Archive for category Product Applications

From Utility to Engineered Performance: Comparing Armstrong® 1B Perforated Tiles Vs. HiPer Panels®

For decades, perforated acoustic panels have played an important role in shaping the sound of recording studios, broadcast facilities, civic buildings, and public spaces. While the iconic Armstrong® 1B perforated mineral fiber tile represented the standard for practical noise control throughout much of the twentieth century, modern acoustic engineering has transformed what perforated panels can accomplish. A comparison between the Armstrong® 1B and today’s Acoustics First® HiPer Panel® family illustrates just how far acoustic technology has advanced.

Perforated Armstrong® 1B tiles – drilled random (left) and straight (right)

The Armstrong® 1B tile was designed as a utilitarian acoustic treatment. Manufactured from thin mineral fiber, the 1′ x 1′ panels featured either linear or random perforation patterns that allowed sound energy to enter the porous material for absorption – which increased the NRC of these tiles to a 0.55-0.60. Originally developed during WWII and used in military barracks and installations, these tiles eventually found their way into countless municipal buildings, schools, government facilities, and even legendary recording environments such as RCA and Sun Recording Studios. Their modest absorption characteristics, ease of installation, and economical construction made them a practical solution for reducing reverberation in a wide variety of spaces.

The Million Dollar Quartet (left-to-right – Jerry Lee Lewis, Carl Perkins, Elvis Presley, & Johnny Cash) at Sun Studios (Memphis, TN) with Armstrong 1B straight-drilled tiles on the wall. (1956)

Despite their historical significance, the Armstrong® 1B tiles were fundamentally simple acoustic absorbers. The mineral fiber substrate behaved much like compressed fiberboard or heavy paper, relying solely on the porous material itself for sound absorption. While the perforations exposed more surface area to incoming sound, there was no engineered reflective face, no constrained barrier layer, and no intentional diffusion characteristics. Their primary function was simply to absorb a portion of the reflected sound energy.

Modern critical listening spaces demand considerably more sophisticated performance.

The Acoustics First® HiPer Panel® family builds upon decades of acoustic research using high-performance fiberglass substrates and engineered panel construction. Rather than functioning as simple absorbers, HiPer Panels® are carefully designed hybrid acoustic devices that combine broadband absorption with controlled reflection and diffusion. Where the Armstrong tiles had an NRC of 0.55 – 0.60, the HiPer panels increase this to a 0.90 NRC – but they also introduce tuned absorption and diffusion.

The original HiPer Panel®

The original laminated HiPer Panel® incorporates a perforated fiberglass bonded to a constrained barrier septum layer. This engineered assembly allowed portions of the sound spectrum to be reflected while some acoustic energy passed into the fiberglass absorber, creating a more balanced acoustic response than a conventional porous panel. The result is an environment that maintains clarity, spaciousness, and natural musical energy instead of becoming acoustically “dead.”

The HiPer Panel® Impact

The Hiper Panel® Impact takes a slightly different approach by utilizing a durable perforated reflective face over the fiberglass core. Its optimized perforation pattern and reflective surface are specifically engineered to provide controlled diffusion on top of tuned absorption, making it well suited for performance venues, mastering rooms, critical listening spaces, and recording studios where preserving acoustic life is just as important as controlling excessive reflections. This tuned absorption allows the low frequencies to be absorbed, while leaving the high frequencies so that the diffusion characteristics of the device (over 4Khz) will be more effective in creating a feeling of openness in the room.

Graph showing the sound absorption coefficients of the HiPer Panel® Impact. Note that the high-frequency absorption decreases to allow the diffusion to be more effective in the listening space.

The differences between these products extend well beyond appearance. While both feature perforated surfaces, the Armstrong 1B’s small perforations simply exposed a thin mineral fiber absorber. By contrast, the HiPer Panel® systems use perforation geometry, reflective facings, engineered barrier layers, and high-density acoustic fiberglass to create a far more efficient and balanced acoustic device. Instead of merely reducing reverberation, they help shape the acoustic character of a room.

More than fifty years after their introduction, Armstrong® 1B perforated tiles remain recognizable symbols of an earlier era of architectural acoustics. Many continue to serve in municipal offices, schools, police interview rooms, and other institutional settings where functional noise control is sufficient. In modern recording studios, listening rooms, and performance spaces, however, engineered systems like the Acoustics First® HiPer Panel® and Hiper Panel® Impact represent the evolution of acoustic treatment—combining advanced materials, acoustic science, and carefully tuned performance to meet the demands of today’s most critical listening environments.

, ,

Leave a comment

Acoustic Transformation at New Harmony: Preserving Art, Improving Sound

In New Harmony, Indiana, there is a former Odd Fellows Lodge repurposed as a private residence—the main hall doubles as an event and performance space. Measuring 80 by 40 feet with a 14-foot ceiling, the room features a mezzanine, raised stage, large windows, and an extensive collection of artwork. While visually striking, the space presented serious acoustic challenges.

Acoustics veteran, John Gardner was engaged to address these issues after experiencing a VIP performance tied to a blues festival. The goal was clear: improve the sound without disturbing the artwork or compromising the room’s aesthetic.

The Challenge: Excessive Reverberation and Harsh Reflections

Initial assessment and measurements revealed a highly reverberant and reflective environment:

  • Reverberation times:
    • ~3.5 seconds at 500 Hz
    • Over 4 seconds at 1 kHz
  • A pronounced “chatter” or flutter echo that degraded clarity
  • Strong reflections from walls, mezzanine face, and windows
  • Poor intelligibility for both speech and live music

Further analysis showed:

  • Extended decay times in mid frequencies
  • A rising frequency response:
    • +12 dB from 63 Hz to 6.3 kHz
    • High-frequency roll-off beginning near 8 kHz
  • Noticeable slap-back echoes from rear wall surfaces

The Solution: Integrated, Art-Conscious Treatments

Given the requirement to preserve the room’s visual identity, all treatments were carefully selected and adapted to blend seamlessly into the environment.

Sonora® Panels were made to the exact size of existing artwork and installed behind them to increase absorption without disrupting the aesthetic of the space.

Key treatments included:

  • Mezzanine Face – Diffusion
    • Installed a series of ArtDiffusor® Model F diffusors
    • Arranged in a continuous matrix across the mezzanine face
    • Positioned against existing molding for a clean, intentional look
    • Purpose: break up reflections and reduce flutter echo without deadening the space
  • Rear Wall – Absorption
    • Installed Tone Tiles®
    • Artist-painted to match the room while maintaining acoustic performance
    • Purpose: reduce slap and high-frequency reflections
  • Reflective Wall Treatment – Absorption + Aesthetic Matching
    • Covered a large reflective wall with Sound Channels® wall fabric
    • This material is acoustically absorptive, not transparent.
    • Original paintings were reinstalled over the treated surface
  • Artwork Enhancement – Distributed Absorption
    • Added Sonora® panels (1-inch thick) behind existing canvas artwork
    • Turned each piece into a functional absorber
    • Created slight diaphragm damping effect due to the air gap behind canvases
    • Maintained full visual integrity of the collection
  • Window Treatment – Removable Absorption
    • Installed custom-fit Sonora® panels within window frames
    • Panels secured with minimal hardware and used only during performances
    • Addressed reflections from large glass surfaces near the stage
ArtDiffusor® Model F were installed in a large array across the mezzanine face.

Results: Balanced Acoustics Without Visual Compromise

Post-treatment measurements showed clear improvement:

  • Reverberation reduced to:
    • ~2.1 seconds at 500 Hz
    • ~3.4 seconds at 1 kHz
  • Reduced flutter echo and slap-back reflections
  • More controlled and even frequency response

Performance Outcome: Proven in Practice

The ultimate validation came during the following year’s festival:

  • The returning headline performer commented on how good the room sounded
  • Performers were able to clearly hear themselves on stage
  • Audience members and owners noted significantly improved clarity and warmth

Conclusion

The New Harmony project highlights how thoughtful acoustic design can coexist with architectural and artistic priorities. By using targeted solutions like ArtDiffusor® Model F Diffusors, Tone Tiles®, Sound Channels®, and Sonora® panels, John Gardner successfully transformed a challenging space into an acoustically balanced performance environment—without compromising its character.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

Autism Spectrum Disorder and Acoustics

People with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) frequently report different sensory experiences, especially with sound. Many experience hypersensitivity (overreaction to stimuli like noise or light) or hyposensitivity (reduced response, requiring stronger input). Unlike most individuals, they may not adapt to constant background noise, which can remain overwhelming. Tools like noise-canceling headphones and stim/fidget toys can help manage stress and support self-regulation.

Some autistic individuals also experience auditory processing disorder (APD), where sounds are heard but not easily understood. This can make following speech in noisy environments—like classrooms—especially difficult, even if other auditory skills remain strong.

Research on autism has often focused on traits, causes, and treatments, sometimes framing autistic individuals as the problem. A more balanced, modern, view considers how environments and nonautistic people contribute to disabling experiences. Under the social model of disability, society shares responsibility for reducing these challenges. Recent perspectives expand beyond individual traits to include social attitudes, accessibility tools, inclusive education, and building design.

The design of built environments plays a major role in comfort and performance, yet acoustics are often overlooked compared to lighting or air quality. Poor sound conditions—such as low signal-to-noise ratios—can hinder learning, particularly for children, people with hearing difficulties, or nonnative listeners. While accessibility standards address physical barriers, they rarely consider acoustic needs for autistic individuals. Studies show that high noise levels can increase distress-related behaviors in children living with autism. Both children and adults report that schools can be overwhelming due to noise, bright lights, and unpredictability, leading to fatigue and reduced learning.

To create more inclusive spaces, designers should focus on acoustics. This includes organizing layouts predictably, adding quiet “escape” areas, separating noisy and quiet zones, and using transitional spaces to ease sensory shifts. Effective sound isolation—through walls, windows, and floor/ceiling—is essential, as is reducing internal noise from building systems and other noise sources. Windows are often the weakest link through which sound can leak, but this can be mitigated with multi-pane window construction with an appropriately airtight and resilient joint sealant. The Sound Transmission Class (STC) and Outdoor-Indoor Transmission Class (OITC) of cavity wall systems can be improved with added mass, resilient layers and cavity absorption. Partitions should extend to their full height and be sealed to the structure of the roof deck or floor above. Penetrations through sound isolating partitions should be avoided. Wherever penetrations are unavoidable, they should be packed with insulation and sealed with a resilient joint sealant to minimize the leakage of sound.

Using sound-absorbing materials can further improve comfort.  Sound Channels acoustic wall fabric is often specified in classrooms and “escape” rooms as it a very durable and cleanable material that provides sound absorption within speech frequencies, reducing echoes and overall noise levels.

Overall, designing for acoustic accessibility requires recognizing the diverse sensory experiences of autistic individuals. Inclusive environments should be shaped through thoughtful design and collaboration with autistic individuals, ensuring their lived experiences guide meaningful improvements.

References:
Caldas, Fernanda; Underwood, Samuel; Masiero Bruno S. and Wang, Lily M. Autism and Indoor Sounds Acoustics Today 20 (2) 21-29.  

, , , ,

Leave a comment

Big vs. Bigger: 2′ vs 4′ Acoustic Diffusers

A couple common form factors in acoustics are based on building material sizes. Ceiling grids are a common place to install acoustic devices, and you will find that many are built to either work in a 2’x2′, 2’x4′, or 4’x4′ ceiling grid installation. This makes sense, but did you know that these devices also perform differently in some cases due to their dimensions? This is especially true with acoustic diffusers.

When you’re tuning a room—whether it’s a studio, theater, rehearsal space, or even a high-end listening room—acoustic diffusers are one of those rare tools that improve clarity without taking the life out of the space. Designs like the Double Duty Diffuser, Pyramidal Diffusers, and Quadratic Diffusers all share that same mission: redistribute sound energy so your room feels open, natural, and honest.

But while they may look similar in concept, their size changes the game. A 2’x2′ panel and a 4’x4′ panel both diffuse sound, but their effect—especially in the low-frequency and low-mid ranges—can be very different.

2’x2′ Diffusers — Compact Control

2’x2′ units are the most modular diffusers in the lineup. Their smaller footprint makes them ideal for:

  • Breaking up mid and high-frequency reflections
  • Treating small and medium rooms
  • Sitting comfortably in grid ceilings or tight wall spaces

Because of their size, 2’x2′ diffusers don’t interact as much with the low-frequency energy in a room. Bass waves—being physically large—tend to wrap around smaller objects. The result? Excellent clarity improvements in the mids and highs, with a very predictable diffusion performance. The Double Duty Diffuser and Pyramidal diffusers have been a standard in breaking up planar surfaces for decades. While their diffusion in low frequencies is limited at this size, the air cavities do help control some upper bass frequencies through absorption.

The tuned mid frequency effects of the 2’x2′ quadratic, and the smooth performance of the Double Duty or Pyramidal diffuser are perfect for control rooms, edit rooms, drum booths, and anywhere you want accuracy without sacrificing sparkle.

Compared to the 2’x2′ Double Duty diffuser, the 4’x4′ is absolutely massive!

4’x4′ Diffusers — Where Diffusion meets Bass Control

Now we get to the big ones.

A 4’x4′ diffuser is similar in concept to its smaller relatives, but the scale moves it into a different acoustic category. At this size, diffusers begin to influence longer wavelengths, which opens the door to something smaller diffusers often struggle with…

Low-frequency interaction

Large diffusers present enough depth, volume, and surface area to affect the bass spectrum. The extra size creates cavities which are tuned to reduce bass, and they have surfaces large enough to redirect those lower frequencies.

  • Break up standing waves in the low-mid range
  • Reduce modes and nodes common in rectangular rooms
  • Add a sense of openness to the bass field
  • Prevent buildup behind listening positions

In other words: same diffuser concept, very different low-end behavior.

Wide-area coverage

A single 4’x4′ panel can modify a huge portion of a wall, creating an even, spacious character that feels less like “treatment” and more like a room that’s naturally well-behaved.

These panels shine in larger studios, live rooms, and worship spaces—anywhere you need diffusion that reaches deeper into the frequency spectrum – and can break-up large, flat, specular surface reflections, which are responsible for flutter, echoes, bass buildup, and long reverb times.

Which do you need?

There are two main factors in the decision: space and performance requirements. In certain environments, it’s impractical or impossible to install large 4’x4′ or larger diffusers; It also may not be the best solution – even if it may appear to be on paper. While a single, large barrel diffuser may appear ideal, you may not have enough physical space to allow the diffusion to develop – where several smaller diffusers would be the better solution.

In short, your physical space and acoustic conditions will dictate which size elements will give you the most benefit in your environment.

Which do you want under your Christmas tree this year?

, , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

Similar, yet different: Angled QRD vs. Standard QRD

In this installment of “Similar, yet Different,” we explore the similarities and subtle differences between a classic, standard 1D QRD and a modern, angled 1D QRD. While being based on the same mathematic function for their design, there are a couple subtle differences in the performance of these devices.

Quick review. A Quadratic Residue Diffuser is based on a mathematic equation that states that the Well Depth is decided based on the square of the position of the cell and the remainder of when it is divided by a prime number. (We know it sounds really complex… but this is how the ratios of the wells are calculated to maintain a balance of magnitude across the face of the device.)

The equation looks like this:
Well Depth = (n² modulo p)
(Note: there will not be a quiz!)

As it was stated, both of the devices use the identical calculation when coming up with their wells… but there is one important change – the well bottoms are flat on the standard QRD and angled on the angled quadratic. This change makes this diffuser perform differently in 2 key ways:

  • The Diffusion Pattern is wider on the angled QRD.
  • There is a more subtle transition from one frequency to the next on the angled QRD.

When you look at the two sets of polar pattern above, you will notice that the Angled QRD has a wider pattern, as shown in the first-column, horizonal polar pattern (at 2000Hz especially), where the standard QRD is a more forward-focused pattern.

What does that mean in practice?

Both of these diffusers have a 1D pattern, but the flat bottoms of the standard QRD primarily use diffraction and incidence angle to widen the diffusion… the rest of the diffusion works on the principal of phase offset from the depth of the wells and the time of travel. The Angled QRD introduces an angle which means that one side of the well is deeper than another. This changes the reflection angle, time of travel, and, in turn, degrees of phase shift depending on where the sound strikes the inside of the well. This modification smooths the transition of phase from well to well – as the wells themselves have a range of phase change. This angle also causes the sound to be redirected toward the inner walls of the wells, causing it to change direction from the angle of incidence – widening the pattern further, changing the travel time, and basically bouncing sound around more.

There are some situations where the standard QRD‘s narrow pattern and well-defined transition frequencies may be preferable. In some practice rooms or larger listening spaces, there may be a need for the diffusion to be a little more directional, maybe to hit (or avoid) a certain position in the room. In these scenarios, the standard quadratic may be the recommended choice. In other spaces where you want the reflections to spread out more rapidly – maybe in smaller rooms or spaces where you need to get more coverage from ceiling reflections – then the angled quadratic may be more appropriate.

In closing, while these two devices have a nearly identical design, a small difference can have a big effect on the performance of the diffuser – and how you use them.

, , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment