@tmuikku: I haven't done the clap test yet with and without absorption but there is definitely some echo in this room.. I have noticed/heard this few times in the past while listening to some songs.. 🙂 So yes.. I need to do something about it like absorption at the back of the sofa..
In person, the differences can be identified easily..
I compared above recordings playing one version for a few seconds and immediately switching to the other through my crinnacle zero earphones and differences in vocals/calming down sort of effect is easily audible even in that.. 🙂
In person, the differences can be identified easily..
I compared above recordings playing one version for a few seconds and immediately switching to the other through my crinnacle zero earphones and differences in vocals/calming down sort of effect is easily audible even in that.. 🙂
Last edited:
If you can make it 150mm out of something that is not super dense you can get a nice broadband absorption
Also somewhat counter intuitively having lots of smaller panels works better at absorbing to low frequencies than single large panels due to the edge effect. Shame it is not so decor friendly.
In the ETC most reflections are down about 20 dB from the peak after the treatment. This is good early reflection performance and should be an audible improvement even if visually it is not such as treat 🙂
The right setup of a DBA or similar can significantly change the decay time at low frequencies for the better. Multi subs in any popular arrangements do very little to address decay time, they are all about reducing spatial variance in the frequency response.
But several smaller panels could be arranged in a big frame covered with fabric
Maybe as long as the frame doesn't cover the edges. The edges need to be exposed to have a beneficial effect, which complicates contruction but it can be done.
Some possible inspiration? 😀 A 3D printer can get you pretty far these days. 😉
https://rdacoustic.cz/en/high-end-audio/silentmax3d-luxury-edition/
https://rdacoustic.cz/en/high-end-audio/silentmax3d-luxury-edition/
I wasn't suggesting that multi-sub would addresss decay time; just that DBA wasn't practical in his space. In addition to the space being small, there is its asymmetry. Perhaps rear subs phased to work as active absorbers would have the desired effect..
I have onshape template for this if somone wants cut and install on a wall.
No that's why I mentioned it 🙂 There are lots of options for source sink arrangements with two subs all the way up to walls of them. The best placement of any number can simulated quite well in AKABAK. Have a read of the Fazenda papers if you haven't or it was some time ago.
Well, I noticed on the right part of the room there is pretty much nothing in the room - just "populate" it with stuff. 1 big thing like drawer full with stuff or another sofa is better than 10+ such panels, because stuff like sofa, especially if it is near wall, works like a natural sound trap down to bass frequencies.
IMO natural rooms sound natural, overly treated - like a studio or semi-anechoic chambers. You will have to live there, so probably natural room sound will be better for your mental health.
Search didn't help me find the Fazenda papers
"A fazenda is a plantation found throughout Brazil during the colonial period " 🙂
so I went to AES library and found Bruno Fazenda is a prolific author.
I read
Subjective Preference of Modal Control Methods in Listening Rooms
which was relevantIf you provided links, I missed them but thanks for pointing me to fazenda
from the article
It appears that, for high quality critical listening conditions, those systems ensuring a faster decay of low frequency energy are preferred over those attempting adirect“flattening”ofthemagnitudefrequencyresponse
the systems that did this best were (in my words) those using one or more rear subwoofers phased to operate as active absorbers
It appears that, for high quality critical listening conditions, those systems ensuring a faster decay of low frequency energy are preferred over those attempting adirect“flattening”ofthemagnitudefrequencyresponse
the systems that did this best were (in my words) those using one or more rear subwoofers phased to operate as active absorbers
This is a hard choice for me. Do I want to be a critical listener, getting to hear every nuance of the recording? Or do I want to engulf myself in the total sensation, just be drawn into the music because it just overpowers me. I think I may want a bit of both at times. But most of all, I want to enjoy the experience so the main reason for me to be in this game isn't the critical listening, rather the enjoyment of music, which is why I play with stuff like ambience etc. Experiencing things like envelopment, even at bass frequencies has become way more important to me than "hearing every detail". Your mileage may vary. If you're like me? Go read some more from David Griesinger 😀. He has some cool video's om subwoofer placement.
