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

From what I've been told, acoustics depend on the frequencies you are trying to target. You can use various materials to break-up and skatter the sound like a wall of stacked firewood or rustic timbers. I did both for esthetics and acoustics. As far as ceiling panels goes,  flat will reflect and certain materials will absorb.  In my case I'll be getting  34"x34"x6" high hollow box clouds made from 1/2" thick felt and stuffing them with 6" Rockwool Safe and Sound acoustic insulation.  They will be suspended with a 4" gap and this gap + the height of the box creates 10" of absorption.  It sounds strange but apparently the distance of the underside of a panel that's suspended from the ceiling changes how the cloud behaves. And for me this 4" gap helps target some of the upper bass/lower mid frequencies and not just the high frequencies. They won't target deeper bass. 

I don't have room for acoustic wall treatments so I'm depending on these box clouds and an artistic 3D wood panel on the front wall to help improve conditions. It's far from perfect but it's something.  

I rendered these box clouds and that 3D wooden art panel into my existing room. Room esthetics is very important to me so I'm treating the room with this in mind. 

@kevinzoe thank you; that’s highly responsive to my question and raises a point i had not considered, which is the lack of flexibility for future adjustments that is inherent in built-in absorption.  Obviously, one would do a lot of professionally guided measuring and modeling before installation, but what happens if one changes speaker make or location (or maybe even furniture layout) later?  

All really useful stuff.  We’re no where close to embarking on another renovation, but I can see, when we are, there will be a lot of questions for a professional consultant and installer to think about and we will need to leave time for some trial and error before doing anything quasi-permanent.  

Given the room limitations in the next room on the renovation list (e.g. floor to ceiling windows on the east and south side and no wall at all on the west side), we may just have to live with some ceiling mounted treatments and work on finding the balance between maximum performance and minimum aesthetic harm.

@kirkwallace 

I had exactly the panels you described in my Family Room, until my unusually clumsy Sister-In-Law, destroyed three out of four.  I have since replaced all four panels with a 2” thick insulation foam (MUCH CHEAPER!) There is a small, but noticeable difference in the sound, but it gives my S-I-L more room to wobble through the room.  I also have a fully carpeted, padded floor, some cheap 2’x4’ foam panels that I’m playing with.  I have them on 7’ tall frames so I can move them around to see if I might want more absorption behind me. About half of my current room is open to other rooms, so there’s not much more I can really do for now.

My wife has been talking about moving, so doing much more would be a waste of time and money.