Foam by Mail?

[Amphiprion]

Has anyone used their products? They are very attractively priced.

[jonathanb3478]

"Jim Holtz" recommended them in the thread with the Dayton RS TMWW speakers.

[ThomasW]

if you read thorough a bunch of different threads you'd see lots of people use them....

[Amphiprion]

is that an oh so subtle hint to use the search function

[ThomasW]

Nope just letting you know lot's of people buy foam from them

[Amphiprion]

Cool. It looks like the search software links only to threads and not to individual posts? Let me know if I am doing something wrong, it is hard to find where people are specifically referring to it in a thread. I am mainly concerned with acoustic quality (which should be addressed by their NRC ratings), longevity, and flame resistance. This will be both for lining vented boxes and for room acoustic treatments. In regard to lining vented boxes, what is the thickest wedge or eggcrate foam I should use? Or should I base foam usage on a % of total volume limit? That brings up another question I had which I will post another thread on, it should be quite a bit more technical than my other threads

[jonathanb3478]

Cool. It looks like the search software links only to threads and not to individual posts? Let me know if I am doing something wrong...

You are doing something wrong. On the bottom left, there are some check boxes. Select the "show posts" option, or something to that effect. The default is "show threads".

[ThomasW]

You can search posts or threads.

The info I was talking about also spans other forums, where people that are also members here have posted about buying from this company.

If I recall correctly there are 2 people posting to the RS TMWW thread using it.

No one has felt the need to analyze the foam to that extent.... The foam lasts a long time if it's not exposed to the environment. Ozone and UV kill it quickly..... It all burns.

I don't use foam. I use 3/8"-1/2" thick high wool content felt gasket material combined with either polyfill or long fiber wool depending on the application. Thick high wool content felt gasket material is $pendy ~$8+/sq ft.

Given the frequencies involved, fiberglass batts are the best choice for subwoofer/woofers.

[Amphiprion]

Oh Ok, thank you guys, I was using the quickie "Search This Forum" button at the top right of the forum page, not the advanced search form. Never knew that was an option.

Thank you!

[Amphiprion]

I don't use foam. I use 3/8"-1/2" thick high wool content felt gasket material combined with either polyfill or long fiber wool depending on the application. Thick high wool content felt gasket material is $pendy ~$8+/sq ft.

Given the frequencies involved, fiberglass batts are the best choice for subwoofer/woofers.

I admit a decent portion of my criteria is aesthetic; I want some cool looking acoustic tiles on my walls

The NRC ratings of all their materials seem very similar until you get down to 500/250/125Hz. For room acoustic stuff I am only really concerned about >250Hz, I will use a PEQ for the sub and carpet/etc to deal with 100-200Hz floor bounce suckout issues. For lining sub boxes I am mostly concerned about 150Hz on up (since that's the lowest standing wave resonance of any size sub I might possibly build). The NRC ratings at the 125 and 250 level vary a LOT by thickness, hence my question about how much lining a vented box is OK (I really want to use the super thick stuff but I've measured bad things re: stuffing vented boxes and I don't know how to model what it does).

[ThomasW]

I have a friend who spent a minor fortune on really high end acoustic foam for his room. Maybe it was the purple/plum color that was off putting to me.

The raw foam does get dusty over time and is a major pain to clean unless you can take it outside and hose it down.

I had a piece of leftover 1.5" PE acoustic foam sitting in the basement. After a year just sitting on a shelf it was beginning to breaking down. The more 'plastic' (less spongy) the foam is the longer it lasts.

With the availability of the compressed fiberglass panels, those covered with fabric would be my choice for room treatments...

[Amphiprion]

Is there a part number or brand/model for the compressed fiberglass panels? I think my friend Hank has used them before but I'm not sure if they're the same thing.

PS - I like the purple FBM is sending me some color samples.

[jkrutke]

I use foam by mail for acoustic tiles. It's cheap, decent quality, and the shipping is cheap too.

They have a unique method of keeping the shipping cost down - they suck the air out of the foam and compress it down. When you open it up, within a few minutes it pops up to about 10 times the size of the box it was in.

[---k---]

I thought that I have read that Foam by Mail was a bunch of liars about thier absorption numbers. IIRC Ethan Winers (I know not everyone's hero, but I think the tests have been accepts) had FBM tested and it failed miserablly to live up to what they promised. I don't think it was any where as good as the Auralex stuff. I'm probably wrong in my recollection since Thomas isn't recalling the same thing. So do a search at a couple of the other forums, especially AVS and also try Studiotips.com

I think much better products would just be DIY solution like Thomas and myself use. Also products from GIKacoustics and ReadyTraps are very similar to the typical DIY stuff and reasonably priced.

But, this is Mission Possible so build your own.

[ThomasW]

The high-end Auralux stuff is what my friend uses. Works very well but very $pendy and I can't imagine how he's ever going to clean it.

The compressed fiberglass panels are Owens Corning 702 or 703. These can be covered with a lightweight cloth that can be put in the washing machine or simply replaced if they get dirty.

