Room treatments - GIK Vs Acoustimac

GIk uses 8lbs/ft. density material while Acoustimac uses 4lb/ft.and the test results from the lab are better for GIK.Results are posted on their websites.One is good the other better.

Mofimadness,GIK does not put their acoustic treatments in a wood frame except the corner traps.The edges are left bare for greater absorbtion .Those that are well read agree with the master handbook of acoustics that leaving a space behind(off the wall) of the panel increases it's effectiveness.This is not an opinion but a scientific fact that can be measured and verified.Again,GIK uses 8lbs/ft material and I am not even sure if 703 comes in a 2 inch thickness,this is not what they use.If you are really interested in acoustic treatments and applications I suggest you get a copy of the master handbook of acoustics.It is a great read and highly recommended .No voodoo,magic,or alien technology just,comparing Gik and Acoustimac with eachother ,they are not apples to apples.If you are really interested you could talk to Glenn at Gik and he can verify what lbs/ft they use,etc.Their specs are listed on the website.

Mofimadness,I stand corrected that GIK does put their treatments in a frame,however the main point is the space behind the panel provides for greater low frequency absortion and the lbs/cubic ft (8 for GIK and 4 for Acousitmac)also is better for low frequency absorption. They say get the base right and all else follows.GIK does a better job at this than Acoustimac . As per my original statement one is good the other better.A DIY person can get or build the frames themselves but the spacing and the 8lbs/cu.ft. is the must have if you want the better of the two.

Csmgolf,i stand corrected about being corrected about GIK putting wood frames around their treatments.Thanks for the verification that they leave the side borders bare for absorption as per my original post of 2-27.