Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[boggy]

Yes, that's much closer to the true response. Again, whether narrow nulls are audible depends entirely on the frequencies present in the music. It also depends on how localized the nulls are, since a null in one ear can be filled in at the other ear.

So, if I understand good, all this means that narrow nulls cannot give a big probability to a "heavy" influence to listeners ears, like strong low-Q artifacts, for example. Double nulls near to each other, possibly can make noticeable influence, like we have in Lizard, anyway.
Physical dimensions are width=3.56m, length=3.67m and height = 2.55m. Bolded dimensions are reasons for double nulls near to each other.

.................

Sure, but again we don't really know how bad things are when the response is glossed over using coarse smoothing at 1/3 octave. I totally agree that the problem with boomy mixes made in small rooms is due to inadequate bass trapping rather than how a graph is displayed.

Someone may know how good and bad things are when listen results mixed in one particular room.
AES/EBU/ITU recommendations seems to be a minimum criterion that listening room must satisfy, and that is a hard task for a small rooms...

BTW, this graph shows Before and After in a small (11x16) room, and both traces are unsmoothed:

Do you know ceiling height?
Dimensions of Lizard is 11.7x11x8.4 (in feet).

So it's possible to make a small room flat, and have it look flat at high resolution. But it takes a lot of bass traps!

True.


As I promise, here is something recently mixed in Pressed Lizard, in a wav format (~23MB)
http://myroom-acoustics.com/hosted/myroom-acoustics/Put_buducih_dogadjaja_selection.wav




Best regards,

[NLP]

That's a lot of work, and I already have my hands full. A proposal I submitted for a comprehensive book about audio was just accepted by a major publisher. So I'll be dispelling audio myths of all types for the next six months. 

BTW, this graph shows Before and After in a small (11x16) room, and both traces are unsmoothed:



So it's possible to make a small room flat, and have it look flat at high resolution. But it takes a lot of bass traps!

--Ethan

So, book is more relevant than serious research and publication in recognized AES organization?
This results in that room are achieved (also) with realtraps membrane absorbers?

[Thomas@Northward]

Physical dimensions are width=3.56m, length=3.67m and height = 2.55m.

That is indeed pretty small. You guys certainly did a great job in there. If I'm ever in the neighborhood, I'll for sure visit the space. I like the idea behind the design

[boggy]

That is indeed pretty small. You guys certainly did a great job in there. If I'm ever in the neighborhood, I'll for sure visit the space. I like the idea behind the design

Yes... this is one really small room.   

I'll be glad to meet you   

All are welcome here. Honestly, there isn't a way to accurately answer Brad's question "How does it sound?" without listening with your own ears.

BTW, here, in Serbia, we don't have more fairly popular musical events in region, than EXIT Festival, http://eng.exitfest.org/...  (7-10 July)  so if anyone plan to visit it, we aren't far from EXIT (festival)   

Just drop us an email couple of days earlier, so we can arrange a listening session.

Best regards,

[Ethan Winer]

Do you know ceiling height? Dimensions of Lizard is 11.7x11x8.4 (in feet).

Yes, the exact dimensions of the RealTraps "lab" room is 16'2" long, by 11"6' feet wide, by 8' high.

here is something recently mixed in Pressed Lizard, in a wav format (~23MB)

Sounds really great!

--Ethan

[Ethan Winer]

So, book is more relevant than serious research and publication in recognized AES organization?

I don't get your point. Research is ongoing. Sometimes old methods must give way to newer thinking. Years ago control rooms were measured using pink noise and a third-octave RTA, with no regard to ringing. Now we know better. The recent (past ten years) surge in the use of bedrooms for mixing is even newer. The problems and solutions for a bedroom are very different than for a pro control room that's 25 by 30 feet or larger. And the measurement techniques needed are different too.

This results in that room are achieved (also) with realtraps membrane absorbers?

Yes, and diffusors too. The full explanation with additional graphs is in this video:

Hearing is Believing

--Ethan

[NLP]

I don't get your point. Research is ongoing. Sometimes old methods must give way to newer thinking. Years ago control rooms were measured using pink noise and a third-octave RTA, with no regard to ringing. Now we know better. The recent (past ten years) surge in the use of bedrooms for mixing is even newer. The problems and solutions for a bedroom are very different than for a pro control room that's 25 by 30 feet or larger. And the measurement techniques needed are different too.

Yes, and diffusors too. The full explanation with additional graphs is in this video:

Hearing is Believing

--Ethan

I understand that yes.
So in your book will be "something new", because the list of acoustics books is long enough and they cover pretty much from classical theory to practice.
AES papers often introduce interesting new ways of thinkig, approaches etc.

Food for thoughts:
membrane acoustical elements (and helmholtz) are more efficient but are they better approach than porous absorbers (in small rooms we have limited approaches of course). To attenuate critical frequencies with resonances or absorbtion with fibers friction... maybe some side effect to psychoacoustics...
... but this is more appropriate for another thread.

[Ethan Winer]

So in your book will be "something new", because the list of acoustics books is long enough and they cover pretty much from classical theory to practice.

My book is more about audio generally than just acoustics, though it will include a lot about acoustics too. I see my contribution to the field as making complex topics clear, without using math. Many AES papers are scholarly, and full of math, and make average studio engineer and audiophile eyes glaze over. So besides new thinking on small rooms, all of the basics are also explained more clearly (IMO) than most other advanced books and articles.

membrane acoustical elements (and helmholtz) are more efficient but are they better approach than porous absorbers (in small rooms we have limited approaches of course).

There are two types of membrane bass traps: tuned and broadband. I'm not a fan of tuned traps in small rooms, because comb filtering from so many nearby boundaries create peaks and deep nulls at all frequencies including the bass range. The type of membrane bass trap I favor is broadband, using thin paper or plastic bonded tightly to thick rigid fiberglass.

maybe some side effect to psychoacoustics.

I don't usually consider psychoacoustics when treating a room. I just want the flattest response with as little ringing as possible. Once the room is neutral sounding, everything else falls into place.

--Ethan

[NLP]

Fair enough.