[dwk]

I also had the impression that the FBM stuff was somewhat lower quality, but I'm not sure where I got that - certainly not first-hand experience

I agree with the basic views here - DIY panels and fiberglass are the best bets if you can manage them. If not, I bought a big whack of 2" foam tiles from Markertek about 9 years ago, and they are holding up well and seem to work as well as can be expected. I have no solid memory as to pricing, though - only that it was way cheaper than Sonex at the time.

[Amphiprion]

I ordered a few samples from Foam Express / Foam For You, which seem to be exactly the same stuff and same price as what FBM has except you can order single unit quantities. I ordered a half dozen tiles in different shapes/thicknesses/colors just to get an idea of what it is like. Doing my searching on this forum for threads, someone said this stuff was tested by another guy on some other forum and that the NRC ratings didn't hold up - any info on that?

Oh, and Sonex is RIDICULOUSLY expensive! Auralex is only about 3x the cost of the other stuff if bought in bulk. Sonex was way more at the site I looked at.

[ThomasW]

Either Sonex and Auralex are just way to $pendy for my budget...

I've never played with any of the foams for room Tx. All my traps are fiberglass and were built almost 20yrs ago when standard home insulation batts were the only thing available. We packed 6" insulation into a 3.5" thick frame and that does a great job, but certainly not as user friendly as the newer foam products

If you find the thread where the person tested the NRC ratings that would be an interesting read..

If I can ever get Jon's assistance I want to clone some of the DaaD traps. I heard a room treated with these at the 2005 RMAF. A standard double wide conference with Avalon Isis loudspeakers with a measley $200,000 with of electronics. It was the finest sound I've ever heard in any audio installation in my life.

[---k---]

Test data for Foam By Mail compared to Real Trap product.

http://www.realtraps.com/data.htm

Note, I think that DIY fiberglass is better than both.

[Amphiprion]

Unfortunately, even just reading other parts of their site makes me doubt the improvement the graphs show. The plot everything in Sabins instead of an NRC. On their about the measurements page they state:

You can convert Sabins to an equivalent absorption coefficient by simply dividing the Sabins by the square feet of front surface area.

Their traps are HUGE compared to the FBM stuff, could that be the big reason in the graph differences?

[Jim Holtz]

Test data for Foam By Mail compared to Real Trap product.

http://www.realtraps.com/data.htm

Note, I think that DIY fiberglass is better than both.

Ryan,

I think you're talking apples and oranges here. The Real Traps are $199 for 8 sq, ft. and 2" wedge Foam by Mail is $16 for 12 sq. ft. which I'm using to line the inside of speaker cabinets.

No argument that Real Traps might be great for wall treatments if you can afford them but to line cabinets? Not in my budget! I've found the 2" wedge Foam by Mail to work extremely well as a way of killing the back waves in speaker cabinets.

My $.02 worth...

Jim

[Amphiprion]

BTW, I'm also considering using these to line cabinets, and judging the NRC vs Freq ratings for the tiles/eggrcate it looks like the FBM stuff will be fine.

Re: Owens Corning - what is the difference between 702,703 and 705? 703 looks to have some kind of backing/facing and the highest absorption at 250Hz and above but 705 is very linear in its absorption from 125 on up.

[---k---]

I was just posting the link, because it is the only test data that I know of - and it showed that FBM lied about thier data. I've read lots of threads about FBM lying. Most of it over at Studiotips, which I haven't visited in a long while.

Studiotips used to have on thier website a graph of the Realtraps and DIY 4" OC703 and thier Superchunks, but I think Ethan threatened to sue so they took it down. But, they DIY traps were, iirc, much better than the Real Traps.

So: DIY > Real Traps >> FBM.

For the cheap price, go ahead and try it, but I think your would be better served by the Rigid Fiberglass DIY panels.

[Amphiprion]

Mkay, you folks are convincing me to go the DIY route (imagine that on this forum ). Maybe I'll throw up a purple pyramid cut square tile here and there just for the bling factor, with all the real work being done by the DIY panels. I think I could get them looking quite sharp with maybe golden-oak stained and lacquered 1x4 oak trim, and black grill fabric covering the fiberglass panels. I'll have more questions about these later and some implementation questions, but it's awful late an I need to hit the sack.

[PMazz]

The OC703 is what I usually use for cabinet lining or traps. I get it for ~$1.65 ft^2 in the 2" unfaced variety. I just apply it with hot glue.



Here is a pretty comprehensive absorption coefficient chart I found way back when. For on-wall ratings, look to the "A" mounting. The 703 (3 lb/ft^3) is pretty much as good as it gets for cost/ease of use/availabilty. According to Ethan, the 705 (6 lb/ft^3) with the foil face is better at freqs below 125 Hz.

Chart

Pete

[---k---]

That is a pretty good site. Here is the one I always refer to:

http://bobgolds.com/AbsorptionCoefficients.htm

[JonW]

I heard a room treated with these at the 2005 RMAF. A standard double wide conference with Avalon Isis loudspeakers with a measley $200,000 with of electronics. It was the finest sound I've ever heard in any audio installation in my life.

If any of you have ever been to Goodwin's High End in the Boston area... It's a quite fancy stereo store. I was in this listening room:
(see photo in link)

http://www.goodwinshighend.com/facility.htm

And as soon as I walked into the room, it was very different. Just amazing acoustics in there. You don't even have to have the speakers playing, it was so nice.