Ron’s New System

[Johan K]

maybe this has already been brought up. but know that loose absorptive panels will sound differently that one's attached solidly to the walls. the space behind will add slight deadening and cause an additional tonal shift.

if you just used double backed velcro tape (or thumbtacs/push pins) to attach the corners to hold it relatively tight it would then be a little more consistent with what it's doing so expectations would match what you end up doing.

Great observation Mike… I did mention this to Ron also a few month back, as if not attach to the wall, the panels will act like (small) helmholtz resonators… But at this point I actually think Ron is very avare of this and is testing various distances.. (my guess anyway).

/ Jk

 

[Ron Resnick]

but know that loose absorptive panels will sound differently that one's attached solidly to the walls. the space behind will add slight deadening and cause an additional tonal shift.

Yes, I agree. But I highly doubt I could hear the difference between the panels flat against the wall versus the panels angled a couple of inches out at the bottom.

The small air gap at the bottom in theory actually improves the panels' absorption.

if you just used double backed velcro tape (or thumbtacs/push pins) to attach the corners to hold it relatively tight it would then be a little more consistent with what it's doing so expectations would match what you end up doing.

Thank you for this good suggestion!

 

[Johan K]

I must say… Your room looks very cool, Ron! Also not the easiest room to get the acoustics right. One can really understand that when one sees the whole room in the pics above. Keep on tuning? !

/ Jk

 

[pjwd]

I must say… Your room looks very cool, Ron! Also not the easiest room to get the acoustics right. One can really understand that when one sees the whole room in the pics above. Keep on tuning? !

/ Jk

The gaps between panel at wall in the reflection zone are very small and I would doubt if they would make much difference in this case
Manufacturers usually test at a gap 50mm or so and increase from there ...you would expect them to have a higher absorbance and go a little lower in fr as gap increases

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Yes, I agree. But I highly doubt I could hear the difference between the panels flat against the wall versus the panels angled a couple of inches out at the bottom.

The small air gap at the bottom in theory actually improves the panels' absorption.

the looseness of the panels is significant, as is the air gap. the whole panel will resonate and multiply the effect. like comparing fabric flat on a wall to a curtain. different only by degrees.

i tried loose fabric 'hanging' in my room and it was dramatically different (and colored the sound) than my fabric flat on the wall (which only knocked down reflections, but no change in tonal balance).

btw; you can buy a lot of fabric and push pins for $100 and try that. my guess is it would take you further.

Thank you for this good suggestion!

you are welcome.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I must say… Your room looks very cool, Ron! Also not the easiest room to get the acoustics right. One can really understand that when one sees the whole room in the pics above. Keep on tuning? !

/ Jk

Thank you, Johan!

 

[Ron Resnick]

i tried loose fabric 'hanging' in my room and it was dramatically different (and colored the sound) than my fabric flat on the wall (which only knocked down reflections, but no change in tonal balance).

If I remember correctly you described the fabric as mitigating "high frequency hash."

 

[Mendel]

So maximum zoomed out -- which makes the room look about three times larger than it really is -- you can see everything:

View attachment 121379

significantly less absorption overall

I have experimented with absorption and diffusion on the front wall behind my Acoustats. Found absorption panels deadened the sound, especially in the treble. Much prefer diffusion using Vacoustic DC3 multifusors. Sound is smoother and imaging is better than a bare front wall. My room is much smaller though and I listen in a more near field setting.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I have experimented with absorption and diffusion on the front wall behind my Acoustats. Found absorption panels deadened the sound, especially in the treble. Much prefer diffusion using Vacoustic DC3 multifusors. Sound is smoother and imaging is better than a bare front wall. My room is much smaller though and I listen in a more near field setting.

Thank you for this report. It's not surprising absorption panels deaden the sound, especially in the treble -- this is the purpose for which they exist.

There is a concern that diffusion on the front wall behind dipole planar loudspeakers -- especially 2D diffusion -- might confuse the sound of the back wave by diffusing both inline with and perpendicular to sound propagated by a line source loudspeaker.

Absorbing or diffusing some of the back wave typically will make the sound "smoother."

In what way did your 2D diffusion on the front wall make the imaging "better"?

Thank you.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

If I remember correctly you described the fabric as mitigating "high frequency hash."

in the context of cleaning up the soundstage yes, that reflective hash is like noise and smear cluttering up images and vividness of the music. it's non musical. the idea is cleaning up the hash, but not lowering the energy or warming up tonality. essentially staying neutral, but improving imaging.

sometimes you want a warmer feeling by cutting high frequencies, essentially changing the balance. however; when you do that you throw away lively ness and high frequency extension. the cloth tight against the wall is a lighter touch, hopefully only positives. you do have to install it in a section and listen for a time.....mostly for me it was two weeks. then move on if i still like it.

the great part is doing it is cheap, cheap. just takes a decision to do it. then lots of listening to check it. if it works in a small case, then keep going. for me it was 9 months of working at it.

it is more work that leaning a panel against the wall. so there is that. but i work cheap. on the step ladder doing my ceiling was a bit extreme. but now 8 years later the best single thing (using the cloth strategically) i've ever done for my sound. and by a very far sight the cheapest.

but it's a not sexy thing, and no brand to buy. just generic (choose a pleasing color) cloth and stick pins.

 

[Mendel]

Thank you for this report. It's not surprising absorption panels deaden the sound, especially in the treble -- this is the purpose for which they exist.

There is a concern that diffusion on the front wall behind dipole planar loudspeakers -- especially 2D diffusion -- might confuse the sound of the back wave by diffusing both inline with and perpendicular to sound propagated by a line source loudspeaker.

Absorbing or diffusing some of the back wave typically will make the sound "smoother."

In what way did your 2D diffusion on the front wall make the imaging "better"?

Thank you.

Hi Ron. I found both diffusion and absorption of the back wave made the centre image more solid and believable and the speakers less obvious as sound sources. The diffusers did this without deadening or confusing the sound.But in my small room the panels are only 3 1/2 feet from the front wall. Without treatment of the back wall the sound was a little ”splashy” and performers and instruments were not clearly placed in the soundstage. Of course you have a much bigger room and your panels are much further from the front wall. Given how far out into the room your panels are you may not need any treatment on the front wall at all and especially not absorption.

 

[Johan K]

in the context of cleaning up the soundstage yes, that reflective hash is like noise and smear cluttering up images and vividness of the music. it's non musical. the idea is cleaning up the hash, but not lowering the energy or warming up tonality. essentially staying neutral, but improving imaging.

sometimes you want a warmer feeling by cutting high frequencies, essentially changing the balance. however; when you do that you throw away lively ness and high frequency extension. the cloth tight against the wall is a lighter touch, hopefully only positives. you do have to install it in a section and listen for a time.....mostly for me it was two weeks. then move on if i still like it.

the great part is doing it is cheap, cheap. just takes a decision to do it. then lots of listening to check it. if it works in a small case, then keep going. for me it was 9 months of working at it.

it is more work that leaning a panel against the wall. so there is that. but i work cheap. on the step ladder doing my ceiling was a bit extreme. but now 8 years later the best single thing (using the cloth strategically) i've ever done for my sound. and by a very far sight the cheapest.

but it's a not sexy thing, and no brand to buy. just generic (choose a pleasing color) cloth and stick pins.

This sounds so much like me… Thought I was alone this crazy… haha… but yes Mike.. it actually works, but as you said.. lots of work to fine tune.

/ Jk

 

[Ron Resnick]

Hi Ron. I found both diffusion and absorption of the back wave made the centre image more solid and believable and the speakers less obvious as sound sources. The diffusers did this without deadening or confusing the sound.But in my small room the panels are only 3 1/2 feet from the front wall. Without treatment of the back wall the sound was a little ”splashy” and performers and instruments were not clearly placed in the soundstage. Of course you have a much bigger room and your panels are much further from the front wall. Given how far out into the room your panels are you may not need any treatment on the front wall at all and especially not absorption.

Thank you for explaining in detail.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I must say… Your room looks very cool, Ron! Also not the easiest room to get the acoustics right. One can really understand that when one sees the whole room in the pics above. Keep on tuning? !

/ Jk

Thank you, Johan!

 

[Ron Resnick]

As an input to this, I can reveal, that I actually have a laying diffusing tubetrap right behind and down on the floor, my listening chair. Diffusing part facing back up towards my ears. Makes a cool ambience, and absorb reflecting bass frequences. A lot of trial and error went into this to get the right sound out of it… Now it works perfect.

/ Jk

How far is you're listening chair from the rear wall?

 

[Ron Resnick]

Good, I think. Maybe a touch livelier (good) but not edgier (good).

At the moment I think that the absorption panels on the front wall were a Band-Aid for edginess from ribbon driver break-in, brightness from Belden 1192A and neutrality from Siegfried IIs. I don't think the Band-Aid is necessary anymore. But I have to listen a lot more. Maybe I'll end up putting back a bit of absorption on the front wall, or maybe I'll experiment with 1D diffusors.

Don is coming over tonight, so I'll be curious to learn what he thinks.

Don basically agreed with these initial impressions of removing all of the absorption from the front wall. He thinks that it really took months for the ribbon drivers to break in and lose their initial edginess.

He agrees with me that maybe there's a little bit too much energy off of the front wall now, and that putting back a little bit of absorption, or experimenting with diffusion, might be worthwhile.

There is no way to prove it, so don't ask me to, but I really think that J.R. was on the right track to dampen the reverberation between the two closest parallel walls in the room near the ceiling. I might have thought a priori that removing all of the absorption from the front wall would result in an unhappy increase in brightness, but it hasn't.

I removed from the front wall four 24 inch wide absorption panels. I'm tempted to order two 12 inch or 18 inch wide absorption panels, and position them right behind the ribbon drivers, to reduce just slightly the energy reflecting off the front wall.

 

[Johan K]

How far is you're listening chair from the rear wall?

Let me explain it like this instead… -When I’m in my chair, my ears is about 75cm / 29,52 inch from the rear wall. My listening position is a little bit more of a far field, than a near field listening position, due to my included surround setup. Now it works very good for both stereo and surround.

Back when I only had a two channel setup, my listening position was more of a near field type position. The system was then differently tuned for that purpose.

/ Jk

 

[Johan K]

Ron,

I think I have mention this before, but my current listening position took me about three years to find and to fine tune to my taste… a few cm’s here, a few cm’s there.. then listen for weeks sometimes, before changing something again… Sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse.. than back to change again… All this moving of speakers or listening chair or other gears.. was just to remove as much of bad reflections as I could, but still don’t loose the soundstage, sound pressure, and the sound signature in bass, mids and treble…. It just took a very long time to get satisfied… just saying.

/ Jk

 

[adyc]

How far is you're listening chair from the rear wall?

Hi Ron, what is the distance between speaker and your listening position?

 

[Ron Resnick]

Which dimension do you mean, exactly?

Left ribbon driver to left ear?

Midpoint between the speakers to nose?