Page 3 of 15 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 145

Thread: Small Room Acoustics

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Age
    48
    Posts
    18,114
    Thanks
    644
    Thanked 522 Times in 461 Posts
    Rep Power
    21474861
    Sign in to disable this ad
    Well, it is better than nothing. Are you in US? Harbor Freight has cheap moving blankets.
    PC Win7-64-24G i7-4790k/Cubase 9 Pro 64-bit/2-Steinberg UR824's/ADAM A7x/Event TR8/SS Trigger Plat Deluxe/Melodyne 4 Studio/Other things that don't mean anything if a client shows up not knowing what it wants.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    63
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    4
    No, am in the UK I'm afraid!

  3. #23
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Jackson, MS
    Posts
    749
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
    Rep Power
    2724490
    I posted a portion (the speaker placement portion) on another site. JH I can send you a link if you would like (I attributed the quote to you and linked to your website) and I can remove it if you would like.

    I think it's great information and it fit perfectly with a topic that had come up on another site. Just let me know if you would like me to take it down and send you a link.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Jakarta, Indonesia
    Age
    64
    Posts
    513
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 15 Times in 7 Posts
    Rep Power
    4192454
    Quote Originally Posted by jimmys69 View Post
    ...Correct me if I am wrong, but as little as 1 foot of length or width of a room can make a drastic change in the modes that cause issues right?
    Correct. Actually, as little as an inch or two can make substantial difference if your partitions are very dense, i.e.; brick or concrete.

    Quote Originally Posted by ashcat_lt View Post
    I've read over and over that thing about how the listening position should be at 38% (or whatever) the length of the room. Can you comment at all on that, and specifically how it relates to your points about the distance from monitors to front wall?
    .375 times the distance from front to back IS a preferred mixing position. This is due to the fact that, if sitting @ 3/8 of the length of the room, you will not be sitting in a dip or peak of the length axial mode or it's harmonics... it is an odd multiple of the room length that will work like this. Similarly 3/7 of the room also works to some degree, but the 'sweet spot' will be smaller as this one puts the mixer/listener closer to the center of the room, which will ALWAYS be a bad spot for LF accuracy. - Another reason why we don't usually face the long wall.

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert27191 View Post
    ...John, I understand what you say about the direction the mic is facing. How would view using a SR Filter, to cover the rear and side of a mic, with blankets put up as a wall behind the singer, in the direction that the mic faces?
    Yes, All of these things can work together to make a better recording. I don't want to throw out the baby with the bath water.. it's just that advertising that tries to sell something by saying it is the 'solution' to recording.. and you DON'T need acoustic treatment, and other associated BS, that bothers me. Yes, these things can help.. They all have to help somewhat or they'd be getting returns and going out of business, but my objection to these tiny things is that they are NOT used, nor are they necessary in a proper studio.. a treated studio. If you are a mobile recordist, you may find them invaluable... coupled with moving blankets and the sort. - But if you have a home studio & your budget is 300 to 500 dollars, why not build some real good panels? Something that will really get you the sound you want.

    Quote Originally Posted by jimmys69 View Post
    .... you gotta deal with what you resources you have. Some get away with hanging blankets over boom stands or pvc pipe frames around singer and get decent results. The basic idea is to hinder the reflections of the room. You will still have low end issues because the blankets will not absorb them, but your sound will be a bit more focused.
    +1

    Quote Originally Posted by polarity View Post
    I posted a portion (the speaker placement portion) on another site. JH I can send you a link if you would like (I attributed the quote to you and linked to your website) and I can remove it if you would like. I think it's great information and it fit perfectly with a topic that had come up on another site. Just let me know if you would like me to take it down and send you a link.
    NO PROBLEMO. I post here to help people.. and if it goes viral... that's fine with me. I know it's probably a drop in the bucket compared to exponential propagation of the myths that continue to run.. - And thanks for linking it to my site. I'm just trying to shine a light... The batteries in this old flashlight... I hope they hold..

    Cheers,
    John
    John H. Brandt Acoustic Designs - ABOUT US - OUR WORK - RESOURCES "Twenty thousand dollars worth of Snap-On tools does not make you a Professional Diesel Mechanic"

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,299
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 204 Times in 192 Posts
    Rep Power
    5430272
    Quote Originally Posted by jhbrandt View Post
    .375 times the distance from front to back IS a preferred mixing position. This is due to the fact that, if sitting @ 3/8 of the length of the room, you will not be sitting in a dip or peak of the length axial mode or it's harmonics... it is an odd multiple of the room length that will work like this. Similarly 3/7 of the room also works to some degree, but the 'sweet spot' will be smaller as this one puts the mixer/listener closer to the center of the room, which will ALWAYS be a bad spot for LF accuracy. - Another reason why we don't usually face the long wall.
    That's what I've always heard. Doesn't ask the question I asked though.

    I've got my listening position right around there, but that puts my speakers about three feet from the front wall. They make a triangle with my head about 4 feet on a side. Would I be better off moving my speakers all the way back to the wall even if that puts them like 8 feet apart?

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    19
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ashcat_lt View Post
    I've got my listening position right around there, but that puts my speakers about three feet from the front wall. They make a triangle with my head about 4 feet on a side. Would I be better off moving my speakers all the way back to the wall even if that puts them like 8 feet apart?
    38 percent rule


  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Jackson, MS
    Posts
    749
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
    Rep Power
    2724490
    It appears that as usual when you post something that goes against the "known" thing no one pays attention.

    Oh well, I found it helpful. Thanks for the post

    Quote Originally Posted by jhbrandt View Post
    NO PROBLEMO. I post here to help people.. and if it goes viral... that's fine with me. I know it's probably a drop in the bucket compared to exponential propagation of the myths that continue to run.. - And thanks for linking it to my site. I'm just trying to shine a light... The batteries in this old flashlight... I hope they hold..

    Cheers,
    John

  8. #28
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Jackson, MS
    Posts
    749
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
    Rep Power
    2724490
    I was talking with some other guys about room treatment and something they brought up (figured I'd try to fact check here). Is that for things like bass traps that will be 6 - 8" deep, the rule would be the thicker it goes the less dense the material you want to use. IE for bass traps the pink fluffy insulation would be better than say rockwool.

    I said I thought that rockwool would be better for bass traps, this was their reply.

    negative, that is merely a common misconception in acoustics that denser is better for LF absorption. for sufficiently designed LF porous-only absorbers, loosely filled pink fluffy attic insulation (~5000rayls/m flow-resistivity) will perform best. you want a material with low flow-resistivity to limit reflection from the absorber (as any impedance change will result in a reflection).
    http://i.imgur.com/3jCn03s.gif
    the air impedance is real, but a porous absorber is complex acoustical impedance (real+imaginary); you cannot look solely at the real (resistive) component.
    sources: Features - AFMG SoundFlow
    Porous Absorber Calculator V1.59
    Just thought I'd get your opinion. I can post more (with sources) if needed.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    19
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    That is correct (although Rockwool per se is not ruled out since there are different types of Rockwool, and some works very well depending on depth). It is a stubborn misconception that very dense wool is best suited for thick velocity based absorbers. The figure of interest for wool used as velocity based absorbers; is the “Gas Flow Resistivity”, and not primarily the density. Although there are loose relations between density and GFR, it is not uncommon for two different types of wool featuring the same density, to have very different GFR values. And yes; for thicker panels, you want to use a lower GFR: Multi-layer Absorber Calculator

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Jakarta, Indonesia
    Age
    64
    Posts
    513
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 15 Times in 7 Posts
    Rep Power
    4192454
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens Eklund View Post
    That is correct (although Rockwool per se is not ruled out since there are different types of Rockwool, and some works very well depending on depth). It is a stubborn misconception that very dense wool is best suited for thick velocity based absorbers. The figure of interest for wool used as velocity based absorbers; is the “Gas Flow Resistivity”, and not primarily the density. Although there are loose relations between density and GFR, it is not uncommon for two different types of wool featuring the same density, to have very different GFR values. And yes; for thicker panels, you want to use a lower GFR: Multi-layer Absorber Calculator
    +1

    - John
    John H. Brandt Acoustic Designs - ABOUT US - OUR WORK - RESOURCES "Twenty thousand dollars worth of Snap-On tools does not make you a Professional Diesel Mechanic"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. My new mix room (and a quasi tracking room for small things)...treatment opinions?
    By Myriad_Rocker in forum Studio Building & Acoustic Treatment
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-27-2010, 08:46
  2. Help with small room treatment! Tracking/live room!
    By mousedadrummer in forum Studio Building & Acoustic Treatment
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 12-01-2008, 07:51
  3. Small room acoustics - 703 and tectum board
    By On A Budget in forum Studio Building & Acoustic Treatment
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-08-2006, 12:27
  4. small control room acoustics
    By guy1511 in forum Studio Building & Acoustic Treatment
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-29-2004, 08:32
  5. small room, small budget, fiberglass madness
    By jdragoun in forum Studio Building & Acoustic Treatment
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-16-2004, 12:18

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •