Phase 2: Room Layout Options

TechTown Acoustics 2.0 — MediaVerse Studio Complex — B3 Damascus

Version: v01 | Date: 2026-03-04 | Author: Claude (Opus 4.6) | Status: AWAITING SELECTION

1. Updated Parameters

Changes from Cross-Session Data

Parameter	Previous (v01 Scope)	Updated	Impact
Ceiling to concrete slab	2.90 m (assumed final)	3.50 m (gypsum at 2.9 m removable)	+21% volume; better modal distribution
Effective volume	75.7 m³	91.8 m³ (after float floor + ceiling)	Lower Schroeder freq; more bass trap space
Buffer spine	Not selected	REQUIRED	~3–4 m² consumed; better flanking control
NC — Control Room	NC-20	NC-25	Easier to achieve; less isolation needed
NC — Video/Podcast	NC-20	NC-25	Easier to achieve
RT60 — VO Live	0.20–0.30 s	0.15–0.25 s	More absorption required; tighter control
VO Live Room use	Voice-over only	VO + 2–3 vocalists + soft acoustic instrument	Needs larger room; modal analysis critical
Green screen	Not specified	Motorized/retractable + 10–30 cm air gap	Video room needs N-S wall clearance
STC targets	STC-60+ (VO)	STC 58–68 (VO perimeter + server wall)	Confirmed; MAM wall on east side
Existing partitions	Assumed removable	Full demo confirmed	Clean shell for construction

CONFIRMED WORKFLOW: Entry (south) → Editing → Video/Podcast → Audio Control → Live/Vocal Booth — noise gradient from high NC tolerance to NC-15 sanctuary.

2. Space Constraint Analysis

CRITICAL FINDING: Area vs. Program Mismatch
The yellow zone provides ~29 m² gross area. After acoustic construction (walls, air gaps, buffer spine, sound lock), usable room area drops to approximately 18–22 m². The 5-zone program at minimum viable sizes requires ~35–40 m². This means every room will be smaller than ideal, and design trade-offs are mandatory.

Area Budget Breakdown

Item	Area (m²)	Notes
Gross yellow zone (trapezoid)	~29.1	South 737 cm × North 615 cm × Depth 431 cm
Less: Sound lock / vestibule	−1.5 to −2.5	Double-door airlock at south entry
Less: Buffer spine	−2.5 to −3.5	80–100 cm wide × room length
Less: Partition walls + air gaps	−3.0 to −4.0	VO box-in-box walls thickest (~25 cm per side)
Available for rooms	~19–22 m²	Distributed across 4 functional rooms

Minimum vs. Available Room Sizes

Room	Min. Viable (m²)	Realistic Here (m²)	Feasibility
VO Live Room (box-in-box)	7.5 (solo) / 10+ (ensemble)	5.5–7.5	TIGHT
Control Room	6.0	4.5–6.0	TIGHT
Video / Podcast Studio	10.0	6.0–8.0	COMPROMISED
Editing Workstations	8.0 (4 desks)	3.0–5.0	REDUCED to 2–3 desks or open area

Volume Update (with 3.5 m Slab)

Metric	Old (2.9 m ceiling)	New (3.5 m slab)	Change
Raw volume	84.5 m³	101.9 m³	+20.6%
After float floor (−15 cm) + acoustic ceiling (−20 cm)	75.7 m³	91.8 m³	+21.3%
Effective ceiling height	2.60 m	3.15 m	+55 cm

The extra 55 cm of height significantly improves low-frequency modal distribution and allows taller bass traps / ceiling clouds.

3. Trapezoid Geometry Reference

Zone boundary

Angled wall / Columns

Server room (noise source)

Entry point

Noise gradient direction

4. Layout Option A — "Dual Zone with Central Spine"

RECOMMENDED

The space is divided east-west by a central buffer spine running north-south. The VO suite occupies the west half (away from the server room), and the production zone occupies the east half. The sound lock is at the south entry. This layout maximizes the distance between the NC-15 live room and both noise sources (server room + entry).

Option A — Room Dimensions

Room	Interior (cm)	Area (m²)	NC	Construction
VO Live Room	~250 × 230 (avg)	~5.8	NC-15	Full box-in-box: floating floor, decoupled walls/ceiling, air gaps
Control Room	~295 × 171 (avg)	~5.0	NC-25	Shared wall with Live (studio window); standard acoustic walls
Video / Podcast	~307 × 210	~6.4	NC-25	Standard acoustic treatment; motorized green screen on west wall
Editing	~307 × 131	~4.0	NC-30–35	Open area; basic absorption panels; headphone use only
Sound Lock	~130 × 90	~1.2	NC-35	Double door; absorption on walls/ceiling
Buffer Spine	~80 × 341	~2.7	—	Services corridor: HVAC ducts, cable trays, access panels
TOTAL		~25.1

Advantages

VO Live Room in NW corner — maximum distance from entry AND server room
Buffer spine provides complete flanking path break between VO suite and production
Green screen on west wall of Video room: N-S orientation (Option A — safest)
Editing adjacent to entry — highest NC tolerance where noise is greatest
Control Room has direct studio window to Live Room
Columns integrated into spine/partition walls — no wasted space
HVAC services routed through spine without crossing room boundaries
Noise gradient flows naturally: SE (entry) → NW (live room)

Limitations

VO Live Room at ~5.8 m² is tight for 2–3 vocalists + instrument
Control Room at ~5.0 m² fits mixing desk but limited monitoring distance
Video room at ~6.4 m² limits camera throw distance to ~2.5 m
Editing area only fits 3 desks (not 4)
Angled west wall complicates VO room geometry (non-rectangular)
Control Room is non-rectangular (follows angled wall)

Acoustic Rating: ★★★★☆ — Best isolation topology; tight dimensions

5. Layout Option B — "L-Wrap Configuration"

The VO suite wraps around the northwest corner in an L-shape, with the Live Room in the far NW and the Control Room extending along the north wall. The Video/Podcast studio occupies the eastern portion with maximum width for the green screen. The buffer spine runs east-west, dividing north (quiet) from south (active). This gives the video room the widest floor area at the cost of a more complex VO suite shape.

Option B — Room Dimensions

Room	Interior (cm)	Area (m²)	NC	Notes
VO Live Room	~230 × 170 (avg)	~5.5	NC-15	NW corner; irregular west wall (angled)
Control Room	~367 × 170	~6.2	NC-25	Wide but shallow; east side has studio window to Live
Video / Podcast	~410 × 91 (avg)	~7.5	NC-25	Widest option; green screen on angled west wall
Editing	~287 × 91	~2.6	NC-30–35	Tight; 2 desks max
Sound Lock	~130 × 80	~1.0	NC-35	Compact double-door
Buffer Spine (E-W)	~711 × 80	~5.7	—	Full-width E-W corridor — large footprint
TOTAL		~28.5

Advantages

Control Room is wider (367 cm) — better for mixing desk + monitors
Video room gets maximum width for green screen setup
Full E-W spine creates complete acoustic break between quiet north and active south
Studio window on east wall of Live Room — natural sight line
Live Room is furthest from server room AND entry (NW corner)

Limitations

E-W buffer spine consumes ~5.7 m² — LARGE compared to N-S spine (~2.7 m²)
Video room is only 91 cm deep — TOO SHALLOW for camera throw
Editing reduced to 2 desks maximum
South rooms (Video, Editing) are very shallow due to column row
Green screen on angled west wall creates perspective distortion issues
Columns cut into the south zone awkwardly

Acoustic Rating: ★★★☆☆ — Good N-S separation but impractical room depths in south zone

6. Layout Option C — "Maximum Live Room"

This layout prioritizes the VO Live Room, giving it the largest possible footprint in the quiet NW corner. The Control Room is adjacent to the south. The Video/Podcast studio and Editing share the east side. Buffer spine runs north-south as a narrow service corridor. This option sacrifices video room size to maximize the live room for ensemble recording.

Option C — Room Dimensions

Room	Interior (cm)	Area (m²)	NC	Notes
VO Live Room	~310 × 220 (avg)	~7.8	NC-15	LARGEST live room; accommodates ensemble
Control Room	~350 × 121 (avg)	~4.3	NC-25	Wide but shallow — tight for monitoring distance
Video / Podcast	~267 × 180	~4.8	NC-25	Reduced; camera throw limited to ~2 m
Editing	~267 × 161	~4.3	NC-30–35	3 desks; headphone zone
Sound Lock	~130 × 80	~1.0	NC-35	Compact double-door
Buffer Spine	~70 × 341	~2.4	—	Narrow spine; minimal but functional
TOTAL		~24.6

Advantages

Largest Live Room (~7.8 m²) — viable for 2–3 vocalists + soft acoustic instrument
Best room ratio for live room: ~1.4:1 (closer to golden ratio)
Live Room has best isolation position (NW corner, max distance from all noise)
Narrower buffer spine saves ~0.3 m² vs. Option A
Editing gets reasonable area (4.3 m²) for 3 desks

