|
|
Post by leonski on Apr 12, 2021 13:58:37 GMT -5
Some rooms do very well with subs behind the MLP. Yes rooms can be difficult. Especially if it is not symetric or the setup not constructed symmetrically. Sometimes the multi sub listening helps. @ deleted experiment in the Rew with Room Size. With the positions of the LS. Important is the uniform modes suggestion in the room. The JBL document is also interesting. The best method is DBA Bass or Sba.💪 I'm NOT certain symetry is the answer......or even good. My listening area has 8 sides and NO symetry whatsoever. When I found the 'right' spot for my SINGLE sub, the search was OVER. And that was at the 3rd spot. The first spot? On the left as you fact the system / TV and mostly corner loaded. This was very boomy and my DEN, on the opposite width of the house was like being in a big DRUM. Very One Note. Experiments on that same side were no better. When I moved the sub to the RIGHT side? That was IT. Very musical, good uniformity across the listening area AND maintained good LF extension. And the DEN was now habitable while music or movies were playing. The room with 8 sides? Even the ceiling ridge was off-center. I'd rather have the room I have, than a regular cubic or rectangular space. |
|
Germotiva
Minor Hero
Alter Mann über 50 aus Deutschland
Posts: 90
|
Post by Germotiva on Apr 12, 2021 15:00:08 GMT -5
You were lucky with the position and the number of sub. Of course, symmetry is not always the solution.
the room makes the music 😉. sometimes you have few options to position the subs.
I refer to symmetry more to the home cinema(symmetry) with a firm seat and optics with more seats for directness and reverberation and here the dba / sba is best with a lot of success.
some things are also overrated with measurements. hearing quickly forgets. only a comparison(A/B) can reveal the real weaknesses. but not always feasible. and a lot is just a matter of the head.
“I'd rather have the room I have, than a regular cubic or rectangular space.“
I believe that from you. if you have found the luck. I can only pronounce envy here. Many do not find their peace
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Apr 12, 2021 16:10:50 GMT -5
Don't get me wrong.......I'd LOVE to experiment with some SKYLINE diffusion and I can think of a wall which is deserving of some absorption. Image is of 2x skyline diffusers of 24" x 24" with 2" grids for elements.  Getting 2" material is difficult since wood is always smaller....2" is actually 1 1/2" so I have come up with an alternative material. Which is ALSO very much lighter.... In METRIC? Call it 610mmx610mm with 50.8mm cells......  2nd drawing is of a 24" x48" frame for diffusion. Make it 2" thick (1 1/2" actual) Corners include standoffs while the diagonals prevent racking..... |
|
ttocs
Global Moderator 
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,162
|
Post by ttocs on Apr 13, 2021 16:38:36 GMT -5
Germotiva when we were discussing All Stereo a few weeks ago, I was using my Large Fronts which don't use a subwoofer channel. Today, I discovered that if I test the Surround Channels which are setup as Small and use the Left Sub Output set for Mono, the bass below the crossover is +12dB compared to the the frequencies above the crossover. So is this what you are finding with your system? For comparison, when using Surround Mode the bass below the crossover is the same level as the frequencies above the crossover for the Small Surround Channels. The reason I decided to check today is that I've been using All Stereo a lot lately, but most of the time the Large Fronts are on so the excess bass on the Surround channels doesn't sound as bad. But with the Fronts off the bass is really obvious and sounds way too loud.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 13, 2021 17:04:31 GMT -5
FWIW...
The Emotiva "Virtual Copper" wireless transceivers are the cat's meow. Despite an initial failure to launch caused by an intermittent interconnect (a BlueJeans one at that), all's now well. The location I've got my sub in would not have been feasible with a wired connection, so the VC devices are a Godsend. I strongly recommend the Virtual Copper units. Loving mine!
Boomzilla (Moniker not indicative of listening preferences)
|
|
ttocs
Global Moderator
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,162
|
Post by ttocs on Apr 13, 2021 20:09:17 GMT -5
FWIW... The Emotiva "Virtual Copper" wireless transceivers are the cat's meow. Despite an initial failure to launch caused by an intermittent interconnect (a BlueJeans one at that), all's now well. The location I've got my sub in would not have been feasible with a wired connection, so the VC devices are a Godsend. I strongly recommend the Virtual Copper units. Loving mine! Boomzilla (Moniker not indicative of listening preferences) Couldn't agree more! It makes distant subwoofers easy! |
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Apr 15, 2021 8:12:34 GMT -5
Encompassing 3 parts, part 3 tonight. Get the most from your subwoofers.
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Apr 16, 2021 12:40:00 GMT -5
Extension and Much More detail of the Harmon White Paper on Multiple Subs and placement......
But TENDS to gloss over the real problems of measuring 50hz to 80hz and lower. Wavelenghts get very long and placement is critical. Good rec for multiple mic stands.....but begs the questin of
session-to-session REPEATABILITY. I see a LOT of that over in the DIRAC thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by oleops on Jun 6, 2021 5:30:20 GMT -5
ttocs you have really had a ride
Frankly I am not shure I follow everthing with your specific setup.
Too me it looks like you made your own bass management :-p first having the .1 and the submanagement seperate and in some way mix them together again in your speaker subs with high signals and low signals.. (so you understand I have no clue what your speaker setup is able to do..)
Since my question about the seperate .1 you responded on sending me here I bought a couple of more subs :-p
And whith the lately progress with DLBC I am sure I want a seperate boom channel ..
My 4 1x12" subs placed 1/4 in from walls as bass maneged subs and my 3x12" as seperate .1 channel in the front.
With DLBC I think all the posible problems will be "eliminated" by DIRAC.. I hope.
Even without DLBC I think it would be a great setup that I am willing to try.
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 6, 2021 21:46:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by oleops on Jun 7, 2021 13:44:43 GMT -5
I myself is leaning towards Todd Weltis papers, just because it straight forward...
AND I am going to have a small rectangular room by the book.
ttocs aproach looks more to Earl Geddes method... and it also looks he got there by experimenting by himself, kudos...
AND I think its a more better approach against not so "by the book rooms"
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 8, 2021 23:45:39 GMT -5
It would appear that Todd Weltis was one of the authors of the Harman White Paper I link above.....?
|
|
|
|
Post by oleops on Jun 9, 2021 7:07:19 GMT -5
It would appear that Todd Weltis was one of the authors of the Harman White Paper I link above.....? Yes.....! and I am doing his approach as stated. But one must know that his paper are based uppon a perfect rectangular room.. ttocs approach is more like Geddes and I think that is better for odd shape rooms. Other authors like Anthony Grimani say that he have done measurements inside miniature odd shaped room like L and other. Dont know if he have published some results tough, as I said I have a perfect rectanular room and have not went down the L-shape rabbithole my self. Edit: Think Grimani actually talked about it in the series vcautokid linked to above..
or maybe in the absorpsjon or another video ..hu...
Edit2: Rewritten the text from "miniature measurements" to "measurement inside miniatyre room" :-p |
|
ttocs
Global Moderator
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,162
|
Post by ttocs on Jun 9, 2021 7:16:11 GMT -5
It would appear that Todd Weltis was one of the authors of the Harman White Paper I link above.....? Yes.....! and I am doing his approach as stated. But one must know that his paper are based uppon a perfect rectangular room.. ttocs approach is more like Geddes and I think that is better for odd shape rooms. Other authors like Anthony Grimani say that he have done miniature measurements inside odd sheped room like L and other. Dont know if he have published some results tough, as I said I have a perfect rectanular room and have not went down the L-shape rabbithole my self. Since you mentioned Earl Geddes yesterday I looked him up. I wasn't aware I was using any particular published method, I came upon my setup by trial and error. Thanks for mentioning Geddes, good info. |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 9, 2021 15:04:38 GMT -5
It would appear that Todd Weltis was one of the authors of the Harman White Paper I link above.....? Yes.....! and I am doing his approach as stated. But one must know that his paper are based uppon a perfect rectangular room.. ttocs approach is more like Geddes and I think that is better for odd shape rooms. Other authors like Anthony Grimani say that he have done measurements inside miniature odd shaped room like L and other. Dont know if he have published some results tough, as I said I have a perfect rectanular room and have not went down the L-shape rabbithole my self. Edit: Think Grimani actually talked about it in the series vcautokid linked to above..
or maybe in the absorpsjon or another video ..hu...
Edit2: Rewritten the text from "miniature measurements" to "measurement inside miniatyre room" :-p The idea is to educate as to Principles of setup...not just tell someone where to 'put the gear'... All rooms are of course, different, and a 'perfectly rectangular room' must still have doors and perhaps windows.....And are in different proportions of L / W / H. Some swear by the PHI ratio....as you'd find in the CARDAS website / setup helps....... If I were staring with a clean sheet? I'd start with the PHI ratio THAN make sure that opposite sides of the room were NOT parallell and that 2 adjacenet walls were 2X sheetrock and maybe even use an offset stud arrangement. Lots of choices when you have a clean sheet. Retro into an existing space, is of course perhaps more difficult.... Where do you want to start? A room like I have? 8 asymmetric sides, with several entries and an off-center peaked ceiling? For good or bad, I have a reasonable SINGLE sub setup which fulfills my needs.....This after several 'fails' in sub locaiton, one of which resulted in the attached DEN sounding like I was inside a 55 gallon drum being beat on! |
|
|
|
Post by oleops on Jun 10, 2021 14:08:03 GMT -5
At the start I was aming for a Golden Trapagon room, (loved the idea from ears ago) but after reading a lot of papers I found out that non paralell walls inside small rooms is not a good idea so with a heavy heart I ended on a Golden cuboid ish... room wich can be treated more easy
... and the rest I hope that Dirac will help me with..
I am trying to get the best start. But as I also want to have some fun I also ofcourse has added somthing fun of my own... Must have something to try to improve :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 10, 2021 17:55:58 GMT -5
Best of LUCK getting someone to build a golden trapagon room......And I'd add offset studs on 2 adjacent walls, or those walls backing onto the existing structure.....Other features to be added, as well, including
some sound insulation and maybe even an EXTERIOR grade door to the rest of the structure....
Construction costs in MY area are north of 300$ per square foot!
What is a 'small room'? How many cubic feet? Would 10x16x26 constitute 'small'? That's OVER 4000 cubic feet.
|
|
|
|
Post by oleops on Jun 11, 2021 14:19:09 GMT -5
The "experts" would still consider that as a small rom regarding standig waves and other HT problems and considiring wavelength of deep bass...
They call all HT small, consider them talk about full size theaters as a comparison.
(actually Grimani mentioned that every room under 50 feet of length is "small" in the ep1 of the series linked by vcautokid in this thread..)
But on the other side, they say it is manageable when rectangular.. But a non parallell wall will mock up the mathematics and make the job much more difficult as the nulls will come on non regular places and even worse will vary
I was going to build the trapagon room myself, but the above make me reconcider into a rectangular manageable room.
(At the first I was reading alot material directed towards controll rooms, and also some big theatre papers)
I still going to fill my room with huge bastraps, absorbsjon of higher frec. and some desireable diffusion..
My urge for mathematical eye candy tell me to put QRDs on back wall and cealing. :-)
After the build I hope for the best, and if I get problems they will be manageable..
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 11, 2021 16:20:45 GMT -5
Don't forget the CLOUDS and perhaps a slot-loaded Helmholtz into an adjoining room.....
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jun 11, 2021 17:57:55 GMT -5
So my first time venturing into the deep end thread (sub pun), this probably belongs in the Dirac thread, but being sub related I though I’d start here.
So this question is specific to the G3P with Dirac and a pair of symmetrically placed subs in a symmetrical room. Much experience has said that with such a setup, the best way to run this would be a Y cable out of the Center sub channel and off to the two subs. Let’s say we do that, run Dirac, apply our filters and go on about life as a happy camper. But wait, I hate Y cables! What if now I remove the Y cable and plug the individual subs back into the L&R Sub outs, set Center sub to none, and L/R Sub to Dual Mono? I’m thinking LFE content might not be any different, what about sub output below the crossover point? Will Dirac speak to me in the morning or is this a one night stand?
🔊😎 🔊
|
|
