plans for acoustic computer enclosure?

Christopher Glaeser wrote:
>>Is most of this noise transmitted via vibration or is it airborne?
>>IOW.. can you feel the case vibrate?
>
>
> Vibration is relatively low. There is some noise due to the six drives, but
> most of the noise is due to all the fans (fans for dual cpu chips, fan for
> hign-end graphics card, and multiple fans for power and enclosure).
>
> A Kell System enclosure would be ideal, but they are pricey (though I'm sure
> they are worth it). I expect a reasonable design would use 1/2" or 3/4"
> birch plywood lined with carpeting and/or sound proofing material. One key
> feature is the air flow. Needs to cool 600-800 watts, yet baffle the noise
> inside the enclosure. Several superquiete 120mm fans could be used to
> exchange the air. Another feature is the door. Needs to provide easy
> access, but also a seal to minimize noise.
>
> I've seen plans on the net to build the computer case out of wood. I have
> no desire to do that. I want the ability to swap in a new computer every
> couple of years, but keep the acoustic enclosure.
>
> Best,
> Christopher
>
>

Have you considered putting the whole tower into a dorm type
refrigerator modified for cable exits?

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA
[email protected]

"-MIKE-" wrote
>
> The technology has advanced and I am behind in my knowledge of of stuff
> apparently on the cutting edge.
>
Tell me about it. I was once involved in a vocational music program at a
local college. I designed and taught course that were cutting edge in terms
of technology, equipment knowldge, recording theory etc. Then I moved onto
other things.

I went back ten years later and I was an idiot. I didn't know half the stuff
there. Although I still retain the basics, I have NO experience with digital
recording, etc.

But I still have a small voice only studio and can do good work. But even
my little studio has a mixer in it that is much smalle, much cheaper and WAY
quieter than I used to use.

RE: Subject

Check out SoundDown.

Link below.

Lew

http://tinyurl.com/yd694n8

"CW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Since this is taking the course it is, I will throw this out. It's a
> friggen box. How hard is it to make a box?
--
It is easy to make a box. But to make it so it absorbs sound and still allow
sufficient cooling/air flow at the same time is a bit more difficult.

I have installed those anechoic wedge foam blocks in recording studios
before. It is expensive but works well. You would have to make sure the
air still got through though.

Christopher Glaeser wrote:
>>I would recommend getting some software that will monitor the CPU temps.
>>There is some free stuff out there that will do it. Depending upon how
>>quiet you get it, check out for fan monitors as well, want to make sure
>>they keep spinning.
>
>
> The computer case fan speed is controlled by the computer, so the temps
> should be avialble to an app.
>
>
>>Monitor it while the computer is outside the box, under heave usage.
>
>
> Will do.
>
> Best,
> Christopher
>
>

Check the options on the BIOS set-up screen. On many of the higher end
system you can view the system temperatures.

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA
[email protected]

"Christopher Glaeser" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Anyone have plans or photos of an acoustic enclosure for a desktop
> computer?
>
> Best,
> Christopher
>
>

Model railroaders often complain of noise from their trains, and go
through several lengths building the benchwork to minimize the noise.
The track base consists of plywood and homasote, a pressed paper like
material. There are no nails from the track in to the plywood, and in
most cases the homasote is glued to the plywood. This helps quiet the
vibration noise. (Some of us simply use thicker plywood that doesn't
transmit sound like the thinner stuff.)

What about pictures and plans for a shop vac enclosure? They'd seem to
have the same problems of heat and noise.

Puckdropper
--
"The potential difference between the top and bottom of a tree is the
reason why all trees have to be grounded..." -- Bored Borg on
rec.woodworking

To email me directly, send a message to puckdropper (at) fastmail.fm

On Oct 2, 12:51=A0pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
> Christopher Glaeser wrote:
> >> Whichever way you go, you may want to consider using an indoor/outdoor
> >> thermometer to keep an eye on actual in-the-box temps.
>
> > Agreed. =A0Probably the best place to monitor the temp is the air flow =
into
> > the computer case.
>
> > Best,
> > Christopher
>
> Really? =A0 Wouldn't that measure the coolest reading?
>
> I would think you would want to measure somewhere that gives the highest
> reading, because you want to know how hot it is inside the box.

I would tend to agree.

I don't know which of the components represents the Lowest Common
Denominator (by having the lowest upper operating range) in this
equation, but ... I'd think you'd want to locate a temp probe as near
to /that/ component as you could.

OTOH, if they're all within a fairly narrow operating temperature
band, then ... I'd pick a component and locate it as near to that
component as I could.

> That isn't a desktop computer, it is a server, or should be.

It's a desktop computer for video editing.

Silly me, I thought if I posted to the woodworking forum, someone would
suggest a solution that would use one of those tools with a round wheel with
sharp teeth, um, I think they are called table saws. My apologies for the
technical jargon. Perhaps if I post this question to a computer forum they
will provide plans for a 3/4" birch plywood enclosure. I'll let you guys
get back to whatever it is you discuss on this forum. Certainly can't be
woodworking. :)

Best,
Christopher

Find an old Printer enclosure. It is a lid opening box and it has thick
foam on the inside area. The issue you will come in with is air. Cooling
a working computer in an box isn't easy. Not silent.

Perhaps in stead of asking for what you did - you might tell us why or for
what reason.

Might be just a different computer to solve the problem. Might be exotic
water cooled...

Martin

Christopher Glaeser wrote:
> Anyone have plans or photos of an acoustic enclosure for a desktop computer?
>
> Best,
> Christopher
>
>

> I don't know if we're still referring to studio use, but it's mostly the
> fan and drive noise, not vibration, that bug people.

Correct. The problem is also cumulative. The 24 port gigabit switch is
noticable but not really annoying, the NAS is noticable but not annoying,
the video editing station is somewhat loud but tolerable, etc, etc, but with
everything running, it's an annoying wind tunnel. My goal is to tackle the
loudest PC first, and then perhaps add more acoustic enclosures as needed.

Best,
Christopher

On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:09:04 -0600, the infamous Chris Friesen
<[email protected]> scrawled the following:

>On 10/01/2009 11:31 AM, Christopher Glaeser wrote:
>>> What is an acoustic enclosure for a computer? Never heard of one before.
>>
>> Acoustic enclosures are used to reduce computer noise. One of my desktop
>> computers has six hard drives and six fans.
>
>My first suggestion would be to get rid of some of the fans if possible,
>or at least slow them down. I cut my system noise way down by using
>only one case fan.

Sure, and overheat the system, causing (at worst) a fire or (at least)
a component failure, like a fried CPU. Don't mess with the fans,
Chris. Muffle 'em but don't remove 'em.


--
"Giving every man a vote has no more made men wise and free
than Christianity has made them good." --H. L. Mencken
---

"Christopher Glaeser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> If the only requirement was a box, sure, the project would be trivial with
> not much planning needed. However, a major design objective is to
> significantly reduce noise while providing adequate air flow, which
requires
> a bit more thought and planning.

If it helps you any, I built a padded box around my portable compress to
stifle the noise when I use it in my apartment. It's a simple 3/4" plywood
box, four rubber wheeled casters and lined with furnace air intake filters.
It reduces the noise over 50%. Air intake is sufficient by the use of an
interior 120v fan and the air to it is supplied through several layers of
speaker grill cloth. If it does that well on an 85 decibel compressor, it
should be sufficient for a computer box.

"Christopher Glaeser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> FWIW, I have 10 terrabyes of storage that includes a system drive, data
> drive and raid array. Squeezing into a single 1TB HD is not an option. I
> was thinking more of a woodworking solution.

Perhaps there's other options. I'm not too far removed from your 10
terabytes with a total of more than 7 TB, but 6 TB (4x1.5 TB drives) are
located in a USB connected satellite case, which is extremely small and
quiet. And with that I plan on increasing transfer speed soon by replacing
the USB connection with a Firewire 800 connection, which the satellite case
has.

> The track base consists of plywood and homasote, a pressed paper like
> material. There are no nails from the track in to the plywood, and in
> most cases the homasote is glued to the plywood.

This is extremely helpful. I found some excellent articles on Homasote 440
and STC (sound transmission coefficient). I'm reviewing them now.

> What about pictures and plans for a shop vac enclosure? They'd seem to
> have the same problems of heat and noise.

I'll search for them.

Best,
Christopher

On Oct 1, 4:00=A0pm, "Christopher Glaeser" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Replace many hard drives with a 1T HD.
>
> Or, I could use an HP calculator; those are pretty quiet. :)
>
> FWIW, I have 10 terrabyes of storage that includes a system drive, data
> drive and raid array. =A0Squeezing into a single 1TB HD is not an option.=
=A0I
> was thinking more of a woodworking solution.
>
> Best,
> Christopher

Is most of this noise transmitted via vibration or is it airborne?
IOW.. can you feel the case vibrate?

"Christopher Glaeser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>> What is an acoustic enclosure for a computer? Never heard of one before.
>
> Acoustic enclosures are used to reduce computer noise. One of my desktop
> computers has six hard drives and six fans. Kell Systems is one company
> that sells enclosures in this market. See http://www.kellsystems.com/
>
> Features typically include noise reduction, air flow to extract heat,
> cable paths for power and peripherals, and doors for easy access.
>
> Best,
> Christopher
>

For a second I thought he meant an acoustic computer. (grin)

If you are recording with a microphone on the computer, you find out just
how loud the things are.

Ed

On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 09:51:42 -0700, "Christopher Glaeser"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Anyone have plans or photos of an acoustic enclosure for a desktop computer?
>
>Best,
>Christopher
>


Start with a quiet tower PC case with 120mm slow-running fans. Put
the computer on a carpeted floor. Replace many hard drives with a 1T
HD.

The only thing I built is a wheeled base, made from some scrap pine,
painted black with a front pull.

> I would recommend getting some software that will monitor the CPU temps.
> There is some free stuff out there that will do it. Depending upon how
> quiet you get it, check out for fan monitors as well, want to make sure
> they keep spinning.

The computer case fan speed is controlled by the computer, so the temps
should be avialble to an app.

> Monitor it while the computer is outside the box, under heave usage.

Will do.

Best,
Christopher

J. Clarke wrote:

>
> Googling "USB multitrack audio" gets 110,000 hits, and most of them point to
> a device of one sort or another, most of which have mor than two channels.

With current gear for the home recordist it has become, for all
practical purposes, a moot point ... and many are capable of both USB2
and Firewire operation. Mark Of The Unicorn (MOTU) sells some pretty
good gear for the home recordist with that in mind, as well as TasCam,
as you mentioned.

I would worry more about computer processor power, as audio glitches,
that really pop up (no pun intended) when a single processor comes close
to maximum utilization, are the achilles heel of home recording for most.

Hard to beat a minimum of dual processors and multi-threaded software ...

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

On 10/2/09 2:43 PM, "Christopher Glaeser" <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Whichever way you go, you may want to consider using an indoor/outdoor
>> thermometer to keep an eye on actual in-the-box temps.
>
> Agreed. Probably the best place to monitor the temp is the air flow into
> the computer case.

I disagree. The best place is at the level of the computer components that
are of most concern - CPU chip, memory, etc. Some chips have built-in temp
sensing that can be monitored.

> Replace many hard drives with a 1T HD.

Or, I could use an HP calculator; those are pretty quiet. :)

FWIW, I have 10 terrabyes of storage that includes a system drive, data
drive and raid array. Squeezing into a single 1TB HD is not an option. I
was thinking more of a woodworking solution.

Best,
Christopher

> Reviewing the entire thread it's clear that the OP doesn't want a quiet
> machine, he wants a cabinet to hold a noisy one.

Thanks, this car keeps veering off the road, and I appreciate your efforts
to regain control of the steering wheel. It was probably a mistake to
mention the word "computer". In hind sight I should have said "acoustic
enclosure for noisy doohicky" and avoided all the discussions about
replacing videos cards etc.

> Googling "DIY computer isolation box" will yield a good deal of useful
> material.

I had not tried that particular Google phrase and that did turn up some new
ideas. Thanks again.

Best,
Christopher

Since this is taking the course it is, I will throw this out. It's a friggen
box. How hard is it to make a box?
"Christopher Glaeser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>> That isn't a desktop computer, it is a server, or should be.
>
> It's a desktop computer for video editing.
>
> Silly me, I thought if I posted to the woodworking forum, someone would
> suggest a solution that would use one of those tools with a round wheel
> with sharp teeth, um, I think they are called table saws. My apologies
> for the technical jargon. Perhaps if I post this question to a computer
> forum they will provide plans for a 3/4" birch plywood enclosure. I'll
> let you guys get back to whatever it is you discuss on this forum.
> Certainly can't be woodworking. :)


Since this is taking the course it is, I will throw this out. It's a friggen
box. How hard is it to make a box?

Lee Michaels wrote:
> "-MIKE-" wrote
>> The technology has advanced and I am behind in my knowledge of of stuff
>> apparently on the cutting edge.
>>
> Tell me about it. I was once involved in a vocational music program at a
> local college. I designed and taught course that were cutting edge in terms
> of technology, equipment knowldge, recording theory etc. Then I moved onto
> other things.
>
> I went back ten years later and I was an idiot. I didn't know half the stuff
> there. Although I still retain the basics, I have NO experience with digital
> recording, etc.
>
> But I still have a small voice only studio and can do good work. But even
> my little studio has a mixer in it that is much smalle, much cheaper and WAY
> quieter than I used to use.

I still keep a finger (little)in it(still partners in a working studio,
but no longer have anything to do with the day-to-day operation for the
past six or seven years).

I am occasionally enticed/arm twisted back to do engineering/producing
on a small project by project basis, but even turn most of that down
these days. The biggest reason given for even being approached is that
it seems there is a dearth of experience in actually getting a world
class project out the door these days.

Other than admittedly old ears at this point, my problem with the
newbies is that I simply can NOT abide ProTools in any way, shape, or
form, and that is ALL most places use these days.

IME, ProTools has done to music what McDonald's did to hamburgers.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

> Whichever way you go, you may want to consider using an indoor/outdoor
> thermometer to keep an eye on actual in-the-box temps.

Agreed. Probably the best place to monitor the temp is the air flow into
the computer case.

Best,
Christopher

> Really? Wouldn't that measure the coolest reading?

Yes, but I'm not sure what the reading at the computer case exhaust will
tell me. The exhaust is pretty warm now just sitting in a room. If the
input of the computer case has unrestricted air flow at a good operating
temp, isn't that sufficient? Of couser, that "unrestricted air flow" is
criticially important. If the temp at the input to the case was low but the
air flow into the case is restricted, that would be very bad indeed.

Best,
Christopher

> Have you considered putting the whole tower into a dorm type refrigerator
> modified for cable exits?

The sled on my table saw won't support the weight of a dorm refrigerator.
:)

Best,
Christopher

Christopher Glaeser wrote:
>> Replace many hard drives with a 1T HD.
>
> Or, I could use an HP calculator; those are pretty quiet. :)
>
> FWIW, I have 10 terrabyes of storage that includes a system drive, data
> drive and raid array. Squeezing into a single 1TB HD is not an option. I
> was thinking more of a woodworking solution.
>
That isn't a desktop computer, it is a server, or should be.

Why not just network into it, then you could move the machine far away
from your desk? i.e. got a garage, closet etc. where the noise would
not be an issue.

--
Froz...

Christopher Glaeser wrote:
>> That isn't a desktop computer, it is a server, or should be.
>
> It's a desktop computer for video editing.
>
> Silly me, I thought if I posted to the woodworking forum, someone would
> suggest a solution that would use one of those tools with a round wheel with
> sharp teeth, um, I think they are called table saws. My apologies for the
> technical jargon. Perhaps if I post this question to a computer forum they
> will provide plans for a 3/4" birch plywood enclosure. I'll let you guys
> get back to whatever it is you discuss on this forum. Certainly can't be
> woodworking. :)
>
You didn't specify the usage of the machine before, now I know why you need
all that local.

But the box can still be located elsewhere, there are IP based remote
solutions, have you researched the option? Even extending the keyboard,
video and mouse cables may allow you to get it around a corner or
something to cut the noise.

Building a box that will absorb sound and provide the cooling
requirements for a computer like that is non-trivial.
--
Froz...

> What is an acoustic enclosure for a computer? Never heard of one before.

Acoustic enclosures are used to reduce computer noise. One of my desktop
computers has six hard drives and six fans. Kell Systems is one company
that sells enclosures in this market. See http://www.kellsystems.com/

Features typically include noise reduction, air flow to extract heat, cable
paths for power and peripherals, and doors for easy access.

Best,
Christopher

-MIKE- wrote:
> Christopher Glaeser wrote:
>>> Really? Wouldn't that measure the coolest reading?
>>
>> Yes, but I'm not sure what the reading at the computer case exhaust
>> will tell me. The exhaust is pretty warm now just sitting in a room.
>> If the input of the computer case has unrestricted air flow at a good
>> operating temp, isn't that sufficient? Of couser, that "unrestricted
>> air flow" is criticially important. If the temp at the input to the
>> case was low but the air flow into the case is restricted, that would
>> be very bad indeed.
>>
>> Best,
>> Christopher
>>
>
> I guess the purpose isn't airflow, it's temperature drop, right?
> Computer don't need airflow, they need lower temps.
> It just so happens that airflow will lower the temp.
>
> I'd say the probe (whatever) should be in the box, up high.
> I would move it around the box to find the hottest spot and leave it there.
>
> You could always find a website or specs from a company that make those
> boxes for studios and try to ascertain where they put theirs.
>
I would recommend getting some software that will monitor the CPU temps.
There is some free stuff out there that will do it. Depending upon how
quiet you get it, check out for fan monitors as well, want to make sure
they keep spinning.

Monitor it while the computer is outside the box, under heave usage.
When it goes inside the final box, make sure it doesn't get much, if
any, warmer.

--
Froz...

On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 13:13:42 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Every other house in Nashville has a studio in the basement, so you see
>all kind of crazy stuff.

Makes me wonder about Nashville power requirements. What kind of power
generation does Nashville use? Have they got their own nuclear power
reactor?

On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 13:20:06 -0400, the infamous [email protected]
scrawled the following:

>On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 09:51:42 -0700, "Christopher Glaeser"
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Anyone have plans or photos of an acoustic enclosure for a desktop computer?
>
>What is an acoustic enclosure for a computer? Never heard of one
>before.

Before I got this whisper-quiet ACER, I was thinking about doing that
same thing for my old computer. I HATE fan noise when I'm thinking.

I was going to build two open-ended rectangular boxes about 3"
different in height and 6" different in width, then line the inside
with either foam carpet padding or carpet itself. I aimed to do the
same thing for my compressor.

The pooter is 7w x 18d x 14h.
The inside shell would be 10x20x15.5, the outer 13x23x18.5

One end and the bottom would be open on each shell.

A 4" hole near the bottom in the back of the small shell would let in
all the cables and be acoustically baffled by a towel wrapped around
the opening after cable routing and shell placement, open end front.

The front shell would fit around the smaller shell, providing 1.5"
clearance for air intake on 3 sides, open end back. It would slide
off for insertion of DVDs, or if I were playing/loading DVDS more
frequently, I might make an openable door on the top of the front.

Baltic birch plywood and 3/4" cleats, glue, and "a few brads to hold
it while the glue sets" make up the boxes. Once the cleats were glued
and set, I'd glue the carpet down to the inside with acrylic mastic.
It sets in a day and doesn't stink much while curing. Then I'd glue
the panels up and brush on some Waterlox.

Set 'em outside to degas for a couple weeks and Bob's yer uncle.

These might look a lot nicer if you used steel or aluminum sheet and
wetsuit foam, for that commercial look.

IAC, the foam or carpeting + angles should soak up a -whole- lot of
the fan noises. Maybe Swingman could work up some drawings of these
for you. (About 3 minutes with SketchUp, wot? I'm getting ready to
buy a new computer so I won't be installing it on this old job.)

--
"Giving every man a vote has no more made men wise and free
than Christianity has made them good." --H. L. Mencken
---

> Might be just a different computer to solve the problem.

The computer I'm using was $8,200. I can see I'm pushing a string here.
Thank you everyone for all the computer suggestions; I know the intent was
in the right place.

Best,
Christopher

On 10/01/2009 02:53 PM, Christopher Glaeser wrote:
>> That isn't a desktop computer, it is a server, or should be.
>
> It's a desktop computer for video editing.
>
> Silly me, I thought if I posted to the woodworking forum, someone would
> suggest a solution that would use one of those tools with a round wheel with
> sharp teeth, um, I think they are called table saws.

Actually, from an overall perspective his post is a good one. A sound
absorbing enclosure would kill the sound somewhat, but it's going to be
big and bulky. Better to move the noise elsewhere to start with.

Here's what I'd do, starting with free and moving progressively more
expensive.

1) Move as much noise as possible out of the room completely. This
includes things like your NAS and your gigabit switch.

2) Reduce the power requirements on the computer as much as possible.
Without changing the hardware this basically means move stuff from your
10TB of local disks to the NAS. Ideally you want to get rid of entire
drives from your desktop machine. Reduce the number of case fans and/or
run them as slowly as possible without causing too much heat buildup.

3) Enclose the tower in a sound absorbing enclosure. I'd go with a
large box made of MDF or particleboard (solid wood resonates more), with
sound absorbing panels on the inside and mass-loaded acoustic barrier
sheets on the outside, with baffled air intake and exit. You want the
air to have to travel in a zigzag pattern so that there is no direct
path for sound to escape.

4) Reduce the noise on the remaining components. This starts to cost
money. Use quieter/fewer fans, more efficient cpus, quieter heatsinks,
quieter video cards, quieter power supplies, cases designed for cooling
and sound absorption, quieter/cooler hard drives, etc. Basically go and
read www.silentpcreview.com.

Chris

On Oct 2, 10:24=A0am, "Christopher Glaeser" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Reviewing the entire thread it's clear that the OP doesn't want a quiet
> > machine, he wants a cabinet to hold a noisy one.
>
> Thanks, this car keeps veering off the road, and I appreciate your effort=
s
> to regain control of the steering wheel. =A0It was probably a mistake to
> mention the word "computer". =A0In hind sight I should have said "acousti=
c
> enclosure for noisy doohicky" and avoided all the discussions about
> replacing videos cards etc.
>
> > Googling "DIY computer isolation box" will yield a good deal of useful
> > material.
>
> I had not tried that particular Google phrase and that did turn up some n=
ew
> ideas. =A0Thanks again.

Whichever way you go, you may want to consider using an indoor/outdoor
thermometer to keep an eye on actual in-the-box temps.

Best of luck, and happy building!

> 2) Reduce the power requirements on the computer as much as possible.
> Without changing the hardware this basically means move stuff from your
> 10TB of local disks to the NAS.

The local RAID is required for uncompressed HD video editing.

> You want the air to have to travel in a zigzag pattern so that there is no
> direct
> path for sound to escape.

I was thinking along the same lines, but check out the 3D Model Tour at
http://www.kellsystems.com/3d.asp#tab9

It appears the air intake is at the bottom back of the unit, and the air
exhausts are a relatively simple modular package at attach to the back of
the unit. Each exhaust module has three fans at an angle that force the air
down and out through side ports. Is that how you imterpret this model? In
other words, all of the Kell air flow is at the back from bottom to top.
They make no attempt to force air to the front of the rack, so each rack
unit is responsible for pulling air into the front and out the back, and
then the air exchange happens at the back where the Kell vertical air flow
exchanges with the rack unit exhaust. Is that the way you see it?

Best,
Christopher

PS: Pause the video as necessary to examine the exhausts.

On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 09:51:42 -0700, "Christopher Glaeser"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Anyone have plans or photos of an acoustic enclosure for a desktop computer?

What is an acoustic enclosure for a computer? Never heard of one
before.

On Oct 1, 6:49=A0pm, "Martin H. Eastburn" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Find an old Printer enclosure. =A0It is a lid opening box and it has thic=
k
> foam on the inside area. =A0The issue you will come in with is air. =A0Co=
oling
> a working computer in an box isn't easy. =A0

> Might be just a different computer to solve the problem. =A0Might be exot=
ic
> water cooled...


Most desktop computers cool by turbulent circulation of air, which
generates high-frequency 'ssss' sound, in addition to a few low-
frequency
components from disk rotation and fan bearings.

Soundproofing, like in a studio, relies on baffling and putting high
density
barriers in low density mediums (lead sheet will stop a LOT of sound
from air, less of conducted sound in wood). So, one approach is to
use heavy panels (like, liquid nails assemblies of two or three
thicknesses of sheetrock/drywall/gypsum board) and supporting the
computer
inside the box with soft foam pads. There has to be an air inlet and
outlet, so
either use a labyrinth box-with-baffles as an air channel, or close
the
thing comletely and put an air/water heat exchanger (ask at an auto
radiator shop, they can build up a small core easily enough) and
remove heat through water circulation.

Sound-deadening carpentry includes sand-filled panels (Wharfedale
speakers, I think, used this) and humble MDF-glue construction (also
a favorite of speaker designers).

Best, though, is to remove the disks and power-hungry parts to another
room. Sound studios can keep laptops in the quiet room, and used 'em
to
remote-control the real mix computers elsewhere... rubber-chicklet
keyboards and trackpads can be quieter than standard keyboard/mouse.

On 10/01/2009 07:06 PM, Christopher Glaeser wrote:
>> 2) Reduce the power requirements on the computer as much as possible.
>> Without changing the hardware this basically means move stuff from your
>> 10TB of local disks to the NAS.
>
> The local RAID is required for uncompressed HD video editing.
>
>> You want the air to have to travel in a zigzag pattern so that there is no
>> direct
>> path for sound to escape.
>
> I was thinking along the same lines, but check out the 3D Model Tour at
> http://www.kellsystems.com/3d.asp#tab9
>
> It appears the air intake is at the bottom back of the unit, and the air
> exhausts are a relatively simple modular package at attach to the back of
> the unit.

The way I interpret that video is that the air intakes are at the bottom
and top but near the front. (They advertise "front to back airflow" in
the text".) The exit is at the back.

For a tower enclosure I'd just do intake at the front and exit at the
back, but with zigzag passages lined with sound absorber panels. If
you've got carpet it may be beneficial to orient the openings facing
downwards to get a bit more muffling effect. You probably want the
enclosure to fit fairly snugly around the side of the tower to avoid
warm exhaust mixing with the incoming cool air.

Chris

On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 10:31:23 -0700, "Christopher Glaeser"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Acoustic enclosures are used to reduce computer noise. One of my desktop
>computers has six hard drives and six fans. Kell Systems is one company
>that sells enclosures in this market. See http://www.kellsystems.com/

Ok, that sounds reasonable. In retrospect, I have heard of an acoustic
enclosure before, just for printers, not computers. Noise from older
computer systems of mine was something I used to just accept, having
multiple SCSI drives and the fans to keep them cool. Then I upgraded a
little while ago with fewer drives, forgoing SCSI for SATA drives and
when I bought fans for it, I choose the ones with a smaller noise
rating.

The only problem I have now is that I bought an i7-650 extreme
processor and a Cooler Master V10 cpu cooler to go with it. The cpu
cooler is damned near the size of a football and I'm dreading trying
to fit it in the case I've got even though it is a monster tower case.

And no, I'm not going to try water cooling. :)

Every other house in Nashville has a studio in the basement, so you see
all kind of crazy stuff.

A fridge in the studio is a great thing to have for keeping water and
juice and snacks and whatnot.

One guy had a fridge, built into the wall. You couldn't hear this
refrigerator when the compressor kicked on because it was behind the
wall and he did a great job of sealing up around the fridge.

This one was the kind with the cooler on top and the freezer on the
bottom. He had disabled the freezer section and used it for the
acoustic computer enclosure, with a fan and access in the back, from the
other room. It was brilliant and worked like a charm.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

[email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 13:13:42 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Every other house in Nashville has a studio in the basement, so you see
>> all kind of crazy stuff.
>
> Makes me wonder about Nashville power requirements. What kind of power
> generation does Nashville use? Have they got their own nuclear power
> reactor?

All those McMansions popping up all over the place use much more power
than any home studio, just to light their shrubbery. :-)

A whole rack of effects, processors, preamps, along with the computer,
guitar amps, control room speaker amps, etc., won't pull more than one
or two 15amp circuits could handle.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

Christopher Glaeser wrote:
>> That isn't a desktop computer, it is a server, or should be.
>
> It's a desktop computer for video editing.
>
> Silly me, I thought if I posted to the woodworking forum, someone would
> suggest a solution that would use one of those tools with a round wheel with
> sharp teeth, um, I think they are called table saws. My apologies for the
> technical jargon. Perhaps if I post this question to a computer forum they
> will provide plans for a 3/4" birch plywood enclosure. I'll let you guys
> get back to whatever it is you discuss on this forum. Certainly can't be
> woodworking. :)
>
> Best,
> Christopher
>


HAHAHHAHA, now you know.

Took the words right out of my mouth. :-)


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

Robatoy wrote:
> Is most of this noise transmitted via vibration or is it airborne?
> IOW.. can you feel the case vibrate?


I don't know if we're still referring to studio use, but it's mostly the
fan and drive noise, not vibration, that bug people.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

IF the machine doesn't need 3d accelerated graphics or full motion video,
then a thin client might be a possibility--there are several ways to set
that up--a netbook or a mini-itx system does fine as a thin client and they
can be made as quiet as a lamp, while you can put the main machine in
another room.

If you haven't checked out http://www.silentpcreview.com you might want to.
Search that site with keyword "wood" and you'll find some discussion of
wooden cases and some articles by people who have tried them.

If your objective is to do a woodworking project by all means have at it,
but if the objective is to have a quiet machine in a reasonable time then I
think that buying one is going to be a better plan.

"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> IF the machine doesn't need 3d accelerated graphics or full motion video,
> then a thin client might be a possibility--there are several ways to set
> that up--a netbook or a mini-itx system does fine as a thin client and
> they
> can be made as quiet as a lamp, while you can put the main machine in
> another room.
>
> If you haven't checked out http://www.silentpcreview.com you might want
> to.
> Search that site with keyword "wood" and you'll find some discussion of
> wooden cases and some articles by people who have tried them.
>
> If your objective is to do a woodworking project by all means have at it,
> but if the objective is to have a quiet machine in a reasonable time then
> I
> think that buying one is going to be a better plan.
>
>


I have not read all of the posts in this thread. But, if one's objective is
to have
a quiet machine, then building one with a graphics cards having ambient
cooling
is a good start. Giga-byte makes some. I think their URL is giga-byte.com
I like mine. If you want a quiet machine, you will probably need to build
it yourself.
The specifications of most components will list their sound level in db.

As may have been pointed out, "water cooling" may offer the quietest
system--but
I'm not willing to bother with that yet.

Bill

Bill wrote:
> "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> IF the machine doesn't need 3d accelerated graphics or full motion
>> video, then a thin client might be a possibility--there are several
>> ways to set that up--a netbook or a mini-itx system does fine as a
>> thin client and they
>> can be made as quiet as a lamp, while you can put the main machine in
>> another room.
>>
>> If you haven't checked out http://www.silentpcreview.com you might
>> want to.
>> Search that site with keyword "wood" and you'll find some discussion
>> of wooden cases and some articles by people who have tried them.
>>
>> If your objective is to do a woodworking project by all means have
>> at it, but if the objective is to have a quiet machine in a
>> reasonable time then I
>> think that buying one is going to be a better plan.
>>
>>
>
>
> I have not read all of the posts in this thread. But, if one's
> objective is to have
> a quiet machine, then building one with a graphics cards having
> ambient cooling
> is a good start. Giga-byte makes some. I think their URL is
> giga-byte.com I like mine. If you want a quiet machine, you will
> probably need to build it yourself.
> The specifications of most components will list their sound level in
> db.
>
> As may have been pointed out, "water cooling" may offer the quietest
> system--but
> I'm not willing to bother with that yet.

Reviewing the entire thread it's clear that the OP doesn't want a quiet
machine, he wants a cabinet to hold a noisy one.

Googling "DIY computer isolation box" will yield a good deal of useful
material.

Chris Friesen wrote:
> On 10/01/2009 07:06 PM, Christopher Glaeser wrote:
>>> 2) Reduce the power requirements on the computer as much as
>>> possible. Without changing the hardware this basically means move
>>> stuff from your 10TB of local disks to the NAS.
>>
>> The local RAID is required for uncompressed HD video editing.
>>
>>> You want the air to have to travel in a zigzag pattern so that
>>> there is no direct
>>> path for sound to escape.
>>
>> I was thinking along the same lines, but check out the 3D Model Tour
>> at http://www.kellsystems.com/3d.asp#tab9
>>
>> It appears the air intake is at the bottom back of the unit, and the
>> air exhausts are a relatively simple modular package at attach to
>> the back of the unit.
>
> The way I interpret that video is that the air intakes are at the
> bottom and top but near the front. (They advertise "front to back
> airflow" in the text".) The exit is at the back.
>
> For a tower enclosure I'd just do intake at the front and exit at the
> back, but with zigzag passages lined with sound absorber panels. If
> you've got carpet it may be beneficial to orient the openings facing
> downwards to get a bit more muffling effect. You probably want the
> enclosure to fit fairly snugly around the side of the tower to avoid
> warm exhaust mixing with the incoming cool air.

Consider that the Kell cabinets are not intended to render a machine
recording-studio quiet, they are intended to reduce a racket of servers to a
tolerable rack.

Christopher Glaeser wrote:
>> Whichever way you go, you may want to consider using an indoor/outdoor
>> thermometer to keep an eye on actual in-the-box temps.
>
> Agreed. Probably the best place to monitor the temp is the air flow into
> the computer case.
>
> Best,
> Christopher
>

Really? Wouldn't that measure the coolest reading?

I would think you would want to measure somewhere that gives the highest
reading, because you want to know how hot it is inside the box.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

Christopher Glaeser wrote:
>> Really? Wouldn't that measure the coolest reading?
>
> Yes, but I'm not sure what the reading at the computer case exhaust will
> tell me. The exhaust is pretty warm now just sitting in a room. If the
> input of the computer case has unrestricted air flow at a good operating
> temp, isn't that sufficient? Of couser, that "unrestricted air flow" is
> criticially important. If the temp at the input to the case was low but the
> air flow into the case is restricted, that would be very bad indeed.
>
> Best,
> Christopher
>

I guess the purpose isn't airflow, it's temperature drop, right?
Computer don't need airflow, they need lower temps.
It just so happens that airflow will lower the temp.

I'd say the probe (whatever) should be in the box, up high.
I would move it around the box to find the hottest spot and leave it
there.

You could always find a website or specs from a company that make those
boxes for studios and try to ascertain where they put theirs.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

Neil Brooks wrote:
> On Oct 2, 12:51 pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Christopher Glaeser wrote:
>>>> Whichever way you go, you may want to consider using an
>>>> indoor/outdoor thermometer to keep an eye on actual in-the-box
>>>> temps.
>>
>>> Agreed. Probably the best place to monitor the temp is the air flow
>>> into the computer case.
>>
>>> Best,
>>> Christopher
>>
>> Really? Wouldn't that measure the coolest reading?
>>
>> I would think you would want to measure somewhere that gives the
>> highest reading, because you want to know how hot it is inside the
>> box.
>
> I would tend to agree.
>
> I don't know which of the components represents the Lowest Common
> Denominator (by having the lowest upper operating range) in this
> equation, but ... I'd think you'd want to locate a temp probe as near
> to /that/ component as you could.
>
> OTOH, if they're all within a fairly narrow operating temperature
> band, then ... I'd pick a component and locate it as near to that
> component as I could.

www.aerocool.us has a bunch of different temperature monitors combined with
other functions--some of them will support four separate temperature sensors
and adjust fan speeds accordingly--they're designed to go in a computer case
but there's no reason they can't work externally as part of a separate
cabinet, and can be used to carry other functions outside the cabinet.

[email protected] wrote:

> Just get a USB Docking station and put the CPU outside the room. One
> USB cable brings keayboard,mouse,video and audio (in and out) into the
> "studio" leaving all drive and fan noise outside.


USB can't handle multi track audio.

He can do the same with Firewire, but I assume he can't have them
in another room or he'd never had posted this in the first place.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

-MIKE- wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>
>> Just get a USB Docking station and put the CPU outside the room. One
>> USB cable brings keayboard,mouse,video and audio (in and out) into
>> the "studio" leaving all drive and fan noise outside.
>
>
> USB can't handle multi track audio.

Googling "USB multitrack audio" reveals a number of products. Do they not
work well?

> He can do the same with Firewire, but I assume he can't have them
> in another room or he'd never had posted this in the first place.

J. Clarke wrote:
> -MIKE- wrote:
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> Just get a USB Docking station and put the CPU outside the room. One
>>> USB cable brings keayboard,mouse,video and audio (in and out) into
>>> the "studio" leaving all drive and fan noise outside.
>>
>> USB can't handle multi track audio.
>
> Googling "USB multitrack audio" reveals a number of products. Do they not
> work well?
>

I guess it depends on your working definition of "multitrack" is. :-)

I mean, stereo is multitrack, right? And yes, there are USB interfaces
that will handle stereo fine, or let's say vocal mic and and acoustic
guitar. Maybe even 4 channels.

But most people who are using a digital audio workstation, like Protools
for example, and are concerned with noise enough to spend the money to
build a box to hide it, are likely doing real multitrack recording, as
in entire bands or drums. We're talking a minimum 10 tracks just for
drums, and a minimum 24 for a band.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

-MIKE- wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
>> -MIKE- wrote:
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>> Just get a USB Docking station and put the CPU outside the room.
>>>> One USB cable brings keayboard,mouse,video and audio (in and out)
>>>> into the "studio" leaving all drive and fan noise outside.
>>>
>>> USB can't handle multi track audio.
>>
>> Googling "USB multitrack audio" reveals a number of products. Do
>> they not work well?
>>
>
> I guess it depends on your working definition of "multitrack" is. :-)
>
> I mean, stereo is multitrack, right? And yes, there are USB
> interfaces that will handle stereo fine, or let's say vocal mic and
> and acoustic guitar. Maybe even 4 channels.
>
> But most people who are using a digital audio workstation, like
> Protools for example, and are concerned with noise enough to spend
> the money to build a box to hide it, are likely doing real multitrack
> recording, as in entire bands or drums. We're talking a minimum 10
> tracks just for drums, and a minimum 24 for a band.

I'm seeing devices with 20 channels.

J. Clarke wrote:
>> But most people who are using a digital audio workstation, like
>> Protools for example, and are concerned with noise enough to spend
>> the money to build a box to hide it, are likely doing real multitrack
>> recording, as in entire bands or drums. We're talking a minimum 10
>> tracks just for drums, and a minimum 24 for a band.
>
> I'm seeing devices with 20 channels.

A link would help me talk apple/apples with you. Some of those things
are probably mixers that will send and receive a couple of track each
with the computer, but everything else is either on-board recording, or
just an analogue mixer, sending a stereo bus to the PC.

But I may be wrong. The most I've seen is 8 channels, but I wouldn't
trust it for anything I care about.

I can tell you this... I could ask 500 Nashville producers/engineers how
many of them use or would ever consider using USB over Firewire for
anything other than recording quick little scratch demo tracks, and my
junior high school shop teacher could count the number on one hand. :-)

It just was never meant for that purpose, while Firewire.... was,
specifically.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

-MIKE- wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
>>> But most people who are using a digital audio workstation, like
>>> Protools for example, and are concerned with noise enough to spend
>>> the money to build a box to hide it, are likely doing real
>>> multitrack recording, as in entire bands or drums. We're talking a
>>> minimum 10 tracks just for drums, and a minimum 24 for a band.
>>
>> I'm seeing devices with 20 channels.
>
> A link would help me talk apple/apples with you. Some of those things
> are probably mixers that will send and receive a couple of track each
> with the computer, but everything else is either on-board recording,
> or just an analogue mixer, sending a stereo bus to the PC.

Roland has one that is expandable to 40 channels, for a Roland price. For
under 400 bucks you can get a 16 channel Tascom.


Googling "USB multitrack audio" gets 110,000 hits, and most of them point to
a device of one sort or another, most of which have mor than two channels.

> But I may be wrong. The most I've seen is 8 channels, but I wouldn't
> trust it for anything I care about.
>
> I can tell you this... I could ask 500 Nashville producers/engineers
> how many of them use or would ever consider using USB over Firewire
> for anything other than recording quick little scratch demo tracks,
> and my junior high school shop teacher could count the number on one
> hand. :-)

And there was a time when if you asked them if they used Firewire they'd say
"fire_WHAT_?".

Time marches on.

In any case, everybody does't need the same equipment as a Nashville
producer.

> It just was never meant for that purpose, while Firewire.... was,
> specifically.

So what? All that either of them does is move bits across a wire. USB2
has enough real-world bandwidth to carry more than 1000 192kb streams.
There's nothing about Firewire bits that makes them sound different from USB
bits, although I'm sure that the same sucker^H^H^H^H^H^Haudiophiles who buy
Monster speaker cables for a ludicrous price will say otherwise.

With Apple dumping Firewire on the latest iBook the handwriting is on the
wall.

J. Clarke wrote:
> -MIKE- wrote:
>> J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> But most people who are using a digital audio workstation, like
>>>> Protools for example, and are concerned with noise enough to spend
>>>> the money to build a box to hide it, are likely doing real
>>>> multitrack recording, as in entire bands or drums. We're talking a
>>>> minimum 10 tracks just for drums, and a minimum 24 for a band.
>>> I'm seeing devices with 20 channels.
>> A link would help me talk apple/apples with you. Some of those things
>> are probably mixers that will send and receive a couple of track each
>> with the computer, but everything else is either on-board recording,
>> or just an analogue mixer, sending a stereo bus to the PC.
>
> Roland has one that is expandable to 40 channels, for a Roland price. For
> under 400 bucks you can get a 16 channel Tascom.
>
>
> Googling "USB multitrack audio" gets 110,000 hits, and most of them point to
> a device of one sort or another, most of which have mor than two channels.
>

So, you don't have a link, then. :-)


>> But I may be wrong. The most I've seen is 8 channels, but I wouldn't
>> trust it for anything I care about.
>>
>> I can tell you this... I could ask 500 Nashville producers/engineers
>> how many of them use or would ever consider using USB over Firewire
>> for anything other than recording quick little scratch demo tracks,
>> and my junior high school shop teacher could count the number on one
>> hand. :-)
>
> And there was a time when if you asked them if they used Firewire they'd say
> "fire_WHAT_?".
>
> Time marches on.
>
> In any case, everybody does't need the same equipment as a Nashville
> producer.
>
>> It just was never meant for that purpose, while Firewire.... was,
>> specifically.
>
> So what? All that either of them does is move bits across a wire. USB2
> has enough real-world bandwidth to carry more than 1000 192kb streams.
> There's nothing about Firewire bits that makes them sound different from USB
> bits, although I'm sure that the same sucker^H^H^H^H^H^Haudiophiles who buy
> Monster speaker cables for a ludicrous price will say otherwise.
>
> With Apple dumping Firewire on the latest iBook the handwriting is on the
> wall.
>

And no one is using the iBook to record 24 tracks, either....
successfully.

You're giving me theory, and I'm giving you real experience.

The pissing contests is this newsgroup crack me up.
You guys get on a tangent about a semantic, and just won't let go.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

Swingman wrote:
>> Googling "USB multitrack audio" gets 110,000 hits, and most of them
>> point to a device of one sort or another, most of which have mor than
>> two channels.
>
> With current gear for the home recordist it has become, for all
> practical purposes, a moot point ... and many are capable of both USB2
> and Firewire operation. Mark Of The Unicorn (MOTU) sells some pretty
> good gear for the home recordist with that in mind, as well as TasCam,
> as you mentioned.
>

If MOTU is doing it successfully, then it will catch on and succeed.

They are smart to take an already successful, cornerstone, interface,
and add the new technology to it. People will trust it more than
starting from scratch with a completely new box.



--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

-MIKE- wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
>> -MIKE- wrote:
>>> J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>> But most people who are using a digital audio workstation, like
>>>>> Protools for example, and are concerned with noise enough to spend
>>>>> the money to build a box to hide it, are likely doing real
>>>>> multitrack recording, as in entire bands or drums. We're talking
>>>>> a minimum 10 tracks just for drums, and a minimum 24 for a band.
>>>> I'm seeing devices with 20 channels.
>>> A link would help me talk apple/apples with you. Some of those
>>> things are probably mixers that will send and receive a couple of
>>> track each with the computer, but everything else is either
>>> on-board recording, or just an analogue mixer, sending a stereo bus
>>> to the PC.
>>
>> Roland has one that is expandable to 40 channels, for a Roland
>> price. For under 400 bucks you can get a 16 channel Tascom.
>>
>>
>> Googling "USB multitrack audio" gets 110,000 hits, and most of them
>> point to a device of one sort or another, most of which have mor
>> than two channels.
>>
>
> So, you don't have a link, then. :-)

Geez, how lazy can you get?
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1W1ACGW_enUS315US315&q=usb+multitrack+audio&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g1.

>>> But I may be wrong. The most I've seen is 8 channels, but I wouldn't
>>> trust it for anything I care about.
>>>
>>> I can tell you this... I could ask 500 Nashville producers/engineers
>>> how many of them use or would ever consider using USB over Firewire
>>> for anything other than recording quick little scratch demo tracks,
>>> and my junior high school shop teacher could count the number on one
>>> hand. :-)
>>
>> And there was a time when if you asked them if they used Firewire
>> they'd say "fire_WHAT_?".
>>
>> Time marches on.
>>
>> In any case, everybody does't need the same equipment as a Nashville
>> producer.
>>
>>> It just was never meant for that purpose, while Firewire.... was,
>>> specifically.
>>
>> So what? All that either of them does is move bits across a wire.
>> USB2 has enough real-world bandwidth to carry more than 1000 192kb
>> streams. There's nothing about Firewire bits that makes them sound
>> different from USB bits, although I'm sure that the same
>> sucker^H^H^H^H^H^Haudiophiles who buy Monster speaker cables for a
>> ludicrous price will say otherwise.
>>
>> With Apple dumping Firewire on the latest iBook the handwriting is
>> on the wall.
>>
>
> And no one is using the iBook to record 24 tracks, either....
> successfully.

So you're saying that a Firewire iBook can't record 24 tracks?

> You're giving me theory, and I'm giving you real experience.

Gee, quite accomodating of you to go out and get experience with devices of
which at 9 PM last night you were completely unaware.

> The pissing contests is this newsgroup crack me up.
> You guys get on a tangent about a semantic, and just won't let go.

You're the one who turned it into a pissing contest by going into denial
when someone suggested that you might be mistaken, and then going off on a
tangent about "Nashville producers" as if some guy who can't afford a store
bought cabinet is going to be equipping a commercial production studio.

What "semantic" is this? You asserted that there were no USB multitrack
audio devices on the market. That didn't fit in with my recollection so I
checked and found that there were indeed many such devices.

I assumed since you are topping it the expert that giving you the keywords I
used would be enough for you with your greater expertise to check into this
for yourself rather than having to be spoon fed links, but since you seem to
be unable to research such matters for yourself, try

http://www.sonarvstudio.com/700/vs-700r.php
http://www.tascam.com/products/m-164uf;9,9,3744,16.html
http://www.motu.com/products/motuaudio/828mkII/

All of those are USB audio devices. All of them purport to be able to
record more than the 8 tracks that you claim, with one of them going over 40
with an expansion add-in. Are you saying that the manufacturers are lying?
If not then what are you saying?

J. Clarke wrote:
>> And no one is using the iBook to record 24 tracks, either....
>> successfully.
>
> So you're saying that a Firewire iBook can't record 24 tracks?
>

Nope, didn't say that. No one would... or would for very long. They
would get sick, very quickly, of squinting at the little 13" screen,
then go to an external monitor, which shares the ram for video, and the
latency or inability to use a big enough screen would drive them nuts.


>> You're giving me theory, and I'm giving you real experience.
>
> Gee, quite accomodating of you to go out and get experience with devices of
> which at 9 PM last night you were completely unaware.
>
>> The pissing contests is this newsgroup crack me up.
>> You guys get on a tangent about a semantic, and just won't let go.
>
> You're the one who turned it into a pissing contest by going into denial
> when someone suggested that you might be mistaken, and then going off on a
> tangent about "Nashville producers" as if some guy who can't afford a store
> bought cabinet is going to be equipping a commercial production studio.
>
> What "semantic" is this? You asserted that there were no USB multitrack
> audio devices on the market. That didn't fit in with my recollection so I
> checked and found that there were indeed many such devices.
>

I didn't assert that there were none. I believe I wrote,
"But I may be wrong. The most I've seen is 8 channels, but I wouldn't
trust it for anything I care about."

That doesn't strike me as, "going into denial."


You wrote,
"Googling "USB multitrack audio reveals a number of products. Do they
not work well?"

I tried to tell you they didn't work well and gave an example that the
real experts weren't using them.


> I assumed since you are topping it the expert that giving you the keywords I
> used would be enough for you with your greater expertise to check into this
> for yourself rather than having to be spoon fed links, but since you seem to
> be unable to research such matters for yourself, try
>
> http://www.sonarvstudio.com/700/vs-700r.php
> http://www.tascam.com/products/m-164uf;9,9,3744,16.html
> http://www.motu.com/products/motuaudio/828mkII/
>

Hmm, that's all you had to do. :-)


> All of those are USB audio devices. All of them purport to be able to
> record more than the 8 tracks that you claim, with one of them going over 40
> with an expansion add-in. Are you saying that the manufacturers are lying?
> If not then what are you saying?
>

You're the one making this a pissing contest. Asking me if I'm saying
they are lying? I answered to my knowledge at the time. I said
everything I said in a tone of discussion, you're the one being
condescending about it.

The technology has advanced and I am behind in my knowledge of of stuff
apparently on the cutting edge.

What I *do know* is what I very often see in studios and hear from the
guys using the stuff for a living. All I hear about is problems with USB
because of it sharing everything else connected to it and latency and
dropouts and sync problems and on and on.

So maybe if I had said, "For all intents and purposes, USB has not been
able to handle multi track audio, in the real world, professional
setting, and the pros prefer Firewire because of its tested speed and
reliability," all this could've been avoided.

My guess is that the MOTU would be the only one trustworthy right now,
because they have such a good track record, but their involvement will
help the others by lending credence to the technology, simply because
"if MOTU is doing it, it must be alright."


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

-MIKE- wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
>>> And no one is using the iBook to record 24 tracks, either....
>>> successfully.
>>
>> So you're saying that a Firewire iBook can't record 24 tracks?
>>
>
> Nope, didn't say that. No one would... or would for very long. They
> would get sick, very quickly, of squinting at the little 13" screen,
> then go to an external monitor, which shares the ram for video, and
> the latency or inability to use a big enough screen would drive them
> nuts.
>
>
>>> You're giving me theory, and I'm giving you real experience.
>>
>> Gee, quite accomodating of you to go out and get experience with
>> devices of which at 9 PM last night you were completely unaware.
>>
>>> The pissing contests is this newsgroup crack me up.
>>> You guys get on a tangent about a semantic, and just won't let go.
>>
>> You're the one who turned it into a pissing contest by going into
>> denial when someone suggested that you might be mistaken, and then
>> going off on a tangent about "Nashville producers" as if some guy
>> who can't afford a store bought cabinet is going to be equipping a
>> commercial production studio.
>>
>> What "semantic" is this? You asserted that there were no USB
>> multitrack audio devices on the market. That didn't fit in with my
>> recollection so I checked and found that there were indeed many such
>> devices.
>>
>
> I didn't assert that there were none. I believe I wrote,
> "But I may be wrong. The most I've seen is 8 channels, but I wouldn't
> trust it for anything I care about."
>
> That doesn't strike me as, "going into denial."
>
>
> You wrote,
> "Googling "USB multitrack audio reveals a number of products. Do they
> not work well?"
>
> I tried to tell you they didn't work well and gave an example that the
> real experts weren't using them.

However your response demonstrated a lack of familiarity the the products in
question, leaving one to wonder on what basis you made your assertion.

>> I assumed since you are topping it the expert that giving you the
>> keywords I used would be enough for you with your greater expertise
>> to check into this for yourself rather than having to be spoon fed
>> links, but since you seem to be unable to research such matters for
>> yourself, try
>>
>> http://www.sonarvstudio.com/700/vs-700r.php
>> http://www.tascam.com/products/m-164uf;9,9,3744,16.html
>> http://www.motu.com/products/motuaudio/828mkII/
>>
>
> Hmm, that's all you had to do. :-)

And why were you unable to find those products? Are you lazy, or just not
the expert you pretend to be?

>> All of those are USB audio devices. All of them purport to be able
>> to record more than the 8 tracks that you claim, with one of them
>> going over 40 with an expansion add-in. Are you saying that the
>> manufacturers are lying? If not then what are you saying?
>>
>
> You're the one making this a pissing contest. Asking me if I'm saying
> they are lying? I answered to my knowledge at the time. I said
> everything I said in a tone of discussion, you're the one being
> condescending about it.

Yes, you answered from your knowledge rather than taking 30 seconds to
actually enter the keywords you were given into Google and looking at the
first page of resulting hits.

> The technology has advanced and I am behind in my knowledge of of
> stuff apparently on the cutting edge.

> What I *do know* is what I very often see in studios and hear from the
> guys using the stuff for a living. All I hear about is problems with
> USB because of it sharing everything else connected to it and latency
> and dropouts and sync problems and on and on.

Finally you get to something other than denial. One of the manufacturers
states that their USB device should be attached to a dedicated port rather
than hub for the reasons you mention.

> So maybe if I had said, "For all intents and purposes, USB has not
> been able to handle multi track audio, in the real world, professional
> setting, and the pros prefer Firewire because of its tested speed and
> reliability," all this could've been avoided.
>
> My guess is that the MOTU would be the only one trustworthy right now,
> because they have such a good track record, but their involvement will
> help the others by lending credence to the technology, simply because
> "if MOTU is doing it, it must be alright."

Roland has a poor track record?

J. Clarke wrote:
> And why were you unable to find those products? Are you lazy, or just not
> the expert you pretend to be?
>

More condescension. More things I didn't say.

I never claimed to be an expert.
I spoke to the experience of the experts I know and work with regularly.


>>> All of those are USB audio devices. All of them purport to be able
>>> to record more than the 8 tracks that you claim, with one of them
>>> going over 40 with an expansion add-in. Are you saying that the
>>> manufacturers are lying? If not then what are you saying?
>>>
>> You're the one making this a pissing contest. Asking me if I'm saying
>> they are lying? I answered to my knowledge at the time. I said
>> everything I said in a tone of discussion, you're the one being
>> condescending about it.
>
> Yes, you answered from your knowledge rather than taking 30 seconds to
> actually enter the keywords you were given into Google and looking at the
> first page of resulting hits.
>
>> The technology has advanced and I am behind in my knowledge of of
>> stuff apparently on the cutting edge.
>
>> What I *do know* is what I very often see in studios and hear from the
>> guys using the stuff for a living. All I hear about is problems with
>> USB because of it sharing everything else connected to it and latency
>> and dropouts and sync problems and on and on.
>
> Finally you get to something other than denial. One of the manufacturers
> states that their USB device should be attached to a dedicated port rather
> than hub for the reasons you mention.
>

They didn't use hubs.


>> So maybe if I had said, "For all intents and purposes, USB has not
>> been able to handle multi track audio, in the real world, professional
>> setting, and the pros prefer Firewire because of its tested speed and
>> reliability," all this could've been avoided.
>>
>> My guess is that the MOTU would be the only one trustworthy right now,
>> because they have such a good track record, but their involvement will
>> help the others by lending credence to the technology, simply because
>> "if MOTU is doing it, it must be alright."
>
> Roland has a poor track record?
>

More words in my mouth, huh?

Complimenting one manufacturer isn't an implicit insult on another.
Can you grasp that concept, Skippy? (a little condescension for you,
since you seem to be unable to communicate without it.)

MOTU was and is pretty much the standard/benchmark for multi-track i/o's.

Roland does some wonderful things, but they certainly have not been the
go-to name and essentially synonymous with digital audio interface for
the professional, like MOTU.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

-MIKE- wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
>> And why were you unable to find those products? Are you lazy, or
>> just not the expert you pretend to be?
>>
>
> More condescension. More things I didn't say.
>
> I never claimed to be an expert.
> I spoke to the experience of the experts I know and work with
> regularly.
>
>
>>>> All of those are USB audio devices. All of them purport to be able
>>>> to record more than the 8 tracks that you claim, with one of them
>>>> going over 40 with an expansion add-in. Are you saying that the
>>>> manufacturers are lying? If not then what are you saying?
>>>>
>>> You're the one making this a pissing contest. Asking me if I'm
>>> saying they are lying? I answered to my knowledge at the time. I
>>> said everything I said in a tone of discussion, you're the one being
>>> condescending about it.
>>
>> Yes, you answered from your knowledge rather than taking 30 seconds
>> to actually enter the keywords you were given into Google and
>> looking at the first page of resulting hits.
>>
>>> The technology has advanced and I am behind in my knowledge of of
>>> stuff apparently on the cutting edge.
>>
>>> What I *do know* is what I very often see in studios and hear from
>>> the guys using the stuff for a living. All I hear about is problems
>>> with USB because of it sharing everything else connected to it and
>>> latency and dropouts and sync problems and on and on.
>>
>> Finally you get to something other than denial. One of the
>> manufacturers states that their USB device should be attached to a
>> dedicated port rather than hub for the reasons you mention.
>>
>
> They didn't use hubs.

You examined the wiring on their motherboards? Or are you simply not aware
that many systems have internal hubs that are not necessarily marked as
such?

>>> So maybe if I had said, "For all intents and purposes, USB has not
>>> been able to handle multi track audio, in the real world,
>>> professional setting, and the pros prefer Firewire because of its
>>> tested speed and reliability," all this could've been avoided.
>>>
>>> My guess is that the MOTU would be the only one trustworthy right
>>> now, because they have such a good track record, but their
>>> involvement will help the others by lending credence to the
>>> technology, simply because "if MOTU is doing it, it must be
>>> alright."
>>
>> Roland has a poor track record?
>>
>
> More words in my mouth, huh?

"MOTU would be the only one trustworthy" does not appear to be in any way
ambiguous.
.
> Complimenting one manufacturer isn't an implicit insult on another.
> Can you grasp that concept, Skippy? (a little condescension for you,
> since you seem to be unable to communicate without it.)

Either MOTU is or is not "the only one trustworthy".

> MOTU was and is pretty much the standard/benchmark for multi-track
> i/o's.
>
> Roland does some wonderful things, but they certainly have not been
> the go-to name and essentially synonymous with digital audio
> interface for the professional, like MOTU.

I see. I would have expected professional equipment to be more expensive.
Oh, well, live and learn.

J. Clarke wrote:
>> They didn't use hubs.
>
> You examined the wiring on their motherboards? Or are you simply not aware
> that many systems have internal hubs that are not necessarily marked as
> such?
>

Most are, to the best of my knowledge.

Again, one reason why professionals use Firewire.
You plug it in and it works.

According to you, with all these wonderful USB multitrack
interfaces, one has to open up their computer to examine the motherboard
to determine if it'll work properly.

Wow, that sounds sounds trustworthy.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

"Larry Jaques" <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:09:04 -0600, the infamous Chris Friesen
> <[email protected]> scrawled the following:
>
>>On 10/01/2009 11:31 AM, Christopher Glaeser wrote:
>>>> What is an acoustic enclosure for a computer? Never heard of one
>>>> before.
>>>
>>> Acoustic enclosures are used to reduce computer noise. One of my
>>> desktop
>>> computers has six hard drives and six fans.
>>
>>My first suggestion would be to get rid of some of the fans if possible,
>>or at least slow them down. I cut my system noise way down by using
>>only one case fan.
>
> Sure, and overheat the system, causing (at worst) a fire or (at least)
> a component failure, like a fried CPU. Don't mess with the fans,
> Chris. Muffle 'em but don't remove 'em.
>

Monitor the temperatures and you can compare the performance of various
configurations.

Another "solution", and an effective one if your layout affords it, is to
put the computer
in a room on the other side of the wall, and to string through the cords
for the monitor keyboard, mouse and speakers.
You could even "caulk" the hole! : )

Bill



>
> --
> "Giving every man a vote has no more made men wise and free
> than Christianity has made them good." --H. L. Mencken
> ---

On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 13:16:32 -0400, "Bill" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Another "solution", and an effective one if your layout affords it, is to
>put the computer
>in a room on the other side of the wall, and to string through the cords
>for the monitor keyboard, mouse and speakers.
>You could even "caulk" the hole! : )

I've actually been considering this for the computer in our master
bedroom. The other side of the wall is a coat closet that mainly holds
old junk, so it would make an ideal computer closet with the addition
of a good vent fan. I may decide to re-visit that idea....

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com

"I'm not exactly burned out, but I'm a little bit scorched and there's some smoke damage."

On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 11:43:58 -0700, "Christopher Glaeser"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> Whichever way you go, you may want to consider using an indoor/outdoor
>> thermometer to keep an eye on actual in-the-box temps.
>
>Agreed. Probably the best place to monitor the temp is the air flow into
>the computer case.
>
>Best,
>Christopher
>
Best monitoring location is the heat sink of the processor. Measuring
either intake or exhaust air means NOTHING if air flow is restricted.
Air temperature INSIDE the case is a poor second to measuring actual
component temperature, but a giant leap forward from measuring either
intake or exhaust air.

On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 00:28:58 -0400, "Upscale" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>"Christopher Glaeser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> If the only requirement was a box, sure, the project would be trivial with
>> not much planning needed. However, a major design objective is to
>> significantly reduce noise while providing adequate air flow, which
>requires
>> a bit more thought and planning.
>
>If it helps you any, I built a padded box around my portable compress to
>stifle the noise when I use it in my apartment. It's a simple 3/4" plywood
>box, four rubber wheeled casters and lined with furnace air intake filters.
>It reduces the noise over 50%. Air intake is sufficient by the use of an
>interior 120v fan and the air to it is supplied through several layers of
>speaker grill cloth. If it does that well on an 85 decibel compressor, it
>should be sufficient for a computer box.
>
Just get a USB Docking station and put the CPU outside the room. One
USB cable brings keayboard,mouse,video and audio (in and out) into the
"studio" leaving all drive and fan noise outside.

> The way I interpret that video is that the air intakes are at the bottom
> and top but near the front. (They advertise "front to back airflow" in
> the text".) The exit is at the back.

Yeah, I watched it again and I think you are right. It's interesting that
all the wiring in the back is sealed within soft foam panels. Originally I
had assumed that was to reduce noise, but now I'm guessing the major reason
is to ensure air flow comes from the front, as you point out.

> For a tower enclosure I'd just do intake at the front and exit at the
> back,

Yes, I should probably do that for a desktop as well.

> but with zigzag passages lined with sound absorber panels. If
> you've got carpet it may be beneficial to orient the openings facing
> downwards to get a bit more muffling effect.

I was thinking either carpet with a non-straight patter as you suggest, or
posssibly using the egg crate foam used in sound studios that directs the
sound waves into the foam channels.

> You probably want the
> enclosure to fit fairly snugly around the side of the tower to avoid
> warm exhaust mixing with the incoming cool air.

At first I was thinking I could rely on an air exchange at the back, but I
think you're right, I should design something that puts the incoming air at
the front of the equipment, perhaps using a false bottom or false side to
redirect the air flow so there is no straight line path from the inside to
the outside of the acoustic enclosure.

Best,
Christopher

On 10/01/2009 11:31 AM, Christopher Glaeser wrote:
>> What is an acoustic enclosure for a computer? Never heard of one before.
>
> Acoustic enclosures are used to reduce computer noise. One of my desktop
> computers has six hard drives and six fans.

My first suggestion would be to get rid of some of the fans if possible,
or at least slow them down. I cut my system noise way down by using
only one case fan.

Chris

On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 19:04:27 -0400, [email protected] wrote:

>Just get a USB Docking station and put the CPU outside the room. One
>USB cable brings keayboard,mouse,video and audio (in and out) into the
>"studio" leaving all drive and fan noise outside.

Considering the effort the OP is putting into this and the equipment
he has, I'm wondering why he hasn't converted some clothes closet into
a cold room.

> Since this is taking the course it is, I will throw this out. It's a
> friggen box. How hard is it to make a box?

If the only requirement was a box, sure, the project would be trivial with
not much planning needed. However, a major design objective is to
significantly reduce noise while providing adequate air flow, which requires
a bit more thought and planning.

Best,
Christopher

> Is most of this noise transmitted via vibration or is it airborne?
> IOW.. can you feel the case vibrate?

Vibration is relatively low. There is some noise due to the six drives, but
most of the noise is due to all the fans (fans for dual cpu chips, fan for
hign-end graphics card, and multiple fans for power and enclosure).

A Kell System enclosure would be ideal, but they are pricey (though I'm sure
they are worth it). I expect a reasonable design would use 1/2" or 3/4"
birch plywood lined with carpeting and/or sound proofing material. One key
feature is the air flow. Needs to cool 600-800 watts, yet baffle the noise
inside the enclosure. Several superquiete 120mm fans could be used to
exchange the air. Another feature is the door. Needs to provide easy
access, but also a seal to minimize noise.

I've seen plans on the net to build the computer case out of wood. I have
no desire to do that. I want the ability to swap in a new computer every
couple of years, but keep the acoustic enclosure.

Best,
Christopher