There seems to be a certain train of thought in this forum that room correction is always necessary. That every room must have some sort of absorbers or reflectors in order to get the best sound possible for you to enjoy. And there are no exceptions or differences as a function of the type of music you listen to. At least that’s the impression that you get when reading a lot of the posts here.
But is that really true? Well some experts certainly don’t think so. Take for example Toole where in his book on page 197 he says:
…”we decided that absorbing side wall reflections seemed to flatter some recordings (mostly pop/rock) while leaving the walls reflective flattered others (mostly classical and jazz).
Conclusion: one size does not fill all. Personal taste, music and the reason for listening are all significant variables.”
But here we see many people who insist on room correction as a must regardless of the type of music being played or any other variables.
It seems to me that the need for room correction, if any, is a lot more complicated and is based on many more individual details than often presented here.
But is that really true? Well some experts certainly don’t think so. Take for example Toole where in his book on page 197 he says:
…”we decided that absorbing side wall reflections seemed to flatter some recordings (mostly pop/rock) while leaving the walls reflective flattered others (mostly classical and jazz).
Conclusion: one size does not fill all. Personal taste, music and the reason for listening are all significant variables.”
But here we see many people who insist on room correction as a must regardless of the type of music being played or any other variables.
It seems to me that the need for room correction, if any, is a lot more complicated and is based on many more individual details than often presented here.
Last edited:
What you wish to discuss is more commonly referred to as room treatment, room correction is a term associated with programs designed to correct a speaker room combination through equalization. This is not to say you don't know the difference only to point it out as the title confused me at first.
Nothing is necessary or mandatory but almost all rooms can benefit from something to control the bass, whether that be absorbers, multiple subwoofers or equalization. This is something universal. Plenty of that in Toole's book too.
I have tried both with and without side wall absorbers and there is an obvious difference. I find that the type of music being listened to makes a big difference in my own preference. Acoustic and orchestral music can sound nice with them in, studio created music almost always sounds better with them absorbed. I can see why there is debate. What is important too is that any absorber must be broadband at least to the transition frequency to avoid it becoming a reflection tone control. Also in Toole's book. Absorbing sidewall reflections also exacerbates the phantom centre tonal change in stereo.
Nothing is necessary or mandatory but almost all rooms can benefit from something to control the bass, whether that be absorbers, multiple subwoofers or equalization. This is something universal. Plenty of that in Toole's book too.
I have tried both with and without side wall absorbers and there is an obvious difference. I find that the type of music being listened to makes a big difference in my own preference. Acoustic and orchestral music can sound nice with them in, studio created music almost always sounds better with them absorbed. I can see why there is debate. What is important too is that any absorber must be broadband at least to the transition frequency to avoid it becoming a reflection tone control. Also in Toole's book. Absorbing sidewall reflections also exacerbates the phantom centre tonal change in stereo.
Obsessed people and fanatics are the ones who recently dreamed up that room correction stuff.
Apparently for those types, nothing is satisfactory, as-is.
Mr and Mrs Douglas bought a nice new console stereo and found a good spot for it in their living room, and were satisfied.
They didn't go nuts over room correction.
But today?..... "Hey Margie, could you move those pillows to the other sofa?... they're killing the left channel horns."
Apparently for those types, nothing is satisfactory, as-is.
Mr and Mrs Douglas bought a nice new console stereo and found a good spot for it in their living room, and were satisfied.
They didn't go nuts over room correction.
But today?..... "Hey Margie, could you move those pillows to the other sofa?... they're killing the left channel horns."
Yes, thanks for the clarification. Room Treatment is definitely a better term to use for this subject.
Your comments about orchestral music seem to be exactly opposite from Tooles'. He says that classical and jazz benefit from reflective side walls whereas you're saying orchestral music sounds better with absorbers. So, you can see why many of these discussions can be so confusing. And perhaps the best answer is to do nothing if things already sound very good to the person.
I guess that's the point. Is all of this time and attention being paid to room treatments really necessary or meaningful. Does it really make enough of an audible difference that it's worth the effort, cost, and visual distractions that come with it.
And then how do you resolve the fact that there are completely contradictory opinions about what to do for a specific situation. Seems like at that point the science, to whatever extent it exists, is being given a back seat to nothing more than personal opinions.
I've been around for 7 decades now.
And I've seen the changes that society has gone through, and still are.
But mainly the past few decades, maybe around since 1990ish, I've noticed an increased amount of nitpicking, worrying, and obsessivness over things that never were a problem before.
I'm no head-shrink doctor, and I'm no authority on people's personalities, but to put it in simple terms, people have gone nuts.
A large part of this is pressure within society, marketing hype, and ever since the internet, exchange of information overload, not to forget the addiction to it, and cellphones.
All that technology being a form of dependency to many.
I've been watching and noting these things for a long time, but they ain't gonna make me some crazy nutbag.
Nor am I living in a bubble of nostalgia.
I just sit back, and try to enjoy the show.
As for opinions on home entertainment products and their use, they've become pretty damn crazy, and make people lazy at the same time.
God forbid someone has to get up off their chair and adjust the volume like in "the old days".
Nah, it's bluetooth fantasy land now.
Or talk to your remote control.
One day you'll just think what you want it to do or play.
Then you can chop off your arms and legs and not worry about a thing.
Opinions?...... you know what they say about them... They're like A*H***, everybody's got one.
And I've seen the changes that society has gone through, and still are.
But mainly the past few decades, maybe around since 1990ish, I've noticed an increased amount of nitpicking, worrying, and obsessivness over things that never were a problem before.
I'm no head-shrink doctor, and I'm no authority on people's personalities, but to put it in simple terms, people have gone nuts.
A large part of this is pressure within society, marketing hype, and ever since the internet, exchange of information overload, not to forget the addiction to it, and cellphones.
All that technology being a form of dependency to many.
I've been watching and noting these things for a long time, but they ain't gonna make me some crazy nutbag.
Nor am I living in a bubble of nostalgia.
I just sit back, and try to enjoy the show.
As for opinions on home entertainment products and their use, they've become pretty damn crazy, and make people lazy at the same time.
God forbid someone has to get up off their chair and adjust the volume like in "the old days".
Nah, it's bluetooth fantasy land now.
Or talk to your remote control.
One day you'll just think what you want it to do or play.
Then you can chop off your arms and legs and not worry about a thing.
Opinions?...... you know what they say about them... They're like A*H***, everybody's got one.
Yeah, sound (and media in general) directly into the brain skipping the whole problematic acoustics and stuff, no need for rooms or arms and legs, ears or eyes, media all day long, commercials while sleeping 😀
For room treatment, if one has speaker that radiates all around then yes but why not just get narrow directivity speakers instead? room correction would always help I guess, on the bass. None of this is mandatory, for example my kids are rocking perfectly fine just with any sound source never minding about the sound. It is just that after minding the sound then there is various things to obses on, try and get better sound, the audiophiles and enthusiasts.
For room treatment, if one has speaker that radiates all around then yes but why not just get narrow directivity speakers instead? room correction would always help I guess, on the bass. None of this is mandatory, for example my kids are rocking perfectly fine just with any sound source never minding about the sound. It is just that after minding the sound then there is various things to obses on, try and get better sound, the audiophiles and enthusiasts.
Ah, I see my wording was unclear, I agree with Toole's position, when I said "with them in" I was referring to the reflections not the absorbers 🙂
I actually prefer the reflections absorbed at all times but with certain music I can see what attracts others to not absorb them.
I think preferred musical style is one of biggest confounding factors in useful discussion of what is best or preferred. I know I spent many years wondering why my Linkwitz dipoles didn't sound as good on all the music I like, SL was really only interested in one style and it was not the same as me.
🙂
Ok let's start with reflections. Like Fluid stated it's a matter of personal preference and music style. It is ALL SUBJECTIVE.
Now the objective side of things: early reflections ( their level and where (and how) they go) destroy some of the stereo effect. This can be measured ( the Early Reflection level wrt to direct sound), corelated with human perception principle ( psychoacoustic) and from there it is possible to compensate them or not.
In some circles ( professional) it quickly became apparent the issues related to this have to be taken into account if you wish to have the results of work done to deliver end users something which will 'translate' easily on different rooms and ( hopefully) will enjoy 'entertainment' from it.
From enduser perspective does it matter? For some people it seems it doesn't (the Douglas), for other it can ( you know the guy who want the same sound as in a live act into the concert hall).
For those who cares it quickly became apparent the difference in room size can't bring same feelings as in live because Early Reflections in a concert hall are so long ( the walls are so far away from your listening point) they doesn't translate into a domestic room, the later being much smaller will impose it's own sonic signature upon the message.
You prefer with this 'signature' or not... your preference.
About lowend absorbers and small rooms, well there is tons of litterature about it, some members here even spent half their life studying it and giving answers to the issue.
From there what?
You got 70years experience in the entertaining side of business where what does matter for your customers is (no one knows but let's say)... to sing a tune. Be able to understand the speaker telling you the good news world evolved into a place where people doesn't judge opposing views with condescension, more realistically an other conflict just started because one judge others views...
Fine a 2" portable radio from the 60's is the answer.
I like this approach, i have it in my bathroom, my kitchen, my car and bedroom. To be provocative i even have such thing in my pocket but it evolved to give access to the net and even make phonecall from time to time ( so '20th century', but i must reckon that despite all my efforts i still need human contacts from time to time).
As i've been involved in the professional side of things and had the chance to listen to nice loudspeakers behaving to both world ( pro and audiophile: ATC, Kinoshita/TAD/Pioneer,...) in dedicated room and not so i heard the difference it makes to consider room/loudspeakers as a system.
I know what i prefer and why. It is even measurable.
Does it makes me judge people on their choice? No i'm not. I really mean it. Each one it's own.
Ok let's start with reflections. Like Fluid stated it's a matter of personal preference and music style. It is ALL SUBJECTIVE.
Now the objective side of things: early reflections ( their level and where (and how) they go) destroy some of the stereo effect. This can be measured ( the Early Reflection level wrt to direct sound), corelated with human perception principle ( psychoacoustic) and from there it is possible to compensate them or not.
In some circles ( professional) it quickly became apparent the issues related to this have to be taken into account if you wish to have the results of work done to deliver end users something which will 'translate' easily on different rooms and ( hopefully) will enjoy 'entertainment' from it.
From enduser perspective does it matter? For some people it seems it doesn't (the Douglas), for other it can ( you know the guy who want the same sound as in a live act into the concert hall).
For those who cares it quickly became apparent the difference in room size can't bring same feelings as in live because Early Reflections in a concert hall are so long ( the walls are so far away from your listening point) they doesn't translate into a domestic room, the later being much smaller will impose it's own sonic signature upon the message.
You prefer with this 'signature' or not... your preference.
About lowend absorbers and small rooms, well there is tons of litterature about it, some members here even spent half their life studying it and giving answers to the issue.
From there what?
You got 70years experience in the entertaining side of business where what does matter for your customers is (no one knows but let's say)... to sing a tune. Be able to understand the speaker telling you the good news world evolved into a place where people doesn't judge opposing views with condescension, more realistically an other conflict just started because one judge others views...
Fine a 2" portable radio from the 60's is the answer.
I like this approach, i have it in my bathroom, my kitchen, my car and bedroom. To be provocative i even have such thing in my pocket but it evolved to give access to the net and even make phonecall from time to time ( so '20th century', but i must reckon that despite all my efforts i still need human contacts from time to time).
As i've been involved in the professional side of things and had the chance to listen to nice loudspeakers behaving to both world ( pro and audiophile: ATC, Kinoshita/TAD/Pioneer,...) in dedicated room and not so i heard the difference it makes to consider room/loudspeakers as a system.
I know what i prefer and why. It is even measurable.
Does it makes me judge people on their choice? No i'm not. I really mean it. Each one it's own.
Man this is Science you describe: people with different views trying to find how all the mess around us evolve and if it follow some kind of rules.
Science is not religion or dogma.
Reality isn't. There is multiple ways for anything. Once you start to think you are 'right in your own view' then there is chance to follow dogma... being into uncertainty is not confortable. But isn't it what we all face?
Does it makes difference to treat a room? Let's put the room out of the equation: bring your loudspeakers outside. Listen to them, bring them back in room, repeat listening.
You don't have heard what room treatments does, but now you know what your room do.
From there up to you to try/feel if it can be corrected or not. Chance is if you decide to try to minimise artefact it is a science. Won't makes you feel more secured, will bring headache,etc,etc,... but at least there is repeatble things that can be done.
Last edited:
With side-wall reflections (and speakers which illuminate the side walls), you get a more "diffuse" stereo image, which may or may not be beneficial for some music.
NB - Recording techniques for classical arrangement can vary hugely, ranging from coincident (mid-side or XY) or near-coincident micing techniques (ORTF, NOS) to very decorrelated techniques (spaced) and I think that ought to be accounted for too.
The benefits (or shortfalls) of side-wall reflections are very subjective. I might like them. You might not.
Chris
Through their studies, Olive and Toole have found that early reflections, up to about 11ms or so, are filtered out by our brain. I do believe that they play a role in the degree of spacial illusion however. That's probably why over treatment of them tends to detract from things like soundstage envelopment. Certain genres of music benefit greatly from the early reflections .. even rock/roll if it's a live recording.
Isn't it the other way around Puppet: once past 11ms our brain is more able to identify both separately?
This is the point of LEDE and ITG. As well how i understand and experience(d) it.
It's relatively easy to test: a reverb plug in, you cut tail of reverb, set ER at ug, vary the ER time from 1/2ms to 30ms ( ITG specified by LEDE, could be other defined target) then run your audio through it... no coloration? If yes at which freq and how it evolve with time...
Beware there will be level difference so to make a fair comparison you'll have to adjust level ( rms) with the softer one ( this will be the longer ITD) as rms target.
This is the point of LEDE and ITG. As well how i understand and experience(d) it.
It's relatively easy to test: a reverb plug in, you cut tail of reverb, set ER at ug, vary the ER time from 1/2ms to 30ms ( ITG specified by LEDE, could be other defined target) then run your audio through it... no coloration? If yes at which freq and how it evolve with time...
Beware there will be level difference so to make a fair comparison you'll have to adjust level ( rms) with the softer one ( this will be the longer ITD) as rms target.
Last edited:
One other thing about ER: it could help taylor your room to your own prefered seat preference when into a concert hall:
You like center front row: try something along the 10ms/-15db
You like back row try 30ms/-30db...
You like center front row: try something along the 10ms/-15db
You like back row try 30ms/-30db...
No I don't think so. You can get quite a good result using basics like speaker and listener positioning and the "traditional room treatments" rugs, furniture and so on. It depends on the room and your personal preferences. I have multiple set-ups and only use a couple of absorbers in one room. That's the only room I feel they are needed.
As far as DSP room correction I have the capability in 2 systems and don't use it. I don't like what it does when I have used it. But again many swear by it and that's fine preference again.
Rob 🙂
Ok i understood it the other way around that from 0ms to 11ms our brain was able to filter them out.
Sorry for being lost in translation, and thank you clarifying.
Try both and make up your own mind I'd say... the early reflections do influence (not in a positive way) the pin point placement some like so much.
I wouldn't say 'our brain filters them out', that would not be how I'd describe those reflections. As they most certainly do influence what I hear, in fact without
those very early reflections present the perception of the recording itself becomes way more clear and more differing from recording to recording.
The brain can indeed mask those reflections but not without any drawbacks i.m.h.o. The reflections are like 'adding the same sauce over anything you play'.
Every recording seems to image similarly.
The feel of envelopment can easily come from later reflections than the first 11 ms, the works of David Griesinger is quite elaborate to cover that. The first
reflections under 11 ms still diffuse the stage as mentioned earlier and may influence our brain's placement of objects in/on the stage. Can it be pleasant?
I guess that depends on the listener's preference and to some level even his/her musical genre preferences.
