Home Theater Forum and Systems banner

81 - 100 of 110 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Hi

before jumping on conclusions too early, I would like to understands, what the "nulls" and "dips are, how they've been measured, where they come from.

Examples
But I ended up with a few large deep nulls that when I remove the traps are not there.
or
The null goes away if the speakers are flat against the wall at least with the old ones. The new Legacy focus se who knows what is going on as I have not run REW as of yet.
What measurement showed the "nulls"?
How was it measured, how does the curve look like?

-------------------

The term "null" refers to room modes. They are nulls of the standing waves that appear due to resonances of the room.
Not the nulls cause problems but the maxima of the standing waves.

At the nulls the standing waves do not cause any increase of sound pressure.
This does not influence the direct sound from the speakers/woofers.
A sound pressure of x from the direct sound plus an additional sound pressure of zero leaves the sound pressure x from the direct sound.

The the maximum points the standing waves cause anin crease of sound pressure at the certain frequency.
This adds to the direct sound pressure.
The sound pressure x from the direct sound plus a sound preyyure of y>0 due to a maximum of the standing wave gives an increase of sound pressure at the frequency of the standing wave.

-------------------

"Dips" in measurements can have a different cause.

They appear if one measures the room response curve.
The room response measurement is the combined sound pressure of direct sound and the room response (reflections, reverberant sound).

If you combine/overlay the direct sound with the reflected sound, you will observe an interference between those two sounds - depending on the frequency and the phase delay of direct vs. reflected sound (more precise: the wavelength and the difference of travel distance between direct an reflected sound).

Interference leads to peaks for certain frequencies (where the direct and reflected sound are in phase and this add to each other) and dips for other frequencies (where the phases are shiftet by 180°, e.g. the direct sound is at high point the reflected sound is at a low point, resulting in a cancellation, zero sound pressure).

-------------------

A microphone only measures sound pressure changes.
So it does not distinguish between direct and reflected sound - but only the resulting sound pressure.

The ear distinguishes sound patterns also depending on the arrival time and their coherence.
Tu it in a simple way early arriving patterns with high coherence are identified as direct souund, late arriving patterns with low coherence are identified as reverberant sound.

The ear does not use the sound pressure.


So the microphone shows a result that is perceived in a completely different way.

-------------------

Additionally the ear responds differently to peaks and dips in the direct sound.

Experiments were made where the direct sound was manipulated.
One set of manipulations was intriducing peaks at different frequencies.
The other set had dips in the same frequencies.

The result was that listeners responden to peaks much stronger than to dips.
In many cases they did not respjnd to dips at all. Only strong dips could be detected.

So, another question is how relevant the dip is in terms of perception.

-------------------

The tricky thing is the right interpretation of measurements.

So it is inportant to know what has been measured and how it was measured (signals, microhphone setup, length od measurement widwows etc.)

It can be that dips and peaks are measurement artefacts.

-------------------

I would recommend several different measurements, for example:
  • Room reverberation (RT60 or RT30)
  • Waterfall diagram
The interpretation of those would be the basis for further thoughts.

Cheers
Babak
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Not disagreeing with anything being said here - i kinda think that this problem is being over thought a little....

He already stated that the null went away when he placed the old speakers against the wall.... hence he moved the source to change the wavelength location in the small room, hence room mode.......

If when the new speakers are looked at and the problem comes back, location could then be checked and then the crossover points between the subs and the mains (and phase).

Knowing the problem is half the battle.

Gordo
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
1,664 Posts
Bass traps can do one thing a extra sub can't and that is help with the decay times in the bass region. That said I think in the case of this room there maybe something else going on think about it.
Well, without having to go into a 12 page post, I'll just say no. "Bass traps" are simply absorbers that convert sound energy to heat. Fixing the frequency domain, i.e, making it smoother, will also fix you visual time "problems".
But for "audio" problems in the low bass region, you need no such things. What you can "see" in a measurement and what your 2 ears perceive, are two different things. Too many people approach acoustics "intuitively". That is the wrong approach. Perceptual science/psychoacoustics is far from intuitive.
My advice, worry only about amplitude peaks. Cut them down to avg level. Forget narrow dips. Broad ones, a combination of multiple sources and EQ is perfect for HT.

If he moved the sub all over the room and still has the same issue at the same frequencies then it could be several issues combining to cause the dip. Not using that line of thought maybe just maybe a trap could help more then a sub.
No.:) Something effective for those frequencies would be enormous and physically change the volume of the room. Plus I consider it foolhardy to throw away energy at those frequencies.
Still curious about how he measured, some of it makes no sense.

My room had a 30db peak at 57hz that could not find a way to fix with moving stuff around. When I started adding traps it helped it a lot but then show other issues that were being masked. The bass traps took care of son of the peak and moving stuff fix a lot of it too. But I ended up with a few large deep nulls that when I remove the traps are not there.
Exactly. "Traps" are big, "dumb" pieces of absorber. They're not smart enough to know exactly what frequencies to surgically remove. Active OTOH, is not...at least in skilled hands.
Why didn't you just EQ the peak? You're not one of those 2ch anti-EQ "purists", are you?:)

cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
"Traps" are big, "dumb" pieces of absorber. They're not smart enough to know exactly what frequencies to surgically remove.
That's right.

For narrow band reduction one can use Helmholtzresonators or plate/membrane resonators.

Or use a couple (4-6) of Vicoustic Vari Bass modules. They can be tuned to specific frequencies.
http://www.vicoustic.com/hifi-home-cinema/products/acoustic-treatment/basstrap/panel/470


I can also recommend the following absorbers :

The Super Bass Extreme work for broader band absorption from 60 to 100 Hz.
http://www.vicoustic.com/hifi-home-cinema/products/acoustic-treatment/basstrap/panel/473


The Wave Wood panels also work as broad band bass traps (125 to 350 Hz) when mounted over the corners, eg between wall and ceiling.
http://www.vicoustic.com/hifi-home-cinema/products/acoustic-treatment/basstrap/panel/626

Cheers
Babak
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
324 Posts
For the measurements I used REW with a calibrated mic. I don't have any of the files anymore they were not recovered when the hard drive crashed so I am only going by my memory which is poor a lot of times.

The hole at 107hz was about 35db deep and if I recall went down to 103 and upto 111hz but I can't be sure.

I have no issue using a eq to fix a peak I just prefer moving everything I can first to make things as smooth as I can first.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Hi
Babak, have you used this product? And if so how well did it perform?
In my room the Wave Wood panels mounted over the room corners were sufficient.
The speakers are located on 1/4 of the room length and the room width i.e. on nulls of several and the listening position is in the middle of the room, i.e. on nulls of other modes.

So room modes are not really a problem in my room.

A friend of mine distributes Vicoustic products in Austria and I could hear the Vari Bass Pro modules
in several different rooms.
They work very well if enough of them are installed.
4 are sufficient for small rooms, 6 for medium sized rooms and large rooms possibly need 8 of them.

They work best if they are part of a bigger acoustical concept.
That means
  • measure the reverberation times of the room (RT30 or RT60)
  • use the broad band absorbers (Wave Wood over corners and Super Bass Extreme) to reduce the overall reverberation times at low frequencies
  • measure again to identify increase of bass response due to room modes
  • install the Vari Bass modules against specific modes.
It is an iterative process of measuring and improving.

So in my rooms the measurements after installing the Wave Wood panels showed that there is no real need to do anything about the modes.

Of course the Vari Bass modules are not magic but only use physics.
But using them are less effort than calculating, building and tuning Helmholtz resonators by yourself.
Especially the possibility to tune them easily to every frequency makes them very convenient and flexible.


Cheers
Babak
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Hi

For the measurements I used REW with a calibrated mic. I don't have any of the files anymore they were not recovered when the hard drive crashed so I am only going by my memory which is poor a lot of times.

The hole at 107hz was about 35db deep and if I recall went down to 103 and upto 111hz but I can't be sure.
Thanks for the details.
Do you remember which kind of measurement you performed using what kind of signal?
Do you remember the position of the mic in the room, that means in relation to all room boundaries (floor, ceiling, walls)?

Those distances could give a hint, whether the hole was caused by interference of the direct sound with the sound reelected by one of the boundaries.

As written before...
In my opinion one gets a better idea of the room response and room modes by measuring the reverberation times (RT60 or RT30) and a waterfall diagram of the room response curve and it's decay.

Cheers
Babak
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
324 Posts
The mic was at ear height 38" from the ground the location is 8' from the rear wall this had the best sounding bass other locations has large drops in bass and you could hear things missing. From the left wall I am 70"

As I have said the room is split into 2 half's so very limited placement.

When I get time I will measure more but what I knew of of the room was with my old Polk SDA speakers which needed to be placed with in 6 to 12 inches of the front wall to work correctly. The new speakers are placed completely different.

The sweeps were made with REW as I said and it was a normal sweep I can't really recall the rest of the details anymore.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
1,664 Posts
That's right.
For narrow band reduction one can use Helmholtzresonators or plate/membrane resonators.

Or use a couple (4-6) of Vicoustic Vari Bass modules. They can be tuned to specific frequencies.
http://www.vicoustic.com/hifi-home-cinema/products/acoustic-treatment/basstrap/panel/470
Hi Babak,,

Is there any data (3rd party preferably) showing the efficacy of those type products?
What is the cost?
That would be interesting to compare, vs the same cost subwoofers. Subwoofers that would increase output, lower distortion and be actively adjustable...and most likely much smaller and less obtrusive, both physically and spatially.
Of course, with subs, usually at most, only 3-4 would be needed.
I've never quite grasped the concept of going through the trouble of creating energy....only to throw it away. Seems wasteful to me.:)

cheers
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
324 Posts
How would adding more subs to a room deal with a room that has very slow decay that makes bass muddy? If just adding a few subs to the room was the answer then there would be no need to have traps and yet many of us use them to great effect.

Have you even been in a treated room before?
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
1,664 Posts
How would adding more subs to a room deal with a room that has very slow decay that makes bass muddy?
It's not just "add subs". It's add subs, apply eq. Fixing the frequency domain, the "mud" goes away.
Can you show me a "trap" that affects time domain and not frequency? You are "fixing" amplitude with absorption, just in a less efficient manner.

If just adding a few subs to the room was the answer...
It is the answer for smooth amplitude (and resulting perception), greater output/headroom, lower distortion and better power efficiency. All actively adjustable, not passively fixed.

...then there would be no need to have traps and yet many of us use them to great effect.
Well, perhaps those that do have different needs than above. To each their own if the methods gets you where you want to be.

Have you even been in a treated room before?
Many, including the iso-wards studiophile types like to hang out in.:)

cheers
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
324 Posts
Trust me I run a pair of subs and it helped to smooth out the bass quite a bit but I also found that adding traps helps the room quite a bit. I however did not trap to the point to where the room is dead.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
1,664 Posts
Trust me I run a pair of subs and it helped to smooth out the bass quite a bit
Two are insufficient for spatially averaged smoothing. Three would be a minimum.

but I also found that adding traps helps the room quite a bit.
In terms of amplitude? Any EQ? Does that mean you didn't try more than 2 subs? What was the cost of the traps? How big are they?

I however did not trap to the point to where the room is dead.
Well, your perception and preferences are what matter most here. It may not be "dead" to you, but I doubt they had no effect on spatial reproduction and spaciousness. That's why I ask people what they hear...and what they prefer.
I know fully well that 99% do not attend symphony's/live acoustic music and may judge by unknown to me references. Their local movie theater? A high end stereo shop? Who knows?
So I ask.:)

cheers
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
324 Posts
Let me put it this way. The room is a audio nightmare, it sounded like a ecco chamber. You could clap your hand and hear the sound bounce around the room.

The floor is a slab of concrete and there is no carpet on it so it reflects everything more of less. The one wall is concrete with fake wood panel on it for show the kitchen wall is plaster and the other walls are wood studs which sit in front of brick outer wall and on the studs there is loosely tacked on 1/8 inch 1970's fake wood panel.

The couch is leather so that does not soak up much and there is a nice door wall that messes up things as well.

As for the panels I have they were grabbed used off of Craig's list for $150 and I got 5 GIK 244 and 1 GIK 242 for that amount so not bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Hi Babak,,

Is there any data (3rd party preferably) showing the efficacy of those type products?
What is the cost?
That would be interesting to compare, vs the same cost subwoofers. Subwoofers that would increase output, lower distortion and be actively adjustable...and most likely much smaller and less obtrusive, both physically and spatially.
Of course, with subs, usually at most, only 3-4 would be needed.
I've never quite grasped the concept of going through the trouble of creating energy....only to throw it away. Seems wasteful to me.:)
Sorry, I don't have any 3rd party measurements.

The costs are about 200 Euros reach, if I remember right.

I also don't like the idea to create energy to throw it away.

That's why I adopted Toole's idea not to excite room modes in the first place by placing the subs on nulls of room modes.
And also to reduce the effect of the modes by placing the listening position on nulls of other modes.

His following steps are
- Add bass absorbers, then
- narrow band EQ to reduce frequencies of remaining modes


I don't need to absorb modes that are not being excited and that don't build up sound pressure on the listening position.

There are also other reasons why I would always prefer full range speakers on the right positions (in regards to the modes) to subs that are separated from the sprakers by 1 or 2 meters. One single sub is also a bad solution from my point of view.


Cheers
Babak
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
324 Posts
Name a full range speaker that can do want sub can do in a room when placed where it will image and have good overall balance to the sound that can play down to 20hz or less when also placed on the nulls of a given room and cost under 10k

The best place for the speakers to image may not be on a room null and how often is the best most even location for bass in that spot?

And when I am talking full range I mean tested to be flat to 20hz or less without room gain being added in and not can play down to stuff that some company say but by time it is at 20hz it is down 25db
 

·
Plain ole user
Joined
·
11,121 Posts
Maybe, maybe not. Personally, I don't need to get down to 20 Hz for audio only purposes. Not sure if I need it for HT. Some speakers have plenty of extension to satisfy me in their optimum placement for imaging. Most of the speakers in the last review session we did were fine without a sub IMO. You might want more extension, and a sub is needed for that, but not everyone does.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
324 Posts
But there is a difference between a speaker and good sub and how deep it can dig. A good speaker can did deep for music we both know that but with home theater the lfe channel can have effects down to 5hz I don't think I want my mains trying to deal with such things.

My friend tried to run a book shelf speaker set to full range with no sub. Played fine at reference volume until a nice loud bomb went off in the movie and popped a driver.
 

·
Plain ole user
Joined
·
11,121 Posts
No one is denying that there is a difference in what subs can do and what most speakers can do. The point is that many full range speakers CAN be satisfying to many people. The amount of actual signal below 30 hz is minimal actually, and not of great importance to most people.

Don't confuse your own priorities with those of others. They may not have any connection.
 
81 - 100 of 110 Posts
Top