@wesayso , i agree. I like to 'hear' the musician, sense his/hers motivation to play as it is done.
Luckily for listening i can move forward or backward, so at ~ critical distance or more backward. Sit mainly more backward, living room arrangement is a given ;-)
Luckily for listening i can move forward or backward, so at ~ critical distance or more backward. Sit mainly more backward, living room arrangement is a given ;-)
I like it all ! Sometimes, envelopment is the ticket...sometimes hearing every nuance is the ticket. Depends on mood, and quite often the particular track.
Never know really. In any and all cases however, i typically start a listening session in critical listener mode...out of pure habit mainly, I guess.
But that usually quickly switches to enjoyment mode, simply being absorbed by great music, great sound.
The indoor vs outdoor experience are very different ime/imo, they both show what the other is lacking, while each being glorious in its own right.
According to Griesinger detailed sound end envelopment come together perceptually. In other words they are not mutually exclusive and if you have detailed sound, but no envelopment, tune the system, tune the acoustics, tune the positioning, because you haven't hit the sweetspot yet. If you have envelopment but no detailed sound, it's not envelopment but something else, noise in the room, or sub par system. My simplistic view on it.
Last edited:
The interesting thing about some of the findings in the research from Bruno Fazenda is that it is based on perception. The same thing that makes much of Griesinger's work valuable. When there appears to be a threshold where listeners in the test liked something better that way, I think it is worth considering. There is a graph in one of Fazenda's papers showing the decay threshold where improvement in decay didn't result in a more favourable perception. That can be used as a check metric to see how any system measures and whether there might be an improvement to be had, or experimented with.
Have you read what Griesinger has to say about bass in small room acoustics? I'm pretty sure it's quite different from the direction Fazenda chose.
Actually he has several different papers and presentations on the subject and I've changed my own DSP plan of attack based on those papers. I'm not at liberty to move everything in the room so I did the best I can to achieve what he calls enveloping bass. For that to happen it has to be stereo bass. The envelopment comes from a difference in phase between the two bass streams. I've linked some of his papers in my thread somewhere, I'll see if I can dig them up again in a few days. Meanwhile Griesinger's Youtube channel will have some presentations available no doubt.
When looking for clues on how to keep it entertaining, Griesinger still is my go to source of information.
Actually he has several different papers and presentations on the subject and I've changed my own DSP plan of attack based on those papers. I'm not at liberty to move everything in the room so I did the best I can to achieve what he calls enveloping bass. For that to happen it has to be stereo bass. The envelopment comes from a difference in phase between the two bass streams. I've linked some of his papers in my thread somewhere, I'll see if I can dig them up again in a few days. Meanwhile Griesinger's Youtube channel will have some presentations available no doubt.
When looking for clues on how to keep it entertaining, Griesinger still is my go to source of information.
Last edited:
It’s been a while since I tried. For a smart guy with useful stuff to say Griesinger’s website is atrocious and the videos, I can’t stay awake to make it through. I still have one in an open tab you linked a while ago that I can’t get through,
There is no requirement for source and sink arrangements to be summed mono so I don’t see them being incompatible on a fundamental level. Practicalities on implementation are always a limit for some situations. I haven’t had a decent speaker I can listen to for years now so I know all about other things getting in the way of what I want to do.
I did find Fazenda’s papers well written with some outcomes that suggest a different approach to what many people do, and I find that intriguing. There are plenty of studio guys that promote similar things regarding decay times, source and sink seems to offer a more practical approach for the average person in a normal room to try and achieve them at lower frequencies.
There is no requirement for source and sink arrangements to be summed mono so I don’t see them being incompatible on a fundamental level. Practicalities on implementation are always a limit for some situations. I haven’t had a decent speaker I can listen to for years now so I know all about other things getting in the way of what I want to do.
I did find Fazenda’s papers well written with some outcomes that suggest a different approach to what many people do, and I find that intriguing. There are plenty of studio guys that promote similar things regarding decay times, source and sink seems to offer a more practical approach for the average person in a normal room to try and achieve them at lower frequencies.