Email from se regarding the reflexion filter

K

Krush411

New member
I want to buy either the SE Reflexion Filter or the Real Traps PVB. I was leaning towards the PVB and then SE sent me the below email. I know they have to sell and push thier product-but how accurate is this?

"The Realtraps booth is just an acoustic panel
'folded' down the middle.
In our opinion this creates many more problems than it solves. Creating
a corner in which to place a product for isolation breaks every rule of
acoustics by creating a bass well where bass frequencies build and
create harmonic peaks, wrecking the sound of the recording."

Im recording strictly hiphop vocals with my mic. Please advise if the above is accurate.

Thanks
 
If it said - "Creating a corner inside one of the most effective broadband traps on the market (blah, blah, blah) instead of our really tiny and thin but concave foam sheet" -- I could see it.

I'd go with the PVB.
 
My gut tells me the RealTraps product is a far more effective product... Maybe Ethan will pop in with a retort... :)
 
While I don't think there's any issue with Ethan's PVB...I think it would have a more appealing presentation if it was made from 3 panels instead of the two....and I mean 3 smaller panels that would equal the same area as the pair of 2'x2' panels...or the two sides would be bigger than the middle piece...
...and then then you could place them in a soft-U shape:

\_/

...instead of the:

\/

shape.

I just think it would feel more comfortable by giving the singer a bit more space to work in, but I know the 2'x2' size is a more cost effective manufacturing cut since most of his panels come in 2'x2' or 2'x4'.

But the SE panel looks like a small toy next to the Real Traps PVB. :)
 
Theorizing and opinionating is meaningless here.

I will not give an opinion because I have no *real* experience with either one (as is true with 99% of the folks on this board.) All I will observe is that I have yet to read an actual user review of either model that indicates anything other than they both work pretty much as advertised; i.e. I have never seen or been given any reason to believe that either product is a sham (or a sham-wow, FTM.)

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
Theorizing and opinionating is meaningless here.
Click to expand...

While that's partly true if one has no actual experience with the product (one can still theorize and opinionate from specs/data)...
...my own views are based on the look/presentation of the PVB...and that's easy to see from the website images. ;)
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
Theorizing and opinionating is meaningless here.
Click to expand...

No it ain't. The performance of the Reflexion device has not been questioned, so I have no reason to consider it. I also happen to have a self-constructed device sitting right in front of me that is practically identical to a RealTrap PVB. Actually, mine is twice as tall, but the acoustic principle in question is the same.

Anyway, we have Ethan's own tests on his site:

http://www.realtraps.com/p_pvb.htm

If you have a look at his first graph, you will see an apparent nodal response, but I'd bet that is actually a diffraction effect of the speaker firing behind the panel (and thus a function of the panel's shape). Wild guess; I'd be interested to hear Ethan's analysis. But the salient point is that the PVB is so much better at absorption that even that nodal response has lesser amplitude than the broad-spectrum absorption of the Reflexion.

In that context, it is difficult to understand how sE's comments are compelling.
 
I don't understand how the appearance of each contraption has any bearing on the OPs request for comments on sE's stated opinion. While cosmetics may play a subjective part in one's decision on which one to pick, and such opinion *IS* a valid opinion and a valid point to consider, speculative opinion on the real-world performance of each device and therefore on the validity of sE's stated opinion has little meaning.

As to the reality of the evidence we do have in that regard, I find it very relevant that sE specifically states that it is their *opinion* that the RT design will cause such problems, but do not actually provide in that letter any actual evidence to back it up, nor any evidence to suggest their stated supposition that the RT device's design "wrecks the sound of the recording". Has anyone here actually heard or read any actual user review - let alone any test data - that even comes close to suggesting that the RT filter "wrecks the sound"? That's one hell of an unsubstantiated charge. Considering the source of that letter, it's absolutely zero surprise to me that they would take such an opinion (though it remains a disappointment), and IMHO, carries no weight. Which, now that I think about it, would indeed be my answer to the OP's question.

As far as Ethan's charts, as even msh's comments suggest, their meaning is somewhat ambiguous. Low amplitude moding or diffraction spikes vs. higher-amplitude broadband response curves. Apples vs. oranges. Which one actually tastes better? The charts wont tell us that may more than the response curves of two quality microphones will tell us which one will record better for any given situation.

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
I don't understand how the appearance of each contraption has any bearing on the OPs request for comments on sE's stated opinion. While cosmetics may play a subjective part in one's decision on which one to pick, and such opinion *IS* a valid opinion and a valid point to consider, speculative opinion on the real-world performance of each device and therefore on the validity of sE's stated opinion has little meaning.
Click to expand...

Ahhhhh....I never said anything regarding SE's stated opinon.

It was just a side topic triggered by the comments about the PVB's V-wedge shape.
It just happens that I was checking out some of Ethan's products a few days back....and that was something I was thinking about at the time...that it would look (and maybe feel more comfortable) if it was more of a U shape...
...so I mentioned it here. :)

It was a partial seque, Glen. :p
 
Good stuff-

I was actually leaning towards the RT SVB until a local GC manager offered me the RE Reflexion at a discounted rate of 200 dollars. The PVB would cost me 300 plus shipping so I dont know if I can pass up the deal on the RE since I am on a strict budget. Still favor the PVB when all is said and done...will have to think hard about it
 
miroslav said:
Ahhhhh....I never said anything regarding SE's stated opinon.

It was just a side topic triggered by the comments about the PVB's V-wedge shape.
It just happens that I was checking out some of Ethan's products a few days back....and that was something I was thinking about at the time...that it would look (and maybe feel more comfortable) if it was more of a U shape...
...so I mentioned it here. :)

It was a partial seque, Glen. :p
Click to expand...
Undertood and agreed :)

G.
 
Krush411 said:
Good stuff-

I was actually leaning towards the RT SVB until a local GC manager offered me the RE Reflexion at a discounted rate of 200 dollars. The PVB would cost me 300 plus shipping so I dont know if I can pass up the deal on the RE since I am on a strict budget. Still favor the PVB when all is said and done...will have to think hard about it
Click to expand...
Assuming that GC will still honor their standard return policy, then what I might recommend is that you try out the sE filter for the return period. If it works out OK for you, then you should be happy with getting what you need for a bargain price. If not, you can always retrun it and try the same thing out with the RT device.

IMHO and all that.

G.
 
I think that either product is certainly better than nothing...but the sE filter kinda looks like a better design for the intended purpose while the other can be handy in places where the sE is not....but not so much better than maybe a packing blanket on a few pipes.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
I will not give an opinion because I have no *real* experience with either one (as is true with 99% of the folks on this board.) All I will observe is that I have yet to read an actual user review of either model that indicates anything other than they both work pretty much as advertised
Click to expand...

To Glen's point, I cannot comment on the PVB as I have not owned or used one. I do own an sE Reflexion Filter (you can search through my old posts to find a pic of it in my studio; I'm too lazy to do it myself), and it works as advertised.*

* Disclaimer: I have a decent sounding room to begin with. When I'm using a shotgun mic for announcing, I don't even setup the sE Filter. However, when I use an LDC for narration voiceover, I always use the sE Filter to cut down on reflections. In this use, it has done it's job.
 
I am not an expert about this but I has studied it a lot and something seem off about the SE comment to me. I absolutely understand what they are trying to say about corners in general, but the Real Traps device does not seem to have a hard backing on it, and therefore it seems to me that the panels used to create the device would be more or less absorptive or acoustically transparent depending on the frequencies. I am trying to figure out what frequencies would be getting reflected enough by two absorptive panels to create any problems significant enough to mention.
 
I have a friend's SE filter at the moment. I've been using it to cut down the amount of acoustic guitar getting into my vocal. I was originally pretty skeptical about it... especially for the price. It does a great job, though and does exactly what it does on the tin.

I've also used it in a church where the reflections are extremely unmanageable. I would say I managed to get an 80% dry vocal in this situation

The product works, it's just a bit expensive for what it does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top