|
possible upgrade from krk's to hs's (pg. 11)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| tehlord |
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
i have a feeling nobody has a ing clue how bad their rooms actually sound. |
Without any point of reference I can't see how they could even begin to imagine. I include myself in this.
Last time I was in a proper treated room was about 20 years ago. |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
a good room needs very little treatment. Also, most people have never been in good rooms. Classic halls, studios ...
Treatment is a bandaid fix which is usually necessary but there seems to be this myth that a dead space is good for mixing. An anachoic chamber would not be so great.
i would go one step further and say people are so sheltered from live acoustic music that their ears are used to the small amount of auditory information a playback system can provide.
that is why I think playing a real instrument is so important not just for theory or developing your musicianship but ear training both related to theory and just in general. My girlfriend has the best hearing of anyone i've ever known, It is just scary. Perfect pitch within like cents. She could tell you what not disappeared if you made a notch with white noise and high q. I don't know anyone that can do that. And like not just ball park, she will say this note , about 1/4 flat. She is a better musician than me but performance is her thing.
violin is probably the best instrument to develop that. Piano has more practical merit but the violin , well they have the best ears. So , i guess put your kids in both. |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
a good room needs very little treatment. Also, most people have never been in good rooms. Classic halls, studios ...
Treatment is a bandaid fix which is usually necessary but there seems to be this myth that a dead space is good for mixing. An anachoic chamber would not be so great.
i would go one step further and say people are so sheltered from live acoustic music that their ears are used to the small amount of auditory information a playback system can provide.
that is why I think playing a real instrument is so important not just for theory or developing your musicianship but ear training both related to theory and just in general. My girlfriend has the best hearing of anyone i've ever known, It is just scary. Perfect pitch within like cents. She could tell you what not disappeared if you made a notch with white noise and high q. I don't know anyone that can do that. And like not just ball park, she will say this note , about 1/4 flat. She is a better musician than me but performance is her thing.
violin is probably the best instrument to develop that. Piano has more practical merit but the violin , well they have the best ears. So , i guess put your kids in both. |
you're right but even the best designed rooms in the world obviously still have treatment and everything relating to this discussion needs to be kept in perspective;
Most people have home studios and not purpose built rooms. Even if people have stripped back to the studs in their basement, you still probably don't have a floating floor or windows that can be moved or altered.
nearly every room can be made massively better with less than $1000 of the right treatment.
My feeling is if you're going to spend $500+ on a soundcard, $1000 on Monitors and another $500 on desks, stands, cables etc, you can spend $1000 on proper treatment. I don't understand people that have expensive kit and crap rooms. Like people that drive $80k porches and have $5k of jewelry and buy Cristal in the klurb, but still live on a housing estate and have a pay as you go phone. |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
i'm currently tracking down a matching genelec sub and see what happens if i take all the bass traps away. I had to use 4 corner traps and 2 tuned resonators to make the yamahas work.
Did i say I was stubborn ? Not that this is a priority but it is on my radar. Been learning about acoustics and taking math courses to understand the books that can get rather heavy fast. But it is a hobby. Like collecting microphones i dont' use. |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
i'm currently tracking down a matching genelec sub and see what happens if i take all the bass traps away. I had to use 4 corner traps and 2 tuned resonators to make the yamahas work.
Did i say I was stubborn ? Not that this is a priority but it is on my radar. Been learning about acoustics and taking math courses to understand the books that can get rather heavy fast. But it is a hobby. Like collecting microphones i dont' use. |
Oh my ing god. How about taking reading comprehension instead? I swear, I was so close not to writing that long response about why you don't need a sub as I had a feeling it wouldn't make any difference and I secretly proved myself right.
But no. Rann tells him he doesn't need one sub, so Richie goes out to find a second one. Are you hoping two wrongs wake a right? Please report back so I can post the obligatory ITYS. |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
i think your grasp of science is somewhat rudimentary and you are using anecdotal situations from people that probably said what they said not because it was true but practical in the conditions they have had at their disposal. Good enough is relative.
Your constant mentioning of stereo in this conversation that has absolutely nothing to do with imaging in any way what so ever doesn't really give me the impression you grasp the concept.
Do you accept that rooms have modes ?
Do you accept that these modes are inevitable ?
Do you understand how having control over a source that is non directional knowing where these max and mins are located can influence how they resonate.
Can you understand that using 2 subs can reduce bass rather than increase it ?
it really isn't that hard. The fact that you think 2 introduces more issues than 1 clearly tells me you aren't getting the message i'm trying to convey.
Your warning was merely speculative for those that don't really know what they are doing assuming a room that isn't mine and it might require some know how. I accept that. But why you consider exploring fundamental concepts that are put into place and discussed ad nauseam in the AES journals.
You of all people should know how certain people tend to take things too far because they just love going beyond what is just acceptable. That proprietary software system for sample play back was completely not necessary but some people do things others consider being a little too myopic what i consider an obsession with detail. |
|
|
| EddieZilker |
Richie,
I'm just trying to make sure I'm following, here: Are you talking about using two subs to cancel out (phase cancellation) problem frequencies? The subs, being deliberately spaced to align phase in a way that negates over-representation which bass-traps are poorly attenuated to compensate for? |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
not so much frequency but room modes which has a frequency component. The result would show in a frequency domain measurement of the room. Bass traps only reduce the issue where as using multiple sources can move the issue to a location that isn't where you are sitting, and overall give you much more control in terms of bass management.
You measure your room and you can figure out the axial modes. You could even take a measurement where the supposed null for a certain mode will be and you will see if you have a rectangle room, the calculations are pretty accurate. The rest is a matter of deciding which modes are issues, placing a source at a location that can use phase cancellation to control certain resonances. |
|
|
| EddieZilker |
| When you're talking about room modes (tuning, et al), is that similar in effect (albeit on a room-sized scale), in terms of relating to frequency, to the resonance chamber on an acoustic instrument or is it something altogether different (i.e. am I erroneously conflating resonance with frequency domain)? |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
i think your grasp of science is somewhat rudimentary and you are using anecdotal situations from people that probably said what they said not because it was true but practical in the conditions they have had at their disposal. Good enough is relative.
|
Actually, quite the opposite. I've already told you I spent a year studying Acoustics under the highest regarded Acoustic Designer in Canada who quite literally wrote the book (actually the first commercially available program to calculate room modes; AcousticX) and showed us in copious detail how to do the math ourselves. I've then spent 10 years as a professional studio engineer, while running my own studio installation business on the side. So no, this isn't "anecdotal" and I'm not just reading a couple of AES journals in my home telling people who work in the trade that they're wrong.
I'm pretty sure I could out e-penis you on this subject and the math (both length and girth) if needed but frankly, it's not required because the fundamental thing you keep missing is th downsides of the practical application and how many counter productive and negative issues you're unknowingly introducing by trying to fix the room mode issue by adding subs.
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
Your constant mentioning of stereo in this conversation that has absolutely nothing to do with imaging in any way what so ever doesn't really give me the impression you grasp the concept.
|
And that's precisely where our points of view on this stray; Your problem is obsessed with modes (or actually better said the negative impacts of room modes which result in standing waves which in turn are nodes and antinodes of given frequency resonance). Great. Low frequency standing waves are one small one part of the overall monitoring system considerations.
See where I'm going? Stay with me...
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
Do you accept that rooms have modes ?
Do you accept that these modes are inevitable ?
|
Yes, yes, yes.
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
Do you understand how having control over a source that is non directional knowing where these max and mins are located can influence how they resonate.
|
Yes, but you're only looking at the problem of these nodes/antinodes in a very blinkered way....
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
Can you understand that using 2 subs can reduce bass rather than increase it ?
|
No. I *could* in theory reduce localised issues caused by modal resonance, it will not reduce bass
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
it really isn't that hard. The fact that you think 2 introduces more issues than 1 clearly tells me you aren't getting the message i'm trying to convey.
|
Not hard at all, which is why I can't understand why you're having so many problems getting your head around what I'm saying. That's because you're strictly trying to convey one tiny part of of a problem in isolation, and acoustic design is a science made up of a huge number of variables that all interreact. By attacking this one problem in this manner, the solution you're suggestiing happens to generate several other far less manageable problems. That's what I've been getting at all this time.
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
Your warning was merely speculative for those that don't really know what they are doing assuming a room that isn't mine and it might require some know how. I accept that. But why you consider exploring fundamental concepts that are put into place and discussed ad nauseam in the AES journals.
|
I'll concede that partially as the case as I'm trying to make this discussion available to those who may not get it as well as you do.
However, what I seem to be failing at explaining is that there are very well established and easy methods to reduce standing waves/nodes in a room, other than adding sub(s) in to the equation. I think I've eloquently explained why subs are a bad idea for stereo monitoring as a whole or better said all things considered (and if you really want I'll go in depth in to the physics of it), and therefore even though in theory adding LFE's in areas which experience modal problems could help that issue via altering the spatial interaction of low frequency resonance waves, you're causing more problems as described that you;re solving.
Bear in mind that only around 30% of sound quality issues in acoustic design are related to problems below the transition frequency.
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
You of all people should know how certain people tend to take things too far because they just love going beyond what is just acceptable. |
I do, and actaully I applaud you trying and I love like that. I'm just saying all things considered, it's so much easier to defeat standing waves with a concerted effort in room treatment, which is also tried and tested.
I dunno, I just also find the sound/feeling of a sub on a stereo setup just abhorrent and totally unnecessary. As an engineer in my core, I look at problems with an efficiency scale always bearing in mind the practicality of the solution. Every time I've heard a sub on a stereo system it's made me hate it. I worked with the guys at Blue Sky audio who used to make a stereo domed speaker solution paired with a sub which had a digital control fro the sub (to set exact crossover frequency points and curves but no matter what you did, it never sounded as flat or as fluid as just a great pair of monitors).
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
That proprietary software system for sample play back was completely not necessary but some people do things others consider being a little too myopic what i consider an obsession with detail. |
It kinda was though. All the orchestra he's done for the last two decades has nearly all been done in one place (you know where) with a very unique and signature sound . So even having unlimited access to any commercially available samples still wasn't close enough to the real thing that the final products are made from. He wanted a smaple libarary that sounds exactly like his finished products, rather than using/fudging other stuff to try to get get close. He had the resources so why not. Was it overkill? Maybe, but in that instance there really was a need, especially when you're trying to convey what a rough cue will sound like to people who don't really have that musical/audio expertise (studio execs/producers/directors etc). |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
and i have used those methods. My room sounds great considering the size. I want to try this out for the sake of seing if the science will translate. I find these things interesting.
i am curious and I will try this out because i've done the math in my head and i'm willing to bet that my theory will work with the work that has been done by other acousticians.
And you are incorrect in that placing say sources at the position of the second mode nulls will pretty much kill the first second third. In a typical room, you've just killed everything up to about 100 hz. You also don't have to have them loud. So it is quite understandable that 2 subs placed in a certain array will yield less bass than one sub that is 6 dB louder.
And because i don't like your tone, i might get 4. |
|
|
|
|
