Detailed Speaker Setup and Optimization

[Ron Resnick]

I think that dogmatic preferences for or against organic bookshelves and couches and the like in a multipurpose living space and biases against commercially available acoustic absorption panels and diffusion panels in a listening room, and vice versa, is silly.

Mechanical problems have mechanical solutions. If one perceives a frequency anomaly which one wishes to address commercial products can be perfectly acceptable, and organic furnishings and artwork and the like can be perfectly acceptable. Whether one chooses to tailor the sound of one's listening space to one's subjective preferences with commercially available components or organically available living furniture is merely personal sonic and aesthetic preference.

I see here a lot of dogma against absorption panels on the criticism that they operate on all frequencies as opposed to just problem frequencies. Have these partisans measured the frequency response of their random living room furnishings to assure themselves that those random furnishings target only problem frequencies?

The response is likely "well, my random living room furnishings result in an overall sound I'm happy with, so I don't have any problem frequencies to target." But that's disingenuous because it ignores the fact that if you started with an empty room you probably wouldn't be happy with its overly reflective sound. So whether you fill the room with organic furnishings or commercial products is simply personal aesthetic preference.

 

[stehno]

Maybe you’ve never heard a well treated room.

Can you confirm anybody has? What exactly is a well-treated room?

That doesn’t mean your blanket statement is true. My experience is some treatments can allow the life of the music to bloom. Of course too much is too much.

Agreed. More importantly, who's to say?

My personal experience is that the addition of some Quadratic wide band diffusers has made a positive impact. I’ve been listening to classical piano for the last three weeks and the system is full of life from the most quiet nuance to jolting chords

Might this be in spite of or because of the treatments?

I think some of this can come down to personal preferences as well. Some people may like to hear more room than me.

And this is the key. First, are we able to discern the sonic differences between the unnatural sounds of the room and the natural sounds of the recording hall embedded in the recording. I can name at least two "seasoned" members here who cannot make any distinction whatsoever.

Most importantly. Does anybody genuinely want to hear the room at all? And if we do hear the room, is it the room's fault or the system's?

 

[Elliot G.]

And this is the key. First, are we able to discern the sonic differences between the unnatural sounds of the room and the natural sounds of the recording hall embedded in the recording. I can name at least two "seasoned" members here who cannot make any distinction whatsoever.

seasoned with what? were they marinated in Scotch? Smoked with Septiva or just covered with salt and pepper?

 

[Amir]

Hello Amir,

Would you please help us understand your objective statement of fact by detailing for us the last five or 10 music studio rooms or concert halls or listening rooms you have experienced that use acoustic absorber panels, and explain to us in each case the evidence for your generalization?

Hello Ron,
please read my post again, what I say is the key for right audio judgment is our ears not objective measurements. Audio measurement tools for flat frequency response in room and using room treatment for absorbing reflections are ok if finally we get good sound but the problem is room treatments as you think are not good for sound.
My experience is similar to experts (like David @ddk, Romy the Cat , Kevin Living Voice) they do not use heavily room treatments like others (Robert Harley, Mike, You …).

objective solutions like room treatments, dsp room correction are similar objective solutions for designing amplifiers. As you know high feedback complex solidstate amplifiers have perfect measurements but the sound is awful.

I have paid for many acoustic panels but finally I removed all of them.

 

[Amir]

why would anyone do that? use a tool where they did not care what that tool did. i'm not defending absorber panels, or promoting them. i use zero absorber panels.

it seems you are just throwing rocks.



so how many acoustic panels are ok? where you liked the sound?

anything besides a flat wall? and square corner? and flat ceiling? for every room and every type of speaker? 100% all the time? can bookshelves or media storage or furniture or art be used as room treatments? but anything else is 'awful'? big windows, or large panel TV's are ok? without any treatment?

so you bow at an alter of strict dogma? are these your original thoughts, or what you interpret from someone else's?

Mike,
1- You never had any experience about DPOLS so you can not understand what happen to sound when speakers are in perfect position.

2- after speaker placement you can start lowering RT by some changes in room.

My ears are sensitive to dynamic and energy of music so I never liked acoustic panels.

as experts told before the key for good sound in room is speaker placement not using huge amount of room treatments.

 

[Lagonda]

Mike,
1- You never had any experience about DPOLS so you can not understand what happen to sound when speakers are in perfect position.

2- after speaker placement you can start lowering RT by some changes in room.

My ears are sensitive to dynamic and energy of music so I never liked acoustic panels.

as experts told before the key for good sound in room is speaker placement not using huge amount of room treatments.

It is absolutely silly to think that Mike has not used many, many days to find the absolute right position in his room for his speakers and thereafter adjusted acoustic treatment to his liking. His speakers are also adjustable in the bass range. You have this belief that only a few guys can get it right, they are your gurus, i get it ! Romy the Cat stole the writing of a Russian guy and changed its wording and meaning where it fitted him, this babel of DPOLS gives no instructions or method, but has become your setup mantra. In real life it is not that rare to find the absolute right placement for your speakers, it just takes a lot of work and patience, some of us have that !

 

[Al M.]

You have this belief that only a few guys can get it right, they are your gurus, i get it !

Yeah, some people have their gurus and their set-in-stone dogmas. Meanwhile those of us who don't are happily doing our own thing.

 

[Argonaut]

It is absolutely silly to think that Mike has not used many, many day to find the absolute right position in his room for his speakers and thereafter adjusted acoustic treatment to his liking. His speakers are also adjustable in the bass range. You have this belief that only a few guys can get it right, they are your gurus, i get it ! Romy the Cat stole the writing of a Russian guy and changed its wording and meaning where it fitted him, this babel of DPOLS gives no instructions or method, but has become your setup mantra. In real life it is not that rare to find the absolute right placement for your speakers, it just takes a lot of work and patience, some of us have that !

And yet you give other puppets whose strings lead all the way back to Utah a pass Milan !

 

[Lagonda]

And yet you give other puppets whose strings lead all the way back to Utah a pass Milan !

My friends always get a pass, they are my friends !

 

[wil]

Most importantly. Does anybody genuinely want to hear the room at all?

For something different, I think a little bit of room influence can sound really nice — more like the musicians playing in the room and a little less of hearing into the recording. I get this 30’ back in my room.

But excite the room too much and it becomes a distraction. Maybe some mistake an overly live room for a projection of a live music reference? My reference is hearing into the recording. If It’s a good recording, it will sound alive and more true to the original event ( live or studio).

 

[Al M.]

But excite the room too much and it becomes a distraction. Maybe some mistake an overly live room for a projection of a live music reference?

Yes, I think some do.

 

[Argonaut]

My friends always get a pass, they are my friends !

Merely keeping you around as maybe useful some day , Don’t sit in the front of the Cadillac if they get in the back ;0}

 

[Lagonda]

Merely keeping you around as maybe useful some day , Don’t sit in the front of the Cadillac if they get in the back ;0}

I have gotten more help than i have given

 

[stehno]

...

objective solutions like room treatments, dsp room correction are similar objective solutions. ...

Not sure why you inserted the word objective (twice even) but you are right on the money here. However, in this case they are not similar but perhaps identical.

Simply because they all have to do with addressing the downstream effects and all have zero to do with addressing upstream causes.

Now I need to be careful saying this because the acoustic coupling/interface between speaker and room is crucial. However, the speaker/room interface only has much if not everything to do with quality of bass and overall presentation's level of musicality including balance, etc and has zero to do with hearing the room or addressing room acoustic anomalies - anomalies that we'll always have to one degree or another.

In fact, when I'm working on speaker positioning within the room - always a daunting task for me, I like to think I've simplied things a bit as I now focus solely on the bass regions and I find when the bass becomes that much more musical so does the entire presentation.

I have paid for many acoustic panels but finally I removed all of them.

Good for you. Another set of acoustic panels bites the dust.

 

[Argonaut]

I have gotten more help than i have given

Planks ? … Bog Oak or modern Kiln Dried , shudder.

 

[PeterA]

Some individuals , often recruited from the weak of mind, become indoctrinated into a *Cult* mentality and merely become a conduit for the extreme views of said *Cult*

I do not think that is a fair characterization of Elliot’s admiration for his mentor Harry Pearson. It sounds to me more of a teacher student relationship and friendship.

 

[adyc]

I do not think that is a fair characterization of Elliot’s admiration for his mentor Harry Pearson. It sounds to me more of a teacher student relationship and friendship.

I think Argonaut refers to someone else and not HP.

 

[Lagonda]

I think Argonaut refers to someone else and not HP.

And so does Peter ! Two can play the passive aggressive game

 

[pjwd]

I think that dogmatic preferences for or against organic bookshelves and couches and the like in a multipurpose living space and biases against commercially available acoustic absorption panels and diffusion panels in a listening room, and vice versa, is silly.

Mechanical problems have mechanical solutions. If one perceives a frequency anomaly which one wishes to address commercial products can be perfectly acceptable, and organic furnishings and artwork and the like can be perfectly acceptable. Whether one chooses to tailor the sound of one's listening space to one's subjective preferences with commercially available components or organically available living furniture is merely personal sonic and aesthetic preference.

I see here a lot of dogma against absorption panels on the criticism that they operate on all frequencies as opposed to just problem frequencies. Have these partisans measured the frequency response of their random living room furnishings to assure themselves that those random furnishings target only problem frequencies?

The response is likely "well, my random living room furnishings result in an overall sound I'm happy with, so I don't have any problem frequencies to target." But that's disingenuous because it ignores the fact that if you started with an empty room you probably wouldn't be happy with its overly reflective sound. So whether you fill the room with organic furnishings or commercial products is simply personal aesthetic preference.

Ron
One of the problems us that the " treatments" are not always used wisely and only get halfway there plus they can be just plain ugly
I have built quadratic diffusers, hemispherical abfusers and all sorts of devices over the years. Initially I liked them .. then didn't because they partly fixed something but also messed up something.. the reflected sound had a messed up phase response and was not correlated with direct sound. Absorbers have a similar effect.
I passed my efforts on to friends .. they liked them .. then didn't and passed them on .. I expect they are in a dump now.( They were also ugly prototypes
I have been fortunate to work on projects with an acoustic engineer who was on top of all the latest research and now am slightly wiser.

If you have furniture in the right spots and specular reflection( non diffusive ) off flat walls I could understand it sounding better than "improper treatments" + they mess up the decor which is important to the listening experience ... hence this eternal debate
But... if you design a living room or a dedicated room from scratch and build the acoustic solutions into the fabric of the structure it can look smart and sound fantastic. It will always be the optimum result. But you have to find the right people to do that .. not an easy task
The other variable is that some people prefer a reverberent space.... Studies of audiences show preference range from 1.6 to 2 sec in halls.

I agree with your fundamental point that it is
crazy to criticize the science of acoustics .. it's real !
Phil

 

[sbnx]

I don’t think anyone is disputing the science of room acoustics. Sound can be reflected, transmitted, absorbed or diffracted (diffused). Absorbers will absorb the sound wave above its cutoff frequency. I think was some are sying is that they work too well. There is no dispute (at least I don’t think there is) that absorbers reduce the amount of energy in a room. That’s what they do.

If RT60 is a measure of the sound energy in a room then some people will like it lower or higher than others. As I mentioned, a typical living room with carpet on the floor and curtains, sofa, chairs, etc. has an RT60 of about 0.5. To me that is manageable. I oersonally like a little lower at 0.4. It is clear that Amir likes it higher and wants a livlier sound.

All Amir and I and a few others are trying to communicate is that there are “special” spots in the room where the sound coming from the speaker is having minimal interaction with the room as perceived from the listening position.

Why would it be difficult to believe that there exist special spots. These types of things exist all over physics. E.g. the Lagrange point where the Webb telescope is parked. This is how I think about it. Imagine the energy or pressure in the room (produced by a speaker) as a scalar field. That energy surface is going to have maxima and minima. That surface is going to change as the sound source moves. There is going to be positions that will minimize the variation. There will be positions where the listening seat is sitting in a low spot or high spot and everywhere in between. When we find that special spot and speaker attitude the “rooms effect” on the sound gets much quieter.