How to determine mode vs SBIR issue?

1tonio

New member
I have a null at 70 & 120hz present at the mix position.
The fundamental mode is @ 45-ish hz depicted as attached, but I'm getting a deep null a higher range and its harmonic.

I have preliminary treatment up, however the rear wall is not compete, as I am confused as to the approach to take at this point.

The caveat is I have an opening in the rear right and left corners. I have installed a false "wall" type adjustable trap at the rear right opening that goes to the dinning room/kitchen. But taking measurements show that the effect is very minute- not much aid in the nulls.

I know SBIR is a effect to consider with the LF source and its reflection of the front wall. but how do you determine/calculate measure this effect vs a modal issue?


** FRANK????***
T
 

Attachments

  • Screen shot 2010-04-05 at 8.34.51 PM.png
    Screen shot 2010-04-05 at 8.34.51 PM.png
    62.8 KB · Views: 325
I have a null at 70 & 120hz present at the mix position.
The fundamental mode is @ 45-ish hz depicted as attached, but I'm getting a deep null a higher range and its harmonic.

I have preliminary treatment up, however the rear wall is not compete, as I am confused as to the approach to take at this point.

The caveat is I have an opening in the rear right and left corners. I have installed a false "wall" type adjustable trap at the rear right opening that goes to the dinning room/kitchen. But taking measurements show that the effect is very minute- not much aid in the nulls.

I know SBIR is a effect to consider with the LF source and its reflection of the front wall. but how do you determine/calculate measure this effect vs a modal issue?

Since it's a null it's by definition NOT SBIR, which is always a boosting effect. 70Hz is too low anyway. There are other much more obvious issues, like the fact that your width and length are nearly the same...that's bad. They both correspond almost exactly with a 43-45Hz primary mode. I'd suspect 70 and 120Hz to be related to the height dimension...utterly typical for a floor-ceiling thing. What's probably happening in addition is that you have some modal interference happening along the length and width dimensions as well.

So...what have you done in the rest of the room?

Frank
 
Thats the thing Frank. My null (measured) starts @ 60-ish and bottoms at 70hz. There is somewhat of a peak @ 40-45hz. I will post a frequency graph later tonight.

So SBIR is more of mid and HF issue concern?

I am using Dynaudio BM6a's (rear ported) that is about 6" (rear of monitors) from the front wall to make a near 38% mix position. If if get closser to the monitors, the kick body returns, as I get closer to the middle of teh room, it starts to completely null and can only discern the click of the kick drum, but teh bass gtr is really prominent-so much so that the mids seems really low in amplitude.
My dims are as posted earlier, but is 12'10" x 12'2" x8'. I have a opening on the rear right and left.

Treatment:

4 corners of 2x8' x4" rockwool 4.5 pcf. w/ 4mil scrim
front cloud w/ 4 " gap 4x4' x 4" 703
rear cloud w/ 4~6 gap 2x4" x 4" 703
side panels (SBIR) 2x4' x3" 703
wall /ceiling panels above side panels 2x4' x4" 703
rear right opening adjustable false wall panels (basically an 2 fold accordian type panel 2x7.5' x 4" rockwool 4.5 pcf

1 rear panel (not mounted) 2x4' x4" 703

The panel listed last for the rear wall is placed w/ 4" gap in the center /rear wall gives me a 3db deeper null @ 70 and boost about 3dbs at the 120 hz null:confused:

Thanks!!

T
 
No...SBIR is typically in the 90-120Hz range, but it's a BUMP not a null.

How deep is this null? Your treatment looks pretty good, though I'd go thicker on the back wall. In a room that's square (close to being a cube), this might be as good as you can get.

Frank
 
10-4 on SBIR.

The 1st null (70ish hz) is about 15dbs, and 120 is about 18?? I wil have to look at it again. Heck I'll post a screeen shot later.

Thanks.

