Has anyone used this cotton UltraTouch insulation in their theater? If so, how well did it work?

http://www.bondedlogic.com/

I used it in my Home Theater and around the bathroom in my basement. I personally think it works wonders.

I used double drywall with green glue, and used this as insulation. Even with cutting holes in the drywall for inwall speakers and ceiling lights the noise in the room directly above my theater is minimal (almost non-existant) even when watching movies like "Top Gun".

I used it around the bathroom wall also because I hate it when you can hear someone using the restroom! It fixed that problem also.

Vincent

How pricey is that stuff. how does it come in rolls or batts. did you get it locally or order it online ?

I didn't find it that pricey, but at the time I was building a Home Theater and finishing a basement so my recollection could be skewed. I have my project management book at home. I will check my price and tell you tomorrow.

I got it from a local building supply store. They had some in another location in the area and had it moved to the location closest to me in a day. I picked it up from there with 2 SUVs and many runs.

It comes in bats (I think). What is the difference between a bat and a roll? (Sorry if that is a dumb question) Installing it is like unfolding a long, thick piece of fabric.

I would recommend this stuff over and over. Its soft and fluffy not itchy, has great sound isolation properties and you feel good because you are using recycled materials!

Here is an additional website link:

http://www.acousticalsurfaces.com/wall_insulation/pdf/misc_data/Ultra_Brochure.pdf

It is fire retardant, mildew and mold resistant and best of all no goggles, mask or gloves need to be worn when applying it.

For the added benefits, I don't think the cost is that bad.

So how much is this stuff? I didn't see any pricing info.

Pricing:

http://www.greendepot.com/-strse-375/Ultra-Touch-R13/Detail.bok

So that's $0.89 per square foot. In my next of the woods, kraft-faced R-13 fiberglass runs you $0.26 - $0.38 per square, depending on batts or rolls. That's a pretty good premium for the Ultratouch.

Has anyone used this cotton UltraTouch insulation in their theater? If so, how well did it work?

http://www.bondedlogic.com/

That is the same stuff that Bryan Pape sells on his site www.sensiblesoundsolutions.com and he's got a much better price.

As for performance ask go look at the SandmanX, Swithey, EBR, etc... build they're using that stuff.

Holy insulation, Batman! :eek:

That is steep. Why does the stuff that good is for you or envirionmentally friendly always cost so much, geesh. Well, it sounded like a neat idea. At almost 4x the cost though, I think I'll stick with the pink panther. :p

Holy insulation, Batman! :eek:

That is steep. Why does the stuff that good is for you or envirionmentally friendly always cost so much, geesh. Well, it sounded like a neat idea. At almost 4x the cost though, I think I'll stick with the pink panther. :p

Did you check with bpape ? He's got 4 pieces of 24" x 94" x 5.5" for $134 shipped. That's $33.50 each roll. Much cheaper than any e-site with "Green" in their name. :D

I am going to buy from GreenDepot who sells the true UltraTouch brand. Bryan's prices are better, but you get what you pay for.

The price above is about what I paid for mine, so I guess my memory was skewed.

I still think it was a great deal! The amount of sound isolation that room has is well above what my expectations were.

If your looking for accoustical treatments you will not find better pricing than Bryan Papes pricing period, he goes by Bpape here on AVS. He sells accoustical stuff so cheap that you'll smack your momma. :D Hell, you can't even get a better price getting it off the back of the truck. I tried setting up accounts directly with the manufacturers and Bpapes prices were still unexplainingly way lower.

The mark up on these accoustical treatments online is really outrageous.

Ruben

I am going to buy from GreenDepot who sells the true UltraTouch brand. Bryan's prices are better, but you get what you pay for.

Geez dude, It's the same stuff. :rolleyes: Suit yourself. Pay more for it. Just 'cause some idiot calls it "Green" or "environmentally friendly" does not mean they can jack up the prices.

Byran has a very good site and great prices. However, I just would like to install real UltraTouch insulation in my home theater and not any imitations.

Just like how people on this forum buy green glue instead of any other cheaper acoustical caulk like this: http://www.qwyatt.com/caulk.html

Byran has a very good site and great prices. However, I just would like to install real UltraTouch insulation in my home theater and not any imitations.

Just like how people on this forum buy green glue instead of any other cheaper acoustical caulk like this: http://www.qwyatt.com/caulk.html


Well just for your information Acoustical Caulk and GreenGlue are not even close to being the same. One is a sealant (caulk) the other is sound damping material. :rolleyes:

I was just suggesting a less expensive source for the SAME material. (Shreded recycled jeans).

I am going to buy from GreenDepot who sells the true UltraTouch brand. Bryan's prices are better, but you get what you pay for.

Bryan Pape only sells the real Ultra Touch Insulation (I wasn't aware there was a even fake one). Ultra-Touch is what I used for my theater as well.

If you are doing your whole room you owe it to yourself to call Bryan, he will most likely even give you better pricing than what is listed on his site. The site you posted is about 2 - 3 times more expensive than Bryan Papes pricing for the same exact thing drop shipped from the Ultra Touch factory.

Ruben

Thank you SandmanX, I will be sure to contact Bryan and save some money on the Ultra-Touch insulation.

Damn you Sandman!!! Where were you with this info when I was buying this stuff!!!

I agree BTW. I would only use the real stuff, and I still think it is worth every penny I spent on it! So getting it for cheaper still is even better!

Yea thanks Ruben ! I guess reading my previous reply saying it was the same stuff was not good enough. .... :)

am I blind? I don't see it on the SSS website?

am I blind? I don't see it on the SSS website?

Links on the top left of the page. Reads "Acoustical Cotton" The page shows the different thickness materials they carry.

http://sensiblesoundsolutions.com/index.php?cPath=22&osCsid=cb838938feddc66e2d79a1a16e4cfb33

I recently purchased 160 square feet of the 5.5" thick Ultra-Touch to build THIS ANECHOIC CHAMBER (http://www.smxscreen.com/forum/showthread.php?t=352) to test Audio Transparent movie screens.

We also just purchased a bunch for bocapimps theater that we are building/rebuilding.

Ruben

I was thinking of using that in my soffits when I build them. I have regular batt insulation in my walls now. From what I have read this is sufficient, but I was thinking of using the soffits as bass traps also and this stuff should work great.

Please help me understand this a bit better. I looked at some of the data on
this page
http://www.acousticalsurfaces.com/wall_insulation/ultratouch_acou_test.htm
and the data doesn’t look so good to me.

For example, I clicked on test #4 and see an STC 35. What’s so great about
that? Isn’t that the same or even worse than a normal wall?

QUOTE: “So that's $0.89 per square foot. In my next of the woods,
kraft-faced R-13 fiberglass runs you $0.26 - $0.38 per square, depending on
batts or rolls. That's a pretty good premium for the Ultratouch.”

No kidding! My room would cost an additional $700. So at up to 3 X the cost
per square foot, where is the advantage? Again, I just want to understand.

Robert

Please help me understand this a bit better. I looked at some of the data on
this page
http://www.acousticalsurfaces.com/wall_insulation/ultratouch_acou_test.htm
and the data doesn’t look so good to me.

For example, I clicked on test #4 and see an STC 35. What’s so great about
that? Isn’t that the same or even worse than a normal wall?

QUOTE: “So that's $0.89 per square foot. In my next of the woods,
kraft-faced R-13 fiberglass runs you $0.26 - $0.38 per square, depending on
batts or rolls. That's a pretty good premium for the Ultratouch.”

No kidding! My room would cost an additional $700. So at up to 3 X the cost
per square foot, where is the advantage? Again, I just want to understand.

Robert

Robert,

OK, i sense a long winded post coming on, but i will step through the basics of insulation inside walls as best i can. There are literally 100's of historical tests.

First i'll address the tests on the page that you linked to. Test #3 is STC 35, but thats for a normal boring ordinary wood stud wall with no decoupling or damping or anything. Historical tests i'm aware of for this same wall include STC 37 (our test at orfield), 36 (PAC test in Australia), 34 (NRC in canada with mineral fiber), and 35 (NRC in canada with fiberglass). So it isn't worse, its about the same. Link #6 on that page shows STC=45 for a steel stud wall. That's about average for that wall as well. the NRC has a paper you can download here: http://irc.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/pubs/fulltext/ir761/ and on pages 62 through 87 of the .pdf this same basic wall is tested 25 times with differen insulations and so forth. the STCs range from 39 to 49, with the best values being with normal boring fiberglass insulation and the worst being with the most dense insulation in this test. The 3rd test is link 3 and thats STC=57 with double drywall on one side of steel studs with resilient channel. I don't have an exact test from any lab for that wall in front of me, but it is a pretty darn good result.

So it cannot be said that Ultratouch, based ont he supplied data, performs worse than normal insulation, but it can be said that it does not appear to perform better.

Throughout that document that i linked to above - IR761 - and its 350 different tests, one thing happens over and over and over. The STC values are best with normal boring fiberglass. This is true for:

staggered studs
double studs
single wood studs
single steel studs
resilient channel

and basically everything else. The reason for this can be understood with an understanding of how insulations work within a wall.

I will enter another post in a moment highlighting the technical aspects of this, but for now allow me to just offer that Ultratouch does not appear to perform worse than normal fiberglass, which is promising as basically all insulations do (perform worse).

ok, to understand why nromal boring fiberglass is not just an OK choice for walls, but the best choice in most all situations, we have to start by looking at what insulation does in a wall.

1. it acts like a sound absorber. it absorbs sound as it passes through the wall and damps resonances that occur in the air cavity (not resonances in the panels, but resonances that are like mini-room modes that happen inside the air cavity). This is a middle and high frequency phenomenon, not a low-frequency phenomenon.

2. it affects low frequency behavior of the wall by making the air cavity behave as though it is larger than it is, and supplies some amount of damping (generally quite small) at the lowest frequency resonance of a given wall. This is a low frequency phenomenon.


denser types of insulation with better sound absorbing properties are better at 1. But low density normal cheap boring fiberglass is superior at 2. And 2. is way more important than 1. because low-freq's are 1000x more likely to be the weak link of a properly sealed and constructed stud wall than high freqs.


Take a look at the attached diagram, which shows data on walls from IR761, courtesy of the Canadian Govt (linked in my post above).

See how the location of the low-frequency dip (the location of the low-freq resonance) moves up as the density of the insulation increases? OK, that's bad. All of these walls are crappy and no good for theaters, and the "high density mineral fiber" has insulation so dense that its almost as heavy as another layer of drywall, and is probably something like OC 703, but the lesson is valuable, and here's why:

a good theater wall or celing - take a ceiling with ISOMAX clips and double drywall as an example, or a stagg stud wall with Green Glue as another - is often decoupled. And decoupling - adding those clips or staggering those studs - only helps you at frequencies well above the location of the low-freq rseonance.

So using high density insulation harms you by making those efforts (the stagg studs or clips) work LESS for you by driving that resonance up. So perhaps instead of helping you from 50hz and up, they only help from 75hz and up.

And that's a bad thing.

In exchange you get better results at 500hz or 1000hz, which really don't matter at all in the grand scheme.


Dense, "acoustic" insulations have been marketed from the dawn of time, with one big study by USG to support their superiority. But even in that USG study, it is clear that the points i make above are valid - its higher freqs where dense insulation helps and in most cases it hurts at low freqs in the data that USG published.


ok, one more post.

i hate fiberglass. if i carry 3 batts of fiberglass 50 feet, i will cough at least 3 times. I hate mineral fiber even more. Ultratouch is a great idea, i think. recyled and non itchy and all.

But, in light of the presented data it appears to have no advantage over fiberglass in terms of sound performance, and its kind of spendy. But that said, it doesn't appear to have the real problems/worsening of performance that can occur with dense insulation types.

Also, existing data shows that low density insulation is preferable to high density types.


So, lets all make a petition to whoever makes this cotton stuff for a low-density version. Then it'll work better, cost less, and everybody is happy. Seriously, point them to these 3 posts and ask pretty please.

Brian,

Thanks for your insight again. You just saved me $500+ and a road trip to Boulder, CO.

Matt