Acoustic Panel Room Treatments : Built-in vs surface mount question


If one were remodeling a living room or other multi-purpose room where, upon completion, a 2-channel system was going to be, holding aside local building/fire safety code issues, are there acoustic reasons not to install sound absorption panels, like 4” Owens Corning 703 fiberglass insulation or whatever products a place like GIK sells, as inserts into cut-outs to the walls and ceiling (5/8th” dry wall) so that the net result is sound absorption that is flush with the walls/ceilings (and ideally could be skim coated and painted so as to make the whole surface look seamless) as opposed to surface mounting the absorption panels?  Does the raised and lowered profile of a wall or ceiling with surface mounted panels do something beneficial acoustically that a flush surface with embedded panels would not?

Thanks!

kirkwallace

There is a book produced by an individual educated in such disciplines that gives specific instructions on producing a wall structure and adding finishing materials to complete the Wall. The same book suggests Door Treatment and Aperture Treatment on a Wall.

 

@pindac, i don’t suppose you have at hand the actual title and author of this book, do you?  If you do, it would be really helpful if you could share it.

For absorption, in wall treatment can be very effective but won't provide diffusion, which is equally important. The best way to design a new room is to build in angled walls and ceiling. You want to avoid flat, parallel surfaces and make the sound that's not absorbed scatter rather than bounce back and forth between surfaces. 

Thanks, @mashif.  I recognize that diffusion would need uneven surfaces or non-square angles.  I’m trying to not let perfect be the enemy of the good.