I have tested both with and without those very early reflections and under all circumstances I prefer not to have those early reflections. But I must
add that I do like later reflections, at 15 to 25 ms, to get the feel of envelopment as well as keep the clarity and imaging. For myself, that's my preference
for all types of music. I tried classical with the reflections coming in earlier at about 10 ms and that worked quite well too. But for Rock/pop, I prefer 15 ms
or later. The subjective differences are quite obvious.
But it's my preference, and not gospel. So I can't and won't argue with anyone that feels different about it. I just want to say: do try it for yourself. Find
your own preference. And be aware it's just that: your preference. Yours to keep, but not necessarily in line with someone else's preference.
I currently use a JBL wide dispersion horn and I have settled on no sidewall absorption having tried it both ways. It depends on the room, where you sit, loudspeaker directivity, and of course personal preference.
Best thing to do is to learn to read notes! Go to music library and pick up your favourite composer's symphony and enjoy!
But for us less talented people, or someone who likes to listen to different interpretations of a music piece, we have too many choices and problems... Personal taste can also change, and we might have move the listening setup to a different room/apartment/house. I think that we consumers must accept those differencies, up to the point of them being really problematic. Eg. construction of walls, floor and ceiling are what they are... but I have read about professional musicians making a floating room inside another to not disturb neighbors. I have been following hifi only for 50 years, but at least here in Finland (room) acoustics was well known in '70s, but naturally only among those really interested in hifi.
There are many ways to analyze and treat room acoustics, and modern simulations and measurement systems have opened a new and dangereous world for amateurs! I have used RoomEQ Wizard for some 10 years now... Fluid said that absorbers and reflectors should be broadband, but I don't agree, in most cases problems accumulate on certain bands (like bass, room modes). I have never used those, only positioning of speakers, furniture and listening chair, but fortunately I have lived in a house/apartment with wooden frame!
(Digital) room correction by equalizing the source signal is a modern devil, to whom many lose their hand or even heart! I have tried to eq to the max, but I didnt like the result. Nowdays I EQ "manually" only the lowest room mode peak by 50% and adjust tonality by full octave low Q correction. I have dsp in 3 of my 4 own systems now, including two multiway dsp-active diy stereo speaker sets. Third system has minidsp between pre- and power amps and sub. Fourth is at my summer cabin without dsp, but in wonderful acoustics! I have no intention to even try automatic corrections like Acourate, Audyssey or Dirac. I have heard those at friends and and hifi shows and at Genelec factory, and those were OK, so I don't object them in general.
But for us less talented people, or someone who likes to listen to different interpretations of a music piece, we have too many choices and problems... Personal taste can also change, and we might have move the listening setup to a different room/apartment/house. I think that we consumers must accept those differencies, up to the point of them being really problematic. Eg. construction of walls, floor and ceiling are what they are... but I have read about professional musicians making a floating room inside another to not disturb neighbors. I have been following hifi only for 50 years, but at least here in Finland (room) acoustics was well known in '70s, but naturally only among those really interested in hifi.
There are many ways to analyze and treat room acoustics, and modern simulations and measurement systems have opened a new and dangereous world for amateurs! I have used RoomEQ Wizard for some 10 years now... Fluid said that absorbers and reflectors should be broadband, but I don't agree, in most cases problems accumulate on certain bands (like bass, room modes). I have never used those, only positioning of speakers, furniture and listening chair, but fortunately I have lived in a house/apartment with wooden frame!
(Digital) room correction by equalizing the source signal is a modern devil, to whom many lose their hand or even heart! I have tried to eq to the max, but I didnt like the result. Nowdays I EQ "manually" only the lowest room mode peak by 50% and adjust tonality by full octave low Q correction. I have dsp in 3 of my 4 own systems now, including two multiway dsp-active diy stereo speaker sets. Third system has minidsp between pre- and power amps and sub. Fourth is at my summer cabin without dsp, but in wonderful acoustics! I have no intention to even try automatic corrections like Acourate, Audyssey or Dirac. I have heard those at friends and and hifi shows and at Genelec factory, and those were OK, so I don't object them in general.
Last edited: