Home Theater Forum and Systems banner

61 - 78 of 78 Posts

·
HTS Senior Moderator
Joined
·
5,288 Posts
Frequency response is important - but so is impulse response, a balanced decay time curve, etc.

The trick to frequency response is not just what you use. It's more importantly knowing where the problem is coming from so you know how and where to treat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Discussion Starter #62
Yes, but for as far as i understand my frequency response is quite oke, not perfect, but my impulse response , decay etc is less oke.

Wanting to change the frequency response needs more isolation i can imagine as aposed to changing the decay, impulse etc. am i right ?

So besides that, what do you think about puukorva's statement about using diffusers for the rear and front ?
 

·
HTS Senior Moderator
Joined
·
5,288 Posts
Absorption can impact all 3 pending what it is and where it is. Diffusion does not change decay time. Diffusion on the rear wall is personal preference. On the front wall the only time I use diffusion is when using an open baffle or panel dipole type of speaker to deal with the comb filtering from the rear wave but doing so without removing more energy from the room. If a typical monopole speaker, you're more concerned with is SBIR which must be deal with via absorption as a diffuser that would go low enough to address it would be unreasonably sized.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Discussion Starter #64
The advice was not given i think becouse of the 100 hz null, "that" problem was already kindof fixed at page 3 by finding a better listening posistion. you can check the waterfall and frequency response on page 3.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Discussion Starter #65
Oh, ok. I didn't read the previous posts word for word, I just wanted to mention the REW room simulation because I think it's an awesome feature in the awesome software.
I agree, it's verry awesome :)) ,

* The title is a bit misleading by now, so i understand, i can't find an option though to change the title. Is this possible? somebody ?
 

·
HTS Senior Moderator
Joined
·
5,288 Posts
You're correct in that if you want to maximise the effect of a small diameter absorber, the best way to do that is to leave a gap of a similar size to the barrier. That however, is no rule of a thumb on setting up absoroption.
Other than it's impractical to try do do porous absorbers to tune narrowly.

Also, the test results you mentioned earlier you're misreading. 8 of the 12 pieces were done leaning across the wall/floor junction. That's a corner just like any other vertical corner. The other 4 were on a wall. That replicates the way those panels are used in many rooms - 8 in corners, 2 side wall reflections, 2 ceiling reflections.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,771 Posts
Sorry but you're trying to explain physics can be broken. Clearly it isn't so. The tested elements were not comparable to DIY soft absorbers but used multiple technologies combined (according to their website).
What is the link to their website?
 

·
HTS Senior Moderator
Joined
·
5,288 Posts
Trust me. Those did not have the membrane. If they did, the high frequency absorption would be close to zero which it's not. We were there when the testing was done.
 

·
HTS Senior Moderator
Joined
·
5,288 Posts
Again, theory vs data. Bees shouldn't be able to fly according to physics either. But they do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Discussion Starter #70
I'm currently bussy making the soundpanels and all is going fine. But i got another question about the room acoustics. Im planning to buy a diffrent floor. I have read a bunch of diffrent articles saying diffrent things about it.
Im wondering, what would be the best floor to get ?

Carpet
Laminate
Vinyl

For carpet it absorbs high frequency's and it might sound dull and boomy in the end is what i found
For laminate it can sound bad by the reflective sound it produces
For vinyl i couldnt find an awnser.

Also i read that an hard surface would work better with soundpanels and carpet would make it sound boomy

Source

Im planning to get Vinyl though, but i thought lets check what the experts know about it before buying it :)
 

·
HTS Senior Moderator
Joined
·
5,288 Posts
Boomy is there regardless of the floor type until treated. Yes - carpet is high frequency only absorbing. That said, in a home theater situation, I would use carpet. You want a more damped room in a multi-channel environment. Now for 2 channel, Wood can be nice. I would not use tile, concrete, or vinyl.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Discussion Starter #72
Okay, I'm using 2 main speakers and i want to get the most reliable/real sound as its meant to mix music. What is important for me is that it gives me the most accurate sound (not the best warm etc sounding).

The answer i'm looking for is "why" do you suggest wood ?. "Nice sounding" is not an priority if it ads an acoustic sound to the room which is not in the sound of itself . I need it to be as transparent as possible. Why do you think vinyl is a bad choice as aposed to wood/laminate ? wouldn't wood give extra reflections as well ?
 

·
HTS Senior Moderator
Joined
·
5,288 Posts
Wood doesn't tend to be as hard/harsh sounding. If you want to use a laminate, go for it. Just giving my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Discussion Starter #74
I'm just trying to find out what would be best in my situation. I understand wood will sound better then laminate , but it is also allot more expensive.
So instead of going for the harsh sound of laminate i thought vinyl would be a good in between choice as its allot thinner and less reflective (though i'm not that sure about the reflections or if it sounds harsh) or do you think vinyl is just as bad sounding as laminate or carpet for a 2 channel mixing-room situation ?
I do have wood under the vinyl i'm using right now by the way, so no concrete if that might change anything.

For as far as i understand your experience is that vinyl/laminate/tile all produce a to harsh sound ? and that carpet wouldn't be an option for an 2 channel situation ?
leaving actually only wood as an option ? Have you done tests in the past if i may ask ? or is this only by ear (which i would find equally valid if you knew the floor was for a fact the source of the harshness) Harshness is not good in any way , so i wouldn't call that an opinion :p.
 

·
HTS Senior Moderator
Joined
·
5,288 Posts
Over wood, vinyl would be slightly better than laminate but not a ton. It's just experience of hearing a ton of rooms over the years with pretty much any flooring type you can think of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Discussion Starter #76
Ah yes, I figgured i have still a wooden floor beneith my currently vinyl so i will use that and paint it to look nice again.


Thank you for the advice :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Discussion Starter #77 (Edited)
I'm back after a looooong time, it took some while to find the time and do everything the right way but i think i got it right this time... i hope.
I think it sounds allot better already and i did bought a wooden floor, it realy gives allot reflections but when tamed down with the soundpanels it sounds warm and nice :)

Could you check my measurements to see if its improved to an acceptable standard ? I'm still not sure how to read the waterfalls. As you can see in the first picture it looks like the average is 400 (zoomed out) while the second picture looks like the average is around 200 ms.

The frequency response is quite oke i think, it has some spikes though around the 2, 4 and 600.

For the basstraps in the front corners i got also traps behind the carpet wall which you can't see on the photo's.

What are your thoughts about it ? im realy curious :)
 

Attachments

61 - 78 of 78 Posts
Top