Quote: |
tetra,
We should speak about this directly
|
Hello Mr. Manzella.
I would, but I don't think the private message supports sending files along with the message. And I don't think I can properly describe what I want to know without these jpgs. Besides, it might interest others in your answers. Unless they are you own "trade secrets", which I don't think you would hand over to a stranger anyway.
So, let me begin by describing the criteria which directs my conceptual model layout up to now.
First, I've used some typical paradigm that have been around for a while.
1. Equilateral Triangle Monitoring geometry
2. Distance from front wall to Target plane. I used a "starting point distance" which has become a "defacto" Home Studio paradigm, of "38% of room length", courtesy of Mr. Newell.
Which brings me to my first question.
How or what do YOU use to determine where the sonic "target point" IS, in relation to the front wall?
4. Engineers EAR plane.
I used the standard 18" in front of Target Plane.
5. Monitor center line Height.
This brings up another question. To determine this,
I rationalized the monitors should be high enough so both Mid drivers center lines, were above the console. It was kind of arbitrary on my part, but I figured the width of the plane created by a center line from both mids, would create a Plane which would approximately cover the ears on each side.(See jpg above) This resulted in a Soffit vertical angle of 8 degrees.
Which, Mr. Blackwood said above is too much. However, IF, this center line between the two mid drivers is rotated from the Target point as a center rotate point, down to 5 decrees, the G1 lower Mid driver is below the top of the console bridge line. If I simply raise it in the Z direction, now the distance from each Mid to the Target point would be different. Which actually brings up my next question. BTW, I did move the G1's so the Mid drivers are now the center line of the vertical monitoring lanes.
Quote: |
The angle of the wall is determined by several factors but the goal is to keep the mids equi-distant from the targeted listening position to avoid cancellation and comb filtering in these critical mid range frequencies.
|
Maybe I'm missing something here, but if you look at these jpgs, they may illustrate my point.
IF, the center lines from each Mid driver to the target ARE equi-distant(which means the face of the enclosure will be perpendicular to the center line of the enclosure to the Target)
this Plane can be ROTATED in either vertical direction(up or down) and still maintain a equi-distance from the Mid drivers center line to the Target...whew! Anyway, what am I missing? In other words, to my way of thinking, there is an infinite number of angles that this could determine. So whats wrong with this picture? I don't get it.
And finally, at least for this post, the issue of the width of the wall between soffits and how other designers assign the Target point distance from the front wall, still keep an equilateral triangle, and get enough width for a WINDOW?
At least when the 38% paradigm is used, in order to have a wall wide enough to insert a window, the room length must be HUGE! which expands the triangle, which makes the room wider, which THEN allows for a Window. However, I see control rooms all the time with windows and soffits, but the engineering position is so far forward, an equilateral triangle would be impossible. Whats your take on this stuff?
Anyway, thanks for any insight. I'll be back with a few more questions later.