Doctor's Orders-Part Two-The New Listening Room Of Steve Williams

[sbo6]

How do you know what she has even done

I have 8 Helmholtz resonators in my ceiling that address the issues you discuss. I respect your scientific background but honestly without seeing or hearing my room and not knowing what was done to my room I feel you really are discussing something which you really don't know anything about

I understand where you are coming from but as they say, you never talk about an Indian until you've walked a mile in his mocassins

Knowing my room and what treatments were done I feel quite confident about the absence of room modes. as for set up of the subs, it was an ongoing daily exercise for almost 3 months bringing them to where I felt it sounded "just ok"

I can say with confidence that the room sounds better now without the subs than when they were in the room

I'm not trying to be argumentative as I understand your position and don't disagree with it

Finally as to the notion of using REW or other forms of DRC that will never happen in my room even though I understand the efficacy

Sorry if I came across as a hard ass

BTW, a Helmholtz resonator will help reduce a specific peak frequency but does nothing for the other half of problems - troughs or lack of bass across a frequency range. Can I ask how that was addressed?

 

[JackD201]

Hi SB06 may I make a suggestion? When setting up arrays we did not have time for thousands of sweeps. While this is useful and can and has given results, add specific samples to your procedure. Isolated samples on loop such as floor tom strikes and piano strikes are an easy way to find temporal anomalies. Think of it this way. As a sound event hits the transducers after the XO, initial transients typically appear in the higher frequencies then over the span of the envelope hand of sustain and decay to the drivers with lower and lower frequency duties. The successful integration of an additional LF driver would require that that driver, in this case subwoofers follow the others in proportionate amplitude and timing (phase). The sample should go seamlessly from strike to the final roll off of the decay trail lest a "curling" be heard. If curling is heard many a time it is a matter of physical placement of the sub or the phase setting, both of which deal with time. Should physical restraints disallow or finnd phase correction insufficient then secondary eq can be employed. Methods like this allow myself and many others to integrate subs much more easily and more quickly. Sometimes with just a Phonic in hand, a matter of an hour or two to achieve a targeted slope. It is simple, easy and costs next to nothing. Just something I'd like to share because I do think subs are given a bad rap.

 

[JackD201]

BTW, a Helmholtz resonator will help reduce a specific peak frequency but does nothing for the other half of problems - troughs or lack of bass across a frequency range. Can I ask how that was addressed?

Thee easy answer?

Move your chair.

The OCD?

A second, third or fourth sub.

 

[sbo6]

Hi SB06 may I make a suggestion? When setting up arrays we did not have time for thousands of sweeps. While this is useful and can and has given results, add specific samples to your procedure. Isolated samples on loop such as floor tom strikes and piano strikes are an easy way to find temporal anomalies. Think of it this way. As a sound event hits the transducers after the XO, initial transients typically appear in the higher frequencies then over the span of the envelope hand of sustain and decay to the drivers with lower and lower frequency duties. The successful integration of an additional LF driver would require that that driver, in this case subwoofers follow the others in proportionate amplitude and timing (phase). The sample should go seamlessly from strike to the final roll off of the decay trail lest a "curling" be heard. If curling is heard many a time it is a matter of physical placement of the sub or the phase setting, both of which deal with time. Should physical restraints disallow or finnd phase correction insufficient then secondary eq can be employed. Methods like this allow myself and many others to integrate subs much more easily and more quickly. Sometimes with just a Phonic in hand, a matter of an hour or two to achieve a targeted slope. It is simple, easy and costs next to nothing. Just something I'd like to share because I do think subs are given a bad rap.

Thank you for the advice however we'll have to agree to disagree. I've employed many methods and none provide the guidance and accuracy of frequency measuring aided by final tuning by ear. Optimizing placement and integration solely by ear using music, drum strikes or piano strikes yields a very minimal sample of frequencies and simply won't provide enough information (the complete spectrum of frequencies) to know how to tune your sub(s) or place your speakers, for that matter. I've done this method - tuning by ear is a ballpark method.

 

[sbo6]

Thee easy answer?

Move your chair.

The OCD?

A second, third or fourth sub.

Bingo, add a sub or subs.

 

[microstrip]

Not at all Steve, and I also don't want to come across as busting chops. I would honestly love to be able to see the frequency response of your room which I assume your consultant provided because if it is true as you say it is (room is flat), it would be great information for many audiophiles looking for better sound without sub or EQ intervention.

As you , I would love to see such data. But I fear that again we will soon discover that subs in this forum are sometimes ruled by dogmas and strong opinions. I can guess that people advising against the use of subs in stereo will not supply us any measurements, I have asked before several times and never got them. Unfortunately for inquiring people as me, most times acoustics for high-end stereo shares the same secrecy and proprietary characteristics of many equipment design.

I use REW measurements as a tool for bass diagnostics, not for final tuning or optimization. Sharing data would allow us to understand specific aspects in some situations, although we must understand that most time they are not easily correlated with subjective sound quality and can be misinterpreted by people believing that an ultra flat response is a the final goal. All IMHO, YMMV.

 

[JackD201]

Thank you for the advice however we'll have to agree to disagree. I've employed many methods and none provide the guidance and accuracy of frequency measuring aided by final tuning by ear. Optimizing placement and integration solely by ear using music, drum strikes or piano strikes yields a very minimal sample of frequencies and simply won't provide enough information (the complete spectrum of frequencies) to know how to tune your sub(s) or place your speakers, for that matter. I've done this method - tuning by ear is a ballpark method.

I don't think you got my point. My point is that a known sample compared to a sweep even one with a short window will give, at least in my experience, better correlatiion with regards to impulse response be it measured or purely by ear. I do measure. I'm a trained acoustician. Well, it was only a suggestion. If you want to keep on using sweeps and are happy doing so, it's obviously your call and yours alone.

 

[Steve Williams]

Let me once again state.....I agree completely with the addition of subs, so much so that the work involved for me took months of daily playing and measuring as well as having friends who are very gifted in speaker set up also help .....to no avail. I thought of adding 2 more subs but the reality was the room is just too small and lacks the geographical foot space so that was out.

You can speculate all you want but I have lived with this room for over 6 years now since it was constructed and for the first 3-4 years I had the F113's. I was determined to integrate them in the room and every time we found the spot where the subs produced the best measurements in the room we found that the sub master volume was essentially "off". I had prominent speaker manufacturers in my room as well as recording engineers all of whom told me that the subs in my room were not necessary

I had my friend DDK visit and he too from the very first comment told me to get rid of the subs and when Ked visited he had similar comments. It took me a few more years to think I could prove them wrong. IMO the Fathom subs were just too much in the room. I will grant you that had I used perhaps smaller subs then perhaps a solution would be found however when I finally decided to remove the subs, I initially had them in the room turned off and the sound was better BUT it wasn't until I removed them completely from the room that the sound was superb.
So in theory I agree with sbo6 and micro but in my room the answer was clearly evident, the subs only impact was a negative one. Since I removed them I have never looked back. I have invited micro many times to come visit and stay with me for a while. Hopefully in the future that might happen. Sbo6, the invitation is also there for you

When Mike was here a few days ago he commented specifically as to how much better the bass was now as compared to when he heard it 3 years ago

I am truly a happy camper and remain one step away from my end game.

 

[sbo6]

As you , I would love to see such data. But I fear that again we will soon discover that subs in this forum are sometimes ruled by dogmas and strong opinions. I can guess that people advising against the use of subs in stereo will not supply us any measurements, I have asked before several times and never got them. Unfortunately for inquiring people as me, most times acoustics for high-end stereo shares the same secrecy and proprietary characteristics of many equipment design.

I use REW measurements as a tool for bass diagnostics, not for final tuning or optimization. Sharing data would allow us to understand specific aspects in some situations, although we must understand that most time they are not easily correlated with subjective sound quality and can be misinterpreted by people believing that an ultra flat response is a the final goal. All IMHO, YMMV.

I couldn't agree more with almost everything you said, thank you. Great to read from someone else with hands - on experience rather than believing what they read or were told. I also know data won't be shared. Also, I don't believe there is an acoustic silver bullet, some special acoustic formula applied to treatment or method that smoothes out low frequencies without EQ and / or subs, not in "normal" sized rooms. You can get better than without but never close to optimal. And yes, agreed, flat = not sonically pleasing or the ultimate goal. I find the Harmon curve the closest to natural and what I strive for. Thanks again.

 

[marty]

Adding subs to ANY system is a challenge, unless the subs were designed to be integral with the main speakers by the designer. And even then it may still be a challenge. The idea that subs are beneficial because they smooth or eliminate room nodes is naive in the extreme. That is but one consideration. In Steve's case, adding a sealed JL sub to a ported woofer system such as the Wilson Alexandria and placing it a few feet back from the Wilsons in a relatively modest-sized room is almost like trying to win a fight with one hand tied behind your back. I admit I first thought it could be done and spent many hours trying but to no avail. Steve's system sounds better without the subs in his room. The trade off is that the Wilson's may not have "bowels of the earth" LF performance one might desire, but at some point, you just have to say you are willing to accept the benefits (seamlessness, i.e., better LF integration to the rest of the range, lower phase errors without an added driver located 3 feet behind the mains, etc), get over the drawbacks , and enjoy the music. And that's pretty easy to do in Steve's system without the subs.

 

[sbo6]

Let me once again state.....I agree completely with the addition of subs, so much so that the work involved for me took months of daily playing and measuring as well as having friends who are very gifted in speaker set up also help .....to no avail. I thought of adding 2 more subs but the reality was the room is just too small and lacks the geographical foot space so that was out.

You can speculate all you want but I have lived with this room for over 6 years now since it was constructed and for the first 3-4 years I had the F113's. I was determined to integrate them in the room and every time we found the spot where the subs produced the best measurements in the room we found that the sub master volume was essentially "off". I had prominent speaker manufacturers in my room as well as recording engineers all of whom told me that the subs in my room were not necessary

I had my friend DDK visit and he too from the very first comment told me to get rid of the subs and when Ked visited he had similar comments. It took me a few more years to think I could prove them wrong. IMO the Fathom subs were just too much in the room. I will grant you that had I used perhaps smaller subs then perhaps a solution would be found however when I finally decided to remove the subs, I initially had them in the room turned off and the sound was better BUT it wasn't until I removed them completely from the room that the sound was superb.
So in theory I agree with sbo6 and micro but in my room the answer was clearly evident, the subs only impact was a negative one. Since I removed them I have never looked back. I have invited micro many times to come visit and stay with me for a while. Hopefully in the future that might happen. Sbo6, the invitation is also there for you

When Mike was here a few days ago he commented specifically as to how much better the bass was now as compared to when he heard it 3 years ago

I am truly a happy camper and remain one step away from my end game.

Steve, (BTW I am a Steve also ), I am truly happy for you. I'm happy for any and all of us who are fortunate enough to enjoy great music on excellent systems, we are truly lucky. And I am not disputing what you say. All I'm saying is - if you are able to flatten out bass issues via treatment in your reasonably sized room w/o EQ and / or subs, I'd love to see the before and after graphs. Becuase if that's the case I may just contact the consultant you hired or at least try to employ the techniques used. Also, thank you for the invite, if you ever come to Austin, you are most welcome to come hear my system.

 

[Steve Williams]

My room response is flat with a slight drop at the top end I also agree that “flat is not where it’s at” hence the slight roll off at the top end

 

[Steve Williams]

Steve, (BTW I am a Steve also ), I am truly happy for you. I'm happy for any and all of us who are fortunate enough to enjoy great music on excellent systems, we are truly lucky. And I am not disputing what you say. All I'm saying is - if you are able to flatten out bass issues via treatment in your reasonably sized room w/o EQ and / or subs, I'd love to see the before and after graphs. Becuase if that's the case I may just contact the consultant you hired or at least try to employ the techniques used. Also, thank you for the invite, if you ever come to Austin, you are most welcome to come hear my system.

I’m in Austin every year. My oldest daughter lived there with her husband and kids

This very long blog of mine at the very beginning discusses step by step all of the invisible changes made to my room by the acoustician in the floor, walls and ceiling. She also has several of her OEM products in the drapes and in the space above the crown mounding in the ceiling. These were all placed by her to eliminate room modes

 

[sbo6]

The idea that subs are beneficial because they smooth or eliminate room nodes is naive in the extreme.

I'd be happy to provide many before and after frequency plots that beg to differ. Unfortunately, your statement erodes any confidence in your ability or experience to properly integrating subs.

 

[sbo6]

I’m in Austin every year. My oldest daughter lived there with her husband and kids

This very long blog of mine at the very beginning discusses step by step all of the invisible changes made to my room by the acoustician in the floor, walls and ceiling. She also has several of her OEM products in the drapes and in the space above the crown mounding in the ceiling. These were all placed by her to eliminate room modes

Awesome, will also check out the details. Thanks Steve.

Steve

 

[Steve Williams]

I'd be happy to provide many before and after frequency plots that beg to differ. Unfortunately, your statement erodes any confidence in your ability or experience to properly integrating subs.

Hi Steve

I can tell you that Marty is one of the most skilled set up guys I’ve ever met. Plus he spent years using DRC in his room so he knows his way around

 

[sbo6]

Time for a conversation in a different thread, Steve, Marty et al. I yield back my time.

 

[microstrip]

Adding subs to ANY system is a challenge, unless the subs were designed to be integral with the main speakers by the designer. And even then it may still be a challenge. The idea that subs are beneficial because they smooth or eliminate room nodes is naive in the extreme. That is but one consideration. In Steve's case, adding a sealed JL sub to a ported woofer system such as the Wilson Alexandria and placing it a few feet back from the Wilsons in a relatively modest-sized room is almost like trying to win a fight with one hand tied behind your back. I admit I first thought it could be done and spent many hours trying but to no avail. Steve's system sounds better without the subs in his room. The trade off is that the Wilson's may not have "bowels of the earth" LF performance one might desire, but at some point, you just have to say you are willing to accept the benefits (seamlessness, i.e., better LF integration to the rest of the range, lower phase errors without an added driver located 3 feet behind the mains, etc), get over the drawbacks , and enjoy the music. And that's pretty easy to do in Steve's system without the subs.

Good summary, Marty. But we have to add that Steve is pairing the Alexandria (large units, front port) with the Lamm ML3 at 8 ohms without feedback. This makes the success of the addition of the sub even less probable.

The XLF is more flexible than the X2 in this aspect - the possibility of changing port orientation strongly modifies the interaction of bass with the room. It is also a curse, one more situation to evaluate ...

 

[Steve Williams]

Good summary, Marty. But we have to add that Steve is pairing the Alexandria (large units, front port) with the Lamm ML3 at 8 ohms without feedback. This makes the success of the addition of the sub even less probable.

The XLF is more flexible than the X2 in this aspect - the possibility of changing port orientation strongly modifies the interaction of bass with the room. It is also a curse, one more situation to evaluate ...

So your suggestion is to change speakers and or electronics. It’s never going to happen. I can tell you that over those 3 years Marty was here in 3 separate occasions and each time we tried over and over to dial in the subs. When we thought it sounded good we discovered the sub master volume control was virtually off. Marty is never a quitter but I believe he too felt it was an exercise in futility

 

[marty]

I'd be happy to provide many before and after frequency plots that beg to differ. Unfortunately, your statement erodes any confidence in your ability or experience to properly integrating subs.

Your reliance on frequency plots as the main arbiter for subwoofer set-up erodes any confidence that you are very knowledgeable in this area. I would have been more impressed by your abilities if you told me you had laser interferometry impulse data since phase error minimization is critical to subwoofer integration, as well as distortion data. However, I think that we would probably agree that in the end, the only thing that matters is the resultant sound. If you're happy with that, no matter how you got there or what tools you used, that's really all that counts.