceeds the dual 5/8’s Sheetrock so you are matching density for density inner wall vs outer wall. Slightly or better absorption and air tight with the open cell spray foam. I just measured some engineered paneling and it’s a 4’x8’x7/16” thick sheet, as heavy as 5/8” Sheetrock so essentially my inner wall would have 3 layers. And the stc chart goes higher than 70. If I achieve 65 or higher I will be happy. This is in a professional recording studio 40’x36’ with a mechanical room with bathroom, live room roughly 24’x28’ then a vocal booth, lounge roughly 12’x16’ and master control room roughly the same size, this does not take into account of wall thickness. Exact measurements will be after the final coat of paint is applied
@@stevereese6488 part of the reason why double wall double sheetrock is seen to be achieving such high numbers is the partial M-S-M functioning that allows for a good isolation in low end, and less real estate needed for internal acoustics too. You need to get it right with decoupling all the external structuers, CLD, and routing the Ducts very strategically. Say, if you have no connected structures, a perfectly floated floor on which the walls are built, and no ducts going through the walls, and you have made the wall leaves resilient enough, then sure you can achieve a high STC rating, but once all these practicalities flow in, not everything works out as efficient.
Where I come from, building brickwalls, RCC structures isn't a problem, so it's rare that I have to build studded walls, a handful of situations where I built one, I found the mess it is to work with. It's not easy to evade flanking transmission with drywall as it is with brickwall. Sure, room modes are stronger, more real estate needed to tackle with resonances, but in isolation, it's worth it!
on a side note, try to give your CR a little larger space.
@@grayveeacoustics yes the double walls will be isolated. The live studio room and mastering control room are vaulted ceilings with associated acoustic treatments, clouds,etc. the main building is 12’ high walls, the bathroom, vocal booth, lounge and interlock type access from lounge to either control room or live room are 8’ ceilings, the interlock rooms if you will have 2doors, double walls/ceilings one is rough outside measurement of 6’x8’ to the live room, the control room interlock double door system is roughly 4’x4’ all solid core fiberglass exterior grade doors with acoustic seals. Actually all doors are 3’ wide solid core doors. The control room interlock extends into the lounge. The vocal booth has a small dual window system that each pane is 1/2” thick safety glass like windshield glass that has that film in the middle of the glass and not standard float glass like the glass used in home windows. So there is an inner glass set at an angle leaning out at the top and a control room side glass with the same angle lean, also a small dual window to the live room. But again the dual room system is isolated from the outer walls, not attached. We are going with mass loaded vinyl between the 2 layers of Sheetrock, the inner dual wall base plate will sit on 1/4” rubber or mass loaded vinyl strips then acoustic seal every joint, floor and ceilings. We already have the recording equipment with both analog snakes and Ethernet snakes. All outlets are wrapped with puffy and acoustic seal around it. The hvac is handled by split units that have a quiet mode function, also an ERV unit in conjunction with a dehumidifier that the supply and return ducts for the live room vocal booth and control room go through an insulated box with zig zag inner deflectors to route air (and sound) in a zig zag pattern, flow rate regulated for the fresh dehumidified air between 100 to 200 cfm, anything higher than 250 to 300 cfm will be detected by the recording equipment. I live on Texas gulf coast (liquid air 99% of the year).
That is a great design but the STC would have to be measured after it was built. I would give it a green light.