Home Theater Forum and Systems banner

61 - 80 of 110 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,784 Posts
Hmm. I wonder too. My thinking is if you've selected and placed your acoustic bolsters, Dirac should have less to do. Kinda like tuning your subs with minidsp before you run audyssey therefore lightening its processing workload. And yes, I also believe if you've placed your speakers correctly (?), Dirac will have less to do there as well. Am I all wet? What I mean to say is taking care of the physical aspects first, like placement and treatment, should be done before relying on electronics. Like subs. Placement first, treatment second, and EQ last. Whatchathinkaboutdat?
All wet, too funny my friend.

I do not wish to answer for Lumen so for my own knowledge, how does one know ahead of time how much treatment is needed and where should the treatment be placed ? I believe, me, Jack, that to fill a room with absorbers/ diffuses etc, without actually having a good baseline on sound may not get the best results. Its possible that only one acoustic thingie is needed or maybe lots more. Having heard the Salons in the past I can say that they are very smooth and engaging with a stunning bottom end, lovely speakers. Now lets put those speakers in a room with 10,000 pounds of absorbent foam, no amount of dirac or audyssey can overcome the deleterious effects of the overwhelming about of foam in the room. Does that make sense ?? Now place the speakers in an empty room, run the correction software and then add treatments based on results and then the software. I dunno, maybe I am full of beans here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,261 Posts
Discussion Starter #62
Hmm. I wonder too. My thinking is if you've selected and placed your acoustic bolsters, Dirac should have less to do. Kinda like tuning your subs with minidsp before you run audyssey therefore lightening its processing workload. And yes, I also believe if you've placed your speakers correctly (?), Dirac will have less to do there as well. Am I all wet?
My emphasis in bold. I also think heavier processing is unfavorable to SQ, if for no other reason than phase shift and time-domain anomalies caused by the extra filters employed by the room correction software. I've read that phase shift is not the smoking gun as was once thought, but I dunno. :huh:

I do not wish to answer for Lumen so for my own knowledge, how does one know ahead of time how much treatment is needed and where should the treatment be placed ?
Thanks for not putting words in my mouth, Jack, my foot's already in there :R
That's a very, very good question! Easily answered? Not so much (see below). ASC Tube Traps have a well-documented set-up procedure that you can take to varying degrees of complexity and expense. Take the article with a grain of salt, as it's something of a sales gimmick, IMO - it becomes ridiculous for most of us to expect to fill a listening room with traps, even without WAF! For other types of traps/treatments, I think most people just follow general rules of thumb like floor-to-ceiling or in-the-corners. Besides, once you've taken care of 1st and 2nd reflections on the sidewalls and ceiling, there's not much room left. ASC suggests adding treatment at the critical locations first, then adding as budget and taste allow. They say that bass will become tighter, but also thinner, as traps are added. They go on to say back-off when you think SQ starts to suffer. Incidentally, they offer limited, free acoustic consultation as part of your purchase!

I believe, me, Jack, that to fill a room with absorbers/ diffuses etc, without actually having a good baseline on sound may not get the best results. Its possible that only one acoustic thingie is needed or maybe lots more. Having heard the Salons in the past I can say that they are very smooth and engaging with a stunning bottom end, lovely speakers. Now lets put those speakers in a room with 10,000 pounds of absorbent foam, no amount of dirac or audyssey can overcome the deleterious effects of the overwhelming about of foam in the room. Does that make sense ?? Now place the speakers in an empty room, run the correction software and then add treatments based on results and then the software. I dunno, maybe I am full of beans here.
This issue of whether to establish a baseline with or without traps has been the source of much of my anguish lately. Both of you got my brain cell thinking. I first thought emptying the room to measure bass response would be a good place to start until I realized that adding the required furnishings would change the response. Since in my case the room dictates the furnishings' locations, they should be present for the baseline measurement, agreed? In general though, furnishings would be moved around to see what works best (example: played into short dimension instead of long one).

After that basic step - which includes speaker positioning for best SS&I - acoustic treatments can be introduced. So which ones and where? I would start with broadband panels at the 1st reflection points on the sidewalls, but am not sure measurements help at this stage. Maybe impulse response and group delay graphs? I'm not familiar enough with REW and the underlying theory to comment. Larger rooms may benefit from 2nd reflection-point treatment; mine is rather small and extra treatment for these 2nd points rob the room of a lively nature. It helps to remember some bare wall-space is needed for beneficial reflections or the room becomes too dead and lifeless in the high frequencies. Once comfortable with SS&I or SQ, I'd tackle the bass, introducing traps one at a time or in pairs per ASC recommendations. After each introduction, measure again or move and measure again. Stop when bass response looks good or sounds right, whichever floats your boat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,015 Posts
All wet, too funny my friend.



I do not wish to answer for Lumen so for my own knowledge, how does one know ahead of time how much treatment is needed and where should the treatment be placed ? I believe, me, Jack, that to fill a room with absorbers/ diffuses etc, without actually having a good baseline on sound may not get the best results. Its possible that only one acoustic thingie is needed or maybe lots more. Having heard the Salons in the past I can say that they are very smooth and engaging with a stunning bottom end, lovely speakers. Now lets put those speakers in a room with 10,000 pounds of absorbent foam, no amount of dirac or audyssey can overcome the deleterious effects of the overwhelming about of foam in the room. Does that make sense ?? Now place the speakers in an empty room, run the correction software and then add treatments based on results and then the software. I dunno, maybe I am full of beans here.


Well Jack, I do not believe you're full of beans. Unless you really are! Lol
I do agree that to arbitrarily start throwing acoustic treatments in a room Willy nilly, is bad form. I also do believe guys like bpape at gik, can get you off to a real good start and pointed in the right direction. Like anything, some trial and error is probably in order. It would probably be easy to overstuff a small space like Lou's, and have it too dead. A fine line... My prescription would be to call GIK(or your favorite acou-treatment place) and get a consult. Start small, run Dirac, add as necessary, run Dirac. Rinse repeat until it's dialed. Probably a lot easier with professional help. That's where I punch out!!! Lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,015 Posts
Louie, I think your Brain cell is screwed on tight.(glued maybe?) lol
Your thoughts seem to be my own, except I wouldn't bother to empty the room to measure since that's not how it will be used. I think you've got a good grasp on not making the room too dead also. My hunch is that space might be a less is more situation, but I've not heard rose amazing speakers in there. And thanks btw, I've been window shopping at revel. Before you came along I was pretty much shopping at GE, RBH, and KEF. Thanks. :neener:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,838 Posts
Sometimes I forget to check the date of the articles I read. Many of the concepts are as timeless as the laws of physics, but others catch me off guard. Looks like I misused the term and meant to write DE/LE because:
  • The back wall (listening end) is fairly dead (two 20" traps and one panel behind LP; one panel at each 1st reflection point).
  • The front wall (speaker end) is supposed to be live (despite having activated the mains' rear tweeters and despite the TV's large reflective display).
Hmmm, not exactly what I said.

Wlth LE/DE, the front of the room is live, and my contention is that the liveness is all early reflections (seems kinda obvious) and that it is not possible to have that without softening the image clarity. Some people like that earlier liveness and put up with the softer imaging to get it - I'd rather have my mind messed with by a dense soundstage and pinpoint imaging. The DE rear of the room simply adds no later reflections, one would hope.

With DE/LE, the front of the room is dead enough that the sharpest imaging is supported and not disrupted. There can still be controlled reflections that arrive from the direction and in time such that imaging is enhanced and the soundstage is as well. The LE reflections from behind are late enough (15 to 20 ms or more) that add the spaciousness without disrupting the image clarity and sharpness. With good dissipation in the LE, the spaciousness is supported and the earlier reflections that support the SS&I are not affected.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

It's easy to identify my acoustic treatments' contribution by listening to how my voice changes when I first walk into the LP end, and then how it keeps changing as I move through it to the speaker end. The acoustics still clearly need improvement. Removing the 2nd reflection panels did not entirely solve the issue with muffled sound at the LP. I think there's still too much hi-frequency absorption as provided by the dual-action traps; so if I remove them to liven the sound at the high end, then SQ will suffer at the low end. WIN-LOSE. Improvement may be possible but like anything else worthwhile, takes effort and time. I'm tempted to swap the dual-acting traps for more conventional bass-only types, but it's not in the budget right now. So what are we left to work with? Assuming the speakers have already been positioned as best as possible for SS&I considerations, here are the variables:
  • Rear tweets on/off
  • Bass trap #x of y in location z
  • Bass trap diffuser section aimed in 45deg increments
That's a lot of combinations and experimentation! Listener fatigue is bound to set in. Wouldn't you question the validity of a listening comparison separated by hours if not days?
Depends. The cool thing about SS&I listening tests is that the psychoacoustical brain has several ways to cross-reference the info, so longer-term listening tests can be more reliable. Frequency response is hard to do this with, until it gets more extreme, so is distortion, so is just about every audio quality. The auditory system is the only one in use. But with SS&I, it is easier. Three different physical systems are used in SS&I perception, the auditory, the visual (angle, distance, image diameter), and the kinesthetic (one's internal mapping system).


Well, that's exactly what will happen when trying to setup each and every combination listed. Time (and sanity) might be preserved by performing only the most promising trials.
Hopefully.


For instance, changes could be made in L/R pairs if the room is acoustically symmetrical - there would be no need to control left and right tweeters individually. If we recognize the orientation of diffuser sections to be the major contributor of muffled sound...
ahhh-HA! muffled sound, too!


then we can concentrate on which setup to perform first. Is this the order in which you'd approach a room-tune:
  1. SS&I
  2. Acoustic treatment for reflections
  3. Acoustic treatment for bass
  4. Room correction
SS&I with good frequency response is the goal of the other activities. Acoustical treatment that affects bass only should not affect imaging, but treatment for reflections is critical. I have never tried treating for bass only, except to deaden it in general to quicken decay time, which really tightens the bass and clears up the soundstage and sharpens imaging.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,838 Posts
More thoughts (sorry, I can't help it!):

Room correction could be trying to undo my well-intentioned acoustic tuning. Dirac Live yields room calibrations rich in SS&I, so if my speakers are correctly set up, less acoustic treatment should be needed, right?
It can be difficult to separate out speakers correctly set up and acoustical treatment. Early reflections - timing, direction, amount - are a big part of what makes a speaker sound set up right.

I believe it's time to get back to basics, take some measurements without the traps, then introduce them individually and measure again. Then guess what? Move them around and measure some more! The vibrating trap method can help a lot here.

Or... My basic complaint of muffled sound could just be high-frequency hearing loss!
Probably not.


Introduce strategically.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,838 Posts
More thoughts (sorry, I can't help it!):

Room correction could be trying to undo my well-intentioned acoustic tuning. Dirac Live yields room calibrations rich in SS&I, so if my speakers are correctly set up, less acoustic treatment should be needed, right?
It can be difficult to separate out speakers correctly set up and acoustical treatment.Early reflections - timing, direction, amount - are a big part of what makes a speaker sound set up right.

I believe it's time to get back to basics, take some measurements without the traps, then introduce them individually and measure again. Then guess what? Move them around and measure some more! The vibrating trap method can help a lot here.

Or... My basic complaint of muffled sound could just be high-frequency hearing loss!
Probably not.Introduce strategically.

Louie, what's with all the weird codes?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,784 Posts
Hmmm, not exactly what I said.

Wlth LE/DE, the front of the room is live, and my contention is that the liveliness is all early reflections (seems kinda obvious) and that it is not possible to have that without softening the image clarity. Some people like that earlier liveliness and put up with the softer imaging to get it - I'd rather have my mind messed with by a dense soundstage and pinpoint imaging. The DE rear of the room simply adds no later reflections, one would hope.

With DE/LE, the front of the room is dead enough that the sharpest imaging is supported and not disrupted. There can still be controlled reflections that arrive from the direction and in time such that imaging is enhanced and the soundstage is as well. The LE reflections from behind are late enough (15 to 20 ms or more) that add the spaciousness without disrupting the image clarity and sharpness. With good dissipation in the LE, the spaciousness is supported and the earlier reflections that support the SS&I are not affected.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
I have been thinking on this for a bit and wonder if the description in the LE/DE note above could be a part of the nature of your Martin Logans. If I have LE/DE in my room, the early reflections would mainly come from the side walls and ceiling if not properly treated as my speakers do not fire rearward with the exception of a port on the back to release low frequency information in way of sound pressure. By placing some nice Roxul at the first reflection points on my side walls, the image specificity is brilliant. This plan also seems to work very well for my Dahlquist which have an open baffle situation but nothing truly fires back to the front wall.
Should there be different breakdowns for different types of speakers ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,784 Posts
I saw them in the duplicate post, too, but they're gone now. Like my hair. :R
We are old Lumen, we dont need no stinkin hair !!:innocent:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,261 Posts
Discussion Starter #74
Too funny, Jack! This just in: I passed on another of my wife's offers to move to the slightly larger room. I'm starting to think they're moving into the realm of suggestions rather than offers! But the room swap carries with it the stipulation that the new one be painted a light color (for the home's pending sale). Egad, man.

If I stay planted in the green room, at least it's a lot darker there; so I'm hoping possession is all-tenths of the law.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,784 Posts
And... playing dumb can be the better part of being smart!

"Playing" you say ??? Lumen knows what he is doing, no one wants to move 16 tons of speakers and stuff. I can see a day when he velcro's his bottom to his leather chair. :wink2:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,261 Posts
Discussion Starter #78
15 pounds of dust and dog fur later, the room transformation has begun. I must have been the one moving at light speed, because I missed pictures of the tear-down! Here's a peek at the progress so far. The tube traps may come out or get swapped with different diameters depending on measurements yet to come.







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
61 - 80 of 110 Posts
Top