Limitations

Control Room only 121 cm deep — VERY SHALLOW for near-field monitoring
Video room at ~4.8 m² — COMPROMISED camera throw (~2 m max)
Green screen placement is limited on the narrow spine-side wall
Spine at 70 cm is tight for HVAC duct routing
Live Room's west wall follows angled facade — modal analysis complicates

Acoustic Rating: ★★★★☆ — Best live room but compromises video and control room usability

7. Comparison Matrix

Criterion	Option A Dual Zone + Central Spine	Option B L-Wrap	Option C Maximum Live Room
VO Live Room area	5.8 m²	5.5 m²	7.8 m² ★
Control Room area	5.0 m²	6.2 m² ★	4.3 m²
Video / Podcast area	6.4 m²	7.5 m² ★	4.8 m²
Editing area	4.0 m² ★	2.6 m²	4.3 m²
Spine area consumed	2.7 m² ★	5.7 m²	2.4 m²
VO isolation quality	Excellent ★	Good	Excellent ★
Noise gradient alignment	Excellent ★	Good	Good
Camera throw distance	~2.5 m	~1.5 m	~2 m
Green screen orientation	N-S (best) ★	N-S (on angle)	N-S (narrow)
HVAC routing ease	Easy (N-S spine) ★	Moderate	Tight (70 cm)
Construction complexity	Standard ★	Complex	Standard
Column integration	Natural ★	Awkward	Natural
Ensemble recording viability	Tight	Tight	Viable

8. Recommendation

PRIMARY RECOMMENDATION: Option A ("Dual Zone with Central Spine")

Option A provides the best overall balance across all criteria:

Best noise gradient alignment (SE entry → NW live room)
Most efficient buffer spine (N-S, only 2.7 m²)
Natural column integration into partition walls
Clean HVAC routing through central spine
Green screen in optimal N-S orientation on straight wall
All rooms at viable (though tight) sizes

ALTERNATIVE: Option C if ensemble recording is a top priority. Option C gives the Live Room ~34% more area (7.8 vs 5.8 m²), at the cost of a severely compromised Control Room depth. Consider Option C if the Live Room must accommodate 3 vocalists + instrument simultaneously as a primary use case, not occasional.

NOT RECOMMENDED: Option B. The E-W buffer spine consumes too much area (5.7 m²), and the south rooms (Video + Editing) are too shallow at only ~91 cm depth.

9. Preliminary Modal Considerations

Axial Mode Estimates (Option A — Live Room)

Using effective interior dimensions ~250 × 230 × 315 cm (height to acoustic ceiling from floating floor):

Mode	Dimension (cm)	f₁ (Hz)	f₂ (Hz)	f₃ (Hz)
Length (250 cm)	2.50 m	68.8	137.6	206.4
Width (230 cm)	2.30 m	74.8	149.6	224.3
Height (315 cm)	3.15 m	54.6	109.2	163.8

f = n × c / (2 × L), where c = 344 m/s (air at ~21°C), n = mode order.
Lowest axial mode: 54.6 Hz (height mode). Ratio analysis: 2.50 : 2.30 : 3.15 = 1.00 : 0.92 : 1.26
The 1.00 : 0.92 ratio is close to degenerate — potential modal stacking at ~69–75 Hz. Adjusting room width by ±10 cm would improve distribution.

Schroeder Frequency Estimate

f_Schroeder = 2000 × √(RT60 / V)

For Live Room: RT60 ≈ 0.20 s, V ≈ 250×230×315 = 18.1 m³

f_Schroeder = 2000 × √(0.20 / 18.1) = 2000 × 0.1051 = ~210 Hz

Below 210 Hz, room behavior is dominated by discrete modes. Bass trapping is critical in this range. The extra ceiling height (3.15 m effective) helps spread axial modes compared to a 2.6 m ceiling.

Note: Full modal analysis (axial, tangential, oblique modes + Bonello criterion) will be completed in Phase 3 after layout is confirmed. The Schroeder frequency and mode spacing will be calculated for all rooms with finalized dimensions.

10. Questions for Layout Selection

11. Next Steps

Phase	Deliverable	Depends On
Phase 2b	Finalize layout dimensions from selected option	Q1–Q6 answers
Phase 3	Full acoustic calculations (RT60, NC, STC, modal, Schroeder, Bonello)	Phase 2b finalized dimensions
Phase 4	HVAC noise mitigation plan + silencer schedule	Phase 3 NC budgets
Phase 5	Construction details, BOM, contractor DXFs	Phase 3 + 4 confirmed
Phase 6	How-to guides with step-by-step illustrations	Phase 5 confirmed