Thanks PureBasic for your reply and attention. I went back in thread afterwords and looked at earlier posts to find the answers. Is there a fully satisfactory solution; or accept the current solutions as the best there is?
Best wishes
Anton
No. Here is a bit of discussion from a few years ago that might help clarify the physics and how active sound absorbers tend to go about things.
I did not put the time and money to make/test anything yet. In my case I have a rectangular room. So I believe a DBA would work fine.
ABT could be great devices and really have their place in control rooms and in auditoriums, but yeah, the ones from PSI are very expensive, not very efficient, and you need more than one. In definitive, DBAs and MSOs are much simpler systems, cost less, and they just work. I would go for that kind of setup before trying active traping.
It makes sense, but seems like a lot of work.
For a small amount more effort and cost you could have four subs (one in each corner) and have the same effect but also help with achieving a higher spl at the listening position.
For a small amount more effort and cost you could have four subs (one in each corner) and have the same effect but also help with achieving a higher spl at the listening position.
Not using to many abbreviations highly improves readability in general.
I always try to avoid it as much as I can, or at least use the full word in the beginning and sometimes later on again.
I agree with this.
In fact, the effort and costs vs an active bass trap system are basically the same.
A multi-sub system already gives a very satisfying result.
So just pure practically speaking it doesn't make a lot of sense to go for something else.
Higher SPL can also be replaced for smaller subs for example (At the same SPL)