T
 
picies!!

so fluffy pink on the rear wall/ceiling corner 36" deep to hit 1/4 wavelength???:eek:
 

Attachments

  • freq4-6.jpg
    freq4-6.jpg
    63.7 KB · Views: 275
  • waterall4-6.jpg
    waterall4-6.jpg
    65.4 KB · Views: 256
10-4 on SBIR.

The 1st null (70ish hz) is about 15dbs, and 120 is about 18?? I wil have to look at it again. Heck I'll post a screeen shot later.

Thanks.

T

Not the fluffy pink stuff. Either 6" of 4 or 6lb mineral wool or 6" of OC 703, either one with at least 4" of airspace.

Frank
 
how do you determine/calculate measure this effect vs a modal issue?

I see a lot of guessing here, so first I'll answer your question and then go on to the theory.

The way to tell if a given peak is modal or due to SBIR is to look at a waterfall plot. Modal peaks have extended decay times called ringing, and non-modal peaks do not. To see this you need proper room measuring software such as:

Room EQ Wizard, Windows (and some Macs), Freeware
ETF, Windows, $150
FuzzMeasure, Mac, $150

Modal and non-modal peaks and nulls are identical and are caused by the same reflections. The only difference is that one is at a frequency that happens to line up with a room dimension, and the other does not. Whether modal or non-modal (SBIR), the root cause, or "parent property" as I call it, is acoustic interference. Direct and reflected waves collide in the air. If the waves happen to be in phase at the point of collision the result is a peak. Out of phase gives a null. Again, this is true for all peaks and nulls and all frequencies, whether modal or non-modal.

Modal and non-modal peaks and nulls (and ringing) occur at all frequencies, not just bass. The root cause - acoustic interference - is the same whether at 30 Hz or 3,000 Hz! Much more info here:

Frequency-Distance Calculator
Graphical Mode Calculator
Non-Modal Peaks and Nulls
Early Reflections and Comb Filtering
A common-sense explanation of audiophile beliefs

--Ethan
 
Since it's a null it's by definition NOT SBIR, which is always a boosting effect. 70Hz is too low anyway. There are other much more obvious issues, like the fact that your width and length are nearly the same...that's bad. They both correspond almost exactly with a 43-45Hz primary mode. I'd suspect 70 and 120Hz to be related to the height dimension...utterly typical for a floor-ceiling thing. What's probably happening in addition is that you have some modal interference happening along the length and width dimensions as well.

So...what have you done in the rest of the room?

Frank

Frank,

I respectfully have to disagree with you on this - SBIR can be either constructive or destructive - thus either a dip or a boost.

I support this with documentation from Dr. Peter D’Antonio, who I would believe you will accept as an expert in the field of acoustics.

I refer you to his paper entitled: "Minimizing Acoustic Distortion in Project Studios"

where he states:

[4.2] SPEAKER-BOUNDARY INTERFERENCE RESPONSE

Room modes develop as reflected sound interferes with itself. This next type of acoustic distortion is due to the coherent interference between the direct sound of a loudspeaker and the reflections from the room, in particular the corner immediately surrounding it.

This distortion occurs across the entire frequency spectrum, but is more significant at low frequencies. We refer to it as the Speaker Boundary Interference Response or SBIR. The room’s boundaries surrounding the loudspeaker mirror the loudspeaker forming virtual
images. When these virtual loudspeakers (reflections) combine with the direct sound, they can either enhance or cancel it to varying degrees depending on the phase

and goes on further to say:

The effect of the coherent interference between the direct sound and these virtual images is illustrated in Figure 6. The SBIR is averaged over all listening positions with the speaker located 4’ from one, two and three walls surrounding the loudspeaker. It can be seen that as each wall is added, the low frequency response increases by 6 dB and the notch, at roughly 100 Hz, gets deeper. It is
important to note at this point that once this notch is created, due to poor placement, it is virtually impossible to eliminate without moving the listener and loudspeaker, since it is not good practice to electronically compensate for deep notches. Thus the boundary reflections either enhance or cancel the direct sound depending on the phase relationship between the direct sound and the reflection at the listening position.

The null could well be due to SBIR

Rod
 
Thank you Ethan and Rod. More information to study.

In the short term, Rod's provided reference implies that I should be moving the speakers around to find the sweet spot (least null/peaks) then design treatment.

Sadly, I am currently using concrete blocks as monitor stands-which would make it difficult to move around to say the least:eek:

Time to make some temporary stands for now.

T
 
Hi Ethan,
I have set up with the 38% rule in mind as best as I can for now, however I'm struggling with the stereo field balance (L vs R). I believe it has to to do with the coupled openings: Right rear opens to a dinning room & left rear opens to a hallway. I made a accordian type false wall BB absorber in the right rear opening, which does not appear to make much of a difference. Measurement results are more apparent with a simple 2x4'x4" panel in the center rear wall.
With a more portable (vs concrete) monitors stands I can tweek the equalateraltriangle, and rework the desk for better positioning and less HF reflections.

I do plan to make more panels- or perhaps super chunks for the rear wall. With that in mind I have a feeling that the front wall/ceiling corner may be a good placement for another panel, however I remember reading that that junction did not make much of a difference-or waste of effort.
Do you have any experience of treating that area?

T
 
Hi Ethan,

I can post some snap shots later tonight.

Got my monitor stands made DIY of wood. I have mouse pads under the stands and high density polyuerathane slabs under the monitors.
Much easier to move around and has a smaller footprint. I believe I am getting a better response-less null artifacts. I will take some measurements to to check, but overall there is less boomy bass in the room. The floor itself is a raised wooden frame and tiled, so perhaps the previous concrete blocks actually made the floor resonate?

The imaging is much better also, after getting the symetry in a better position.

I'll be back with some pic's and measurements for a possible remedy to the coupled openings.

T
 
Heres' some before & after of the coupled openings.
1. left rear with 2x* panel
2. right rear opening

IMG_0335.jpg

IMG_0321.jpg
 
Hi Ethan,
I have set up with the 38% rule in mind

Tonio,

understand - there is no such animal as the "38% rule" - it is not a rule - it is a suggested starting point only - it is intended to give put you in the ball park of where your sweet spot will be- but once there it is up to you to make the effort to do extensive testing to find the actual sweet spot - which would include testing multiple speaker locations as well as the locations for your ears.

The 38% location was a suggestion made by studio designer (who I believe we can now refer to as "world renowned" seeing as he is designing studios in Europe as well as the States) Wes Lachot - who has made it quite clear that this was never intended to be viewed as a rule.

Just telling you this so you can keep the proper perspective......

Rod
 
The 38% location was a suggestion made by studio designer (who I believe we can now refer to as "world renowned" seeing as he is designing studios in Europe as well as the States) Wes Lachot - who has made it quite clear that this was never intended to be viewed as a rule.

Doggone Rod, the first time I read about the 38% "rule", I would have sworn the person who posted it said it was from Phillip Newell. In fact, I could have sworn it was Ethan who said it, but I could be wrong. Not that it matters.


However, I DO have a problem with the whole "sweet spot" thing when it comes to laying out a room from the get-go where SOFFITS are to be employed. In fact, this is precisely where I get frustrated about the 38% thing. The problem I experience, is with a CR WIDTH/LENGTH ratio, the centerline plane of a 60 degree monitoring geometry vs the placement of the monitor within the geometry of a soffit, the distance of the monitor face from the "sweet spot", the area between soffits, and the vertical angle of the soffit face. All of which can be manipulated to achieve any number of arbitrary "sweet spots" along the long axis room centerling. Its when juxtapositioned against this so called starting point(amongst other "school of thought" issues) that really frustrates me, as there is NOTHING that I've ever read that gives a person such as me the scientific rational behind all these variables that verifys any given layout is actually putting the "sweet spot" at the correct point along this long axis room centerline and why it should be that point. The point being, with soffits, you can start at a 38% point, do the layout, and manipulate everything to hold that point, but then it affects other so called "points of view", and once you've established the soffit/monitor geometry...YOU CAN'T CHANGE IT AFTER THE FACT!!:mad:
And I CