Room treatments - GIK Vs Acoustimac

02-28-12: Csmgolf
"I own GIK acoustics 242, and 244 panels as well as monster bass traps and tri traps. All of them are wood framed."

Be careful. On my 244s, bought last year as well, there is a 1" (perhaps) wood frame that goes around the back, not around the sides. The panel is maybe 6" thick: 5" is the absorbing material, and 1" is the wood frame that causes the 1" gap between the panel and wall.
IOW - If you lay the panel face down and put a 1" x 1" frame around the edge of the back face.
(all measurements are guesses, give or take a couple of inches)

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.

Agree with Sebrof. Same with my 244s. The side and back "framing" are open on purpose for trapping instead of reflecting. It is a bass "trap". Not done to be cheap, but rather for better effectiveness.

Sebrof, you are correct. Thanks for catching my mistake.

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.