However, the architect rather mentioned a cost difference of a few hundred euros.
Hehe. I heat my 120sqm with underfloor heating for currently 375€. If I switched to tiles, all heating costs would be gone. What the architects say is absolute nonsense.
That sounds good. :) Well then, I will probably go with wood after all.
So it doesn’t make much difference whether I choose an especially thin parquet or skip the impact sound insulation? The latter should be dispensable in a basement room anyway, right?
So it doesn’t make much of a difference whether I choose a particularly thin parquet or skip the impact sound insulation? The latter should be dispensable in a basement room anyway, right?
No, it doesn’t. You can safely take cheaper two-layer parquet. But please glue it down.
Hihi. I heat my 120 sqm with underfloor heating for currently €375. If I switched to tiles, all heating costs would be gone. It is absolute nonsense what the architects are saying.
Ok, thanks for your information. I just wonder how she comes to advise me so strongly against the wooden floor. "You will end up paying through the nose for heating," direct quote.
The architect suggested tiles for reasons of efficiency, however, the room is intended to serve as a music room and home theater, so tiles are actually out of the question for me.
Choose the acoustically most favorable floor and install the warming pipes in the wall instead of the floor. Surface heating does not have to be installed in the floor. Parquet is also acoustically rather hard. Cork and carpet contribute a lot to good acoustics but hinder the heating performance.