|
|
Post by leonski on Nov 16, 2013 0:00:13 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2013 0:27:28 GMT -5
That a great paper if you have a 20 x 24 room, to everyone else who doesn't, lots of the placement info doesn't apply.
|
|
|
|
Post by Darksky on Nov 16, 2013 0:57:17 GMT -5
There is a lot of interesting information here. Don't be so quick to dismiss it Nate, not everyone has the education and experience that you do. This is good, just from an educational standpoint.
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 18,340
|
Post by DYohn on Nov 16, 2013 9:14:56 GMT -5
Dr. Toole is one of the world's foremost authorities on room effects on sound. His white papers are required reading for anyone serious about room setup (well, actually his books are much better but the white papers are a good start.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2013 15:04:14 GMT -5
There is a lot of interesting information here. Don't be so quick to dismiss it Nate, not everyone has the education and experience that you do. This is good, just from an educational standpoint. It is good info but the whole paper is based on a room 20 x 24. Room size and shape dictates where placement will be and sometimes, they just don't apply like they do in that room because of outside factors. It's not a knock against the paper, Harmon is highly respectable and the info Im sure is 100% right, just that it's doesn't apply directly to all situations. It's like a car that runs perfect in summer and is a pile in winter, different factors cause problems. In lots of room, furniture, ceiling size/vault etc play a big roll. It's interesting to see how it all works but for 99% of people, it just doesn't work out like that without too many compromises. From an educational standpoint it's awesome but from a everyday person's use "maybe" not so much. |
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,340
|
Post by DYohn on Nov 16, 2013 15:10:12 GMT -5
There is a lot of interesting information here. Don't be so quick to dismiss it Nate, not everyone has the education and experience that you do. This is good, just from an educational standpoint. It is good info but the whole paper is based on a room 20 x 24. Room size and shape dictates where placement will be and sometimes, they just don't apply like they do in that room because of outside factors. It's not a knock against the paper, Harmon is highly respectable and the info Im sure is 100% right, just that it's doesn't apply directly to all situations. It's like a car that runs perfect in summer and is a pile in winter, different factors cause problems. In lots of room, furniture, ceiling size/vault etc play a big roll. It's interesting to see how it all works but for 99% of people, it just doesn't work out like that without too many compromises. From an educational standpoint it's awesome but from a everyday person's use "maybe" not so much. You are being entirely too literal. The concepts in Toole's papers (and books) are universal. He simply uses one room geometry for the purpose of the presentation. |
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Nov 16, 2013 15:34:51 GMT -5
It is good info but the whole paper is based on a room 20 x 24. Room size and shape dictates where placement will be and sometimes, they just don't apply like they do in that room because of outside factors. It's not a knock against the paper, Harmon is highly respectable and the info Im sure is 100% right, just that it's doesn't apply directly to all situations. It's like a car that runs perfect in summer and is a pile in winter, different factors cause problems. In lots of room, furniture, ceiling size/vault etc play a big roll. It's interesting to see how it all works but for 99% of people, it just doesn't work out like that without too many compromises. From an educational standpoint it's awesome but from a everyday person's use "maybe" not so much. You are being entirely too literal. The concepts in Toole's papers (and books) are universal. He simply uses one room geometry for the purpose of the presentation. Interestingly, Toole's primary listening room is an L shape. Not ideal by any stretch of the imagination. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2013 16:36:07 GMT -5
I was talking about the harmon paper for one, not toole and the harmon paper is based on that room size. It's placement options doesn't translate to all rooms.
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,340
|
Post by DYohn on Nov 16, 2013 16:44:20 GMT -5
The PowerPoint presentation being presented as a white paper was created by a member of Harmon's research team but make no mistake, Toole is the brains behind this sort of theoretical paper since he is the "brains" behind Harmon's audio team.  |
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Nov 16, 2013 16:54:00 GMT -5
That's not the original paper that was published. That's a somewhat watered down version of the paper that was published to AES. I will post a link later. That PowerPoint glosses over some elements that are part of the real paper. I believe that Dr Toole does less research these days - and Welti does most of it (I might be wrong - I just thought that Dr. Toole was teaching some and researching less). Edit - apparently Dr Toole retired in 2008 or so. |
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,340
|
Post by DYohn on Nov 16, 2013 17:02:48 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2013 17:19:05 GMT -5
I'm not saying the harmon paper/toole is wrong in any way, just that it doesn't take into account peoples living rooms (which is where 80% of people have their gear. I would imagine that people reading that paper are either just curious or looking for a guide on placement in their own rooms. Although all the data I'm sure is right, in lots of cases can't be implemented for whatever reason. Thats all I'm getting at. New houses with open floor plans are becoming the norm (at least in my area) and it's pretty tough to know where to put a sub for the best sounding placement in a 1800 SF room thats has 10 different walls and a totally angular ceiling. The company I have designing my new HT room in my new place and me have has this exact discussion MANY times, you may have heard of them www.mycinematech.com/theater_main.php and although it's gonna be a very expensive bill, it should be extremely awesome when finished. They will be doing my whole home's audio needs. They say out great room is gonna be a complete nightmare hahahaha 1900 square feet and 16 different angles on the walls and ceiling. (They are doing all the plans, not the actual work) |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Nov 16, 2013 19:23:31 GMT -5
First, I'm glad my original post has started some civil discussion.
Now, I think the take away is one of principles of placement. If you go thru the paper………'power point ish' as it is, you can begin to see patterns and principles which would be a good or Reasonable start in nearly any room, save the really wacky. It's important to have principles of placement in mind when you begin.
I'm personally NOT a fan of equalization for a particlular listening spot. Say you listen in a 9db hole at 50hz. Turning UP that frequency THAT amount will tax even a fairly robust amp as well as produce effects virtually everywhere else in the room. Room treatments are perhaps indicated?
My personal space for stereo / TV? It has 8 sides, not counting floor or ceiling(s). Very asymmetrical. I think I made it work for me, though. My original location was a little boomy. I had the sub on the rooms longest wall, in the corner in back of the LEFT most speaker. The corner loading didn't work well. My den even was EXTREMELY boomy, acting, I suspect, as a helmholtz resonator. The door to my den is OPPOSITE the original sub location and on a 45 degree bias to that wall.
Next, I moved the sub to in back of the RH speaker….while in front of a wall, has NO side wall…..or at least the entry to the hall is right there.
I keep the crossover very low at about 40hz and run my panels full-range.
Enjoy
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Nov 16, 2013 19:31:40 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2013 19:43:42 GMT -5
First, I'm glad my original post has started some civil discussion. Now, I think the take away is one of principles of placement. If you go thru the paper………'power point ish' as it is, you can begin to see patterns and principles which would be a good or Reasonable start in nearly any room, save the really wacky. It's important to have principles of placement in mind when you begin. I'm personally NOT a fan of equalization for a particlular listening spot. Say you listen in a 9db hole at 50hz. Turning UP that frequency THAT amount will tax even a fairly robust amp as well as produce effects virtually everywhere else in the room. Room treatments are perhaps indicated? My personal space for stereo / TV? It has 8 sides, not counting floor or ceiling(s). Very asymmetrical. I think I made it work for me, though. My original location was a little boomy. I had the sub on the rooms longest wall, in the corner in back of the LEFT most speaker. The corner loading didn't work well. My den even was EXTREMELY boomy, acting, I suspect, as a helmholtz resonator. The door to my den is OPPOSITE the original sub location and on a 45 degree bias to that wall. Next, I moved the sub to in back of the RH speaker….while in front of a wall, has NO side wall…..or at least the entry to the hall is right there. I keep the crossover very low at about 40hz and run my panels full-range. Enjoy Yup, in crazy rooms, you pretty much have to EQ but like you said, it's always better to cut than to boost. Although, sometimes you have no choice though. I'm personally fine with EQ in any situation that needs it but I completely understand why people would rather not do it. |
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Nov 16, 2013 19:49:37 GMT -5
I'm not saying the harmon paper/toole is wrong in any way, just that it doesn't take into account peoples living rooms (which is where 80% of people have their gear. I would imagine that people reading that paper are either just curious or looking for a guide on placement in their own rooms. Although all the data I'm sure is right, in lots of cases can't be implemented for whatever reason. Thats all I'm getting at. New houses with open floor plans are becoming the norm (at least in my area) and it's pretty tough to know where to put a sub for the best sounding placement in a 1800 SF room thats has 10 different walls and a totally angular ceiling. The company I have designing my new HT room in my new place and me have has this exact discussion MANY times, you may have heard of them www.mycinematech.com/theater_main.php and although it's gonna be a very expensive bill, it should be extremely awesome when finished. They will be doing my whole home's audio needs. They say out great room is gonna be a complete nightmare hahahaha 1900 square feet and 16 different angles on the walls and ceiling. (They are doing all the plans, not the actual work) The research is very tightly implemented into CEDIA's best practices documents. While it may be difficult to apply to a family room or great room - it applies very well to dedicated rooms - especially dedicated rooms for people who have the finances to actually implement the recommendations. The recommendation that I've read over and over is to build a sweet spot both acoustically an visually. That was Dr Toole's opinion too. But I believe it is important not to over eq for a particular spot -- and never try to fix a null with eq. The shapes and reflections and open areas in some residential rooms are extremely difficult to model and sometimes treat. That's a function of the room ---- not of the research. I don't think it makes the research less useful - it just means that acoustics in a weirdly shaped room won't be as predictable as the research. That's just reality is all. Id rather approach an odd roam with current research - than approach with a guess and check method. |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Nov 16, 2013 22:51:27 GMT -5
N8, Let me be clear, I'm NOT a big fan of EQing. though I'd agree cutting in preference to increase. I don't know the current state of the art in trying to optimize an equalized setting for a maximum number of listeners……..not just 'the sweet spot'…... I'd rather put some room treatments into the budget than spend the whole wad on gear. Don't ask me the percentages, but SOME money should be reserved for that purpose. In a few weeks I'm going to be in LA….and intend a couple hours at the Garment District looking for accoustic fabrics. The intent is to build some diffusion for in BACK of my panels…..the best place, IMO to begin. I believe increasing the reflection time…..same as moving them further from the wall….and some diffusion / absorption will go a long way to improve transients and imaging…… If I could figure out how to post a drawing, I'd do so. wallcover.skp (32 KB) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2013 1:29:20 GMT -5
I'm not saying the harmon paper/toole is wrong in any way, just that it doesn't take into account peoples living rooms (which is where 80% of people have their gear. I would imagine that people reading that paper are either just curious or looking for a guide on placement in their own rooms. Although all the data I'm sure is right, in lots of cases can't be implemented for whatever reason. Thats all I'm getting at. New houses with open floor plans are becoming the norm (at least in my area) and it's pretty tough to know where to put a sub for the best sounding placement in a 1800 SF room thats has 10 different walls and a totally angular ceiling. The company I have designing my new HT room in my new place and me have has this exact discussion MANY times, you may have heard of them www.mycinematech.com/theater_main.php and although it's gonna be a very expensive bill, it should be extremely awesome when finished. They will be doing my whole home's audio needs. They say out great room is gonna be a complete nightmare hahahaha 1900 square feet and 16 different angles on the walls and ceiling. (They are doing all the plans, not the actual work) The research is very tightly implemented into CEDIA's best practices documents. While it may be difficult to apply to a family room or great room - it applies very well to dedicated rooms - especially dedicated rooms for people who have the finances to actually implement the recommendations. The recommendation that I've read over and over is to build a sweet spot both acoustically an visually. That was Dr Toole's opinion too. But I believe it is important not to over eq for a particular spot -- and never try to fix a null with eq. The shapes and reflections and open areas in some residential rooms are extremely difficult to model and sometimes treat. That's a function of the room ---- not of the research. I don't think it makes the research less useful - it just means that acoustics in a weirdly shaped room won't be as predictable as the research. That's just reality is all. Id rather approach an odd roam with current research - than approach with a guess and check method. True but sometimes the guess check is the way to go and although some hate EQ, it has it's place and you won't find to many people that have audyssey etc that don't use it. It's not just limited to subs but EQ'ing subs is so simple, even a cave man can do it lol |
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Nov 17, 2013 7:03:26 GMT -5
The research is very tightly implemented into CEDIA's best practices documents. While it may be difficult to apply to a family room or great room - it applies very well to dedicated rooms - especially dedicated rooms for people who have the finances to actually implement the recommendations. The recommendation that I've read over and over is to build a sweet spot both acoustically an visually. That was Dr Toole's opinion too. But I believe it is important not to over eq for a particular spot -- and never try to fix a null with eq. The shapes and reflections and open areas in some residential rooms are extremely difficult to model and sometimes treat. That's a function of the room ---- not of the research. I don't think it makes the research less useful - it just means that acoustics in a weirdly shaped room won't be as predictable as the research. That's just reality is all. Id rather approach an odd roam with current research - than approach with a guess and check method. True but sometimes the guess check is the way to go and although some hate EQ, it has it's place and you won't find to many people that have audyssey etc that don't use it. It's not just limited to subs but EQ'ing subs is so simple, even a cave man can do it lol I don't think that anyone would recocomend against measuring - theoretical will only take you so far. There is something cool about calculated modes showing up when measuring a room though! I'm a big fan of Room EQ Wizard and MiniDSP. Audyssey (and in my opinion Audyssey Pro) have some real limitations. It's too much of a "black box". |
|
