Wall treatment....symmetry question

[Seeker of Rock]

So along the mixing axis of monitors, in my case the longer axis of the room, I understand walls should be the same angle coming off of the front wall behind the board, which my dull walls are a standard 90 degrees from the front wall and run parallel to one another.

HOWEVER, does the same theory apply toward treatment from side to side? I have a situation where I would REALLY like, and at this point need, to place treatment between the MiniTraps in stripes not quite across from each other. The traps are not a problem, obviously, but where I placed wall to floor 'stripes' of foam on one side is not where I need to place them on the other. Is this bad?

edit: distance between the two walls in question being treated is 12'-0"

[Seeker of Rock]

Originally Posted by Seeker of Rock

So along the mixing axis of monitors, in my case the longer axis of the room, I understand walls should be the same angle coming off of the front wall behind the board, which my dull walls are a standard 90 degrees from the front wall and run parallel to one another.

HOWEVER, does the same theory apply toward treatment from side to side? I have a situation where I would REALLY like, and at this point need, to place treatment between the MiniTraps in stripes not quite across from each other. The traps are not a problem, obviously, but where I placed wall to floor 'stripes' of foam on one side is not where I need to place them on the other. Is this bad?

edit: distance between the two walls in question being treated is 12'-0"

Seeker, you cool cat. You're talking to yourself online again. What you have no friends here
Alright, I feel sorry for you, so I'll try to help you out in your predicament. Well, first I would go into your room, look to either side of your future mixing position, and see where the wall treatment would position itself. You probably want, at least at the mixing position, all things to be equal as possible on both sides to maintain a true image from side to side (read 'ear to ear') so you can truthfully maintain an honest stereo image. Now there may be factors along the way that prevent this all the way back, but regardless, I think it would be prudent to maintain this symmetry down the sides of the walls, even if cosmetically it doesn't fall directly on the side of say, oh, a door or a lightswitch. That is my advice. No go get'em tiger!!

[bpape]

Patience seeker. People do have other things to do. Sometimes it takes more than an hour...

Symmetry left to right from the front wall back to the mix position is very important IMO. The only exception is potentially a slight shifting of the mix position and monitors say 6" to one side to get out of the width modes of the room.

Bryan

[apl]

Seems like Ethan recommends that the treatment in the rest of the room be staggered so that there is a hard surface opposite the treatment.

[Seeker of Rock]

Uh oh, then I was giving myself bad advice. Crap, I thought I had read just the opposite on Ethan's site, or seen a layout schematic or something. Oh well, no use crying over spilt milk, opposite wall to wall the treatment is. It is the 'Metro' model of foam which, according to Auralex, possesses some diffusive properties due to the shape. Not sure that that makes a lot of sense, an absorbant being a reflector, but oh well. There is only 2' between 'stripes', so hopefully everything works out optimally.

bpape, appreciate your wisdom and advice throughout the different posts, though your sense of humor seems to be a bit under par....or maybe my attemped humor is not up to par. I have been away from the Cave as of late, so I blame it on that if it's me.

[Ethan Winer]

Originally Posted by Seeker of Rock

I thought I had read just the opposite on Ethan's site

As far as I know I never said one way or the other.

I asked an expert friend of mine about this once, Wes Lachot, and he said he favors symmetry over all else.

--Ethan

[apl]

My bad, perhaps then.

Maybe that had to do with diffusors.

[punkin]

Good thing...I'm all about symetry and my wife hates it! Even numbers, even items and symetry. 3 times 111 is 666. Proof that odd numbers are evil. And one more thing...don't step on cracks...it's bad luck and wash your hands...often, oh, and don't say words that rhyme with time...oops I just did. Oh no! I've got to go now.

[apl]

Originally Posted by punkin

3 times 111 is 666.

Your calculator requires service.

[IronFlippy]

Originally Posted by apl

Your calculator requires service.

His calculator is the devil!


Symmetry is the way to go, according to one of my textbooks.

[punkin]

My momma sez

you mean evens is evil too?

[Seeker of Rock]

[QUOTE=punkin]Good thing...I'm all about symetry and my wife hates it! QUOTE]

So there is one who likes even numbers in the marriage and one who doesn't. Sounds like a doomed situation to me. Sorry to hear that, man.

[IronFlippy]

The deal with side to side symmetry is that you don't want reflections from one speaker getting to you before the other. This doesn't matter if you're mixing in mono, but in stereo and especially surround, it screws with your perspective of the "virtual stage" created with panning.

[punkin]

[QUOTE=Seeker of Rock]

Originally Posted by punkin

Good thing...I'm all about symetry and my wife hates it! QUOTE]

So there is one who likes even numbers in the marriage and one who doesn't. Sounds like a doomed situation to me. Sorry to hear that, man.

Doomed after 25 years. Wait till I break the news to her. She's gonna smack the math skills outta me

[Seeker of Rock]

Originally Posted by punkin

Doomed after 25 years. Wait till I break the news to her. She's gonna smack the math skills outta me

Make sure she smacks you with both hands, not just one

[Seeker of Rock]

Originally Posted by IronFlippy

The deal with side to side symmetry is that you don't want reflections from one speaker getting to you before the other. This doesn't matter if you're mixing in mono, but in stereo and especially surround, it screws with your perspective of the "virtual stage" created with panning.

I kind of played the scenario through my head and thought it would be something like that. Thanks for the input everyone

Now, time to post the diffusion or absorber on the back wall thread.

[bpape]

Absorber. Your room isn't deep enough to make diffusion effective.

Bryan

[apl]

I just use my forehead.

[Seeker of Rock]

Originally Posted by apl

I just use my forehead.

I've been wearing a light beard for about a year...I guess that could work in my favor as an absorber

[Seeker of Rock]

Originally Posted by bpape

Absorber. Your room isn't deep enough to make diffusion effective.

Bryan

Thanks Bryan. That's the second vote for non-diffusion. I understand diffusion works better in larger spaces, but there is a rumor that it expands sound in smaller spaces giving them a larger spatial character. Any thoughts?

Currently I have the Auralex 4'x6' in front of the mix position. I'm considering more fiberglass panels either at the rear wall or in front of the mix position, the latter that would require moving the Auralex from in front of mix to the rear wall. Fiberglass would obviously do better at absorbing, so any thoughts on which position (front wall vs. rear wall) would benefit from the deeper absorption, or they need about the same amount?

[bpape]

Well, the problem is that the absorber in the rear does double duty. It not only helps with general reflections and decay times, but it also should be thick enough and dense enough to act as a bass absorber. Almost all rooms have a null that is caused by bass reflection off the back wall and is calculated based on the distance from the rear to the seated ear position.

The Auralex foam isn't going to give you bottom end control though it's fine for reflections.

Bryan

[RICK FITZPATRICK]

Seeker, watch for my new thread ...Rear Wall Options..
fitZ