Do a search on resilient channel and see some of the comments from the resident experts here before spending your money. The negative aspects have been pointed out so often, people get tired of writing the same thing over and over. Of course my post assumes you have not read up, if you have, nevermind, but if you haven't, you may want to.
BGPGuy, thanks for the tip. I know it's a much disputed topic on the forum. I have done the research. There is much ado about having bass sucked out of the room. In my current room where I have my 10" sub-woofer there's plenty of bass. I have regular 2X4 walls with 1/2" sheet-rock. There are some null spots in the room and I do experience peaks, but not objectionably so. Part of this may be due to the fact that I have a large entertainment center in between the front speakers. Also, a wall is behind one of the fronts and not the other. I'm starting to think wall construction doesn't make a whole lot of difference. The fact that there is an unresolved dispute between many of the members indicates to me that perhaps the differences aren't audible. I do think floating techniques have good isolation properties.
I'm not using it in the walls only the ceiling. I'm finishing the basement and don't think I have room for any other isolation technique on the ceiling. I only have 86" vertical from concrete to joists and I want to build a riser. It's value as an isolation technique does have some worth to me.
ELB_III, thanks. There are two in East Hartford, CT which is very close to me.
ELB_III, you were right. Strober has both regular dry wall channel and resilient channel. I am a bit confused, however. I thought the furring channel was resilient channel. The resilient channel they sell looks a little flimsy. It only attaches to the joist on one side. The good part is that it only hangs down 1/2".
Did you install regular dry wall channel or the resilient channel. If so, how is it working out? Do the seams that were mudded crack because of the flexibility?
I went to the one in East Hartford (the acoustics division on Tolland St) and they were really very nice to work with. The other one up on Rt 5 (where I went first and was directed to the other) smelled "amateur" when I walked in the door and were like "get outta here, you DIY loser!".
Anyway, let me try to address your last post (I'm a little unclear but I'll do my best)...
(NOTE: Member's - Please don't flame me. I admit I don't know much about this and probably didn't do this right anyway)
Yes, the channel they sell is flimsy and attaches to the joists (if you go that route) with the flat side up against the joist.
I put up furring strips (1x3 wood) perpendicular to the joists and installed my channel to the furring strips running in the same direction. The height of the furring strip and resilient channel together gave me the clearance I needed to keep me from having to re-route all of the pipes running across the bottoms of the joists.
Thank God the cans that were already installed had that sleeve that comes down otherwise I would have had to rip 'em all out and lower 'em which would have presented its' own challenge as the mounting brackets were already to the bottom of the joists and you can't really mount 'em to air, now can you?
One option to consider going with is USG's Sheetrock Acoustic Sealant to go into the drywall seams prior to taping and mudding. From what I read, this is supposed to give you additional sound protection properties and allow for a little flexibility. You can find the pdf at http://literature.usg.com/pdf/J678.pdf or just go to www.usg.com and take a look around at the other info they have on sound proofing.
I didn't go this route due to the info contained in the MSDS (material safety data sheet). It's got some stuff in it that I didn't necessarily want to introduce into my house and my builder wouldn't do it either because he didn't want his guys working with it.
I haven't had any problems with cracking or flexing... yet. Then again, I'm not done with the room so I haven't had the opportunity to take it for a test drive yet. I'll keep you posted but the info might not be in time to help you.
I put up the sheet rock on the ceiling of my HT using resilient channel fastened to the joists. That was three years ago and the joints look just like the day they were finished (i.e., like a beginner did them). I used the usual tape and mud without adding anything into the spaces between adjacent sheets at the butted interfaces. Because our master bedroom is above, I wanted to create some acoustic isolation. So in addition to the RC, I stuffed the spaces between joists with insulation. All this may have done some good, but I would do it differently today...thanks to information gleaned from this site.
I did install a second set of studs to create a "box within a box" for the side walls. But the ceiling could have been done that way as well. In order to support the sheet rock but keep it away from the joists of the floor above, a sort of phoney joist could have been installed between the existing real ones. If they were supported just at the ends and extended downward just a bit below the true joists, any sheet rock attacked to them would be more completely isolated from the floor above. It wouldn't be perfect because the ends of these phoney supports have to connect to the above floor somewhere. These false joists need only be strong enough to support the weight of the sheetrock without sagging unduly. What material should they be made from? Don't know. But I wonder about the sort of metal stud that is used in construction this days. In my case I would have needed something to span 14 feet, or a compromise would have required a cross support somewhere near the middle.
But back to the original question: no saging or joint cracking three years after using RC to support sheetrock on the ceiling.
Maybe I should start a new thread. I've shifted topic a bit. I hope I'm not breaking any rules of the forum.
I'm curious, did you take care not to screw through the resilient channel into the joist when hanging the sheet rock? I'm not quite sure on installation instructions, but I've heard some say to use screws only where there are no joists.
Yes, the plan was to avoid putting any screws into the joists...whether we were 100 % successful is another story! As I remember it, the screws skid a bit on the metal, then suddenly bite and pull in. If we lost track of where the joists were, I think it could be detected as the screw entered the wood. My belief is that the joists were avoided.
I've been away from home for a couple of months (Australia), and was catching up on magazines last night. I noticed Russ Herschelmann's column in the January SGHT discussing RC (he calls it "hat channel" because of the shape of a cross-section...like a hat with a brim. The RC mounts to the joists with screws through the "crown of the hat", and then the sheetrock is screwed to the "brim" areas. I don't remember the RC I used having that shape. Mine was more like the letter "V" lying on its side. One side of the V was longer (that's the side that gets screwed to the joist). I think the "hat channel" looks like a better design.
Herschelmann's picture, I believe is upside down. The hat channel is regular dry wall channel. I think normal installation goes the other way. The hat brim should attach to the joist, and the top hat should be attached to the sheet rock. Home Theater magazine also has a similar series going on right now, and there using the same resilient channel you are speaking of, not the hat channel. It was the resilient channel I was curious about. I'm not sure hat channel will provide the degree of separation necessary. But I don't know, it all seems like guess work to me.
You sound a little disappointed in your resilient channel results. Are you convinced a separate ceiling would be better? I'm going to start a new thread on resilient channel. Please reply over there.
If you go to www.unimast.com , maker of resilient channels, they make three types of RC's. One is shaped like the hat and is recommended for ceilings. The brims are nailed alternatively to the joist and sheet-rock to the crown.
The way you explain the hat channel makes better sense than the illustration in SGHT. The V-shaped channel seems to have worked ok for me, but this other shape makes sense.
I'll reply here to the question as to whether or not I'm disappointed with the isolation provided by my ceiling the way I did it: Not really disappointed, just wistful that I'll never know how any of the alternatives would have compared. I arranged to participate in an uncontrolled experiment, so how can I judge the outcome?
For my home situation, any approach would have likely proved successful. I live in a quiet neighborhood, so keeping the outside world removed from the theater isn't too challanging...I can't remember ever hearing any intrusive sounds from outside the house while watching a movie.
However the master bedroom and bath are just above the theater, so footfalls there or water running in the bathroom are very evident. But my wife and I are retired, the children long on their own (well, at least they're away) and we will usually be in the HT at the same time so there's no one to walk around upstairs or use the bathroom.
I AM concerned about containing loud soundtracks within the theater. No one has yet built on the lot on that side of my house, so we haven't really been put to the test yet. I've made a few trips outside to check out levels, and I think we're going to be all right, but time will tell.
If I were starting over on theater construction, I would give precedence to the false joist solution...that is, a support structure that holds only sheet rock. It seems a more elegant solution.
A forum community dedicated to home theater owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, TVs, projectors, screens, receivers, speakers, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!