Auralex bass traps - any good?

Porous absorbers can be, to a large degree judged by size. In short, size matters. ;-)

First tip-off to possible problems with a commercial product: Try finding the actual dimensions. I was only able to figure that out by inference.

Based on the text that comes with them, I'd put the pieces at 2 feet long, and a foot or less on each side. That means that the maximum thickness is less than 9 inches, and the average thickness is less than 5 inches.

When we were talking about porous absorber bass traps, we were talking average thickness of 12 inches and still less-than optimal absorption at 50 Hz.

In short, don't expect a lot of absorption @ 50 Hz. Even 100 Hz is in doubt.

You can see a direct comparison of two brands of corner foam, versus "real" bass traps on my company's Product Data page:

RealTraps Product Data

--Ethan

Ethan beat me to it. Yes, Ethan's traps are far more effective than Auralex. Also, as Ethan will tell you, the more traps you have, the better at taming lower frequencies. Another issue with Auralex, is it also absorbs high frequencies, which can over damp a room rather quickly, when adding enough traps to effectively tame the lower frequencies.

We use LENRDs in our church but more for killing upper bass and up (vocal region). Like many foam products they do poorly at absorbing LF energy (marketing claims aside). I use Ethan's panels and similar for "real" absorption.

For 4-6 months Auralex acoustic products were actually for sale on the AVS Science Store website, but then they were removed (Within past 3-4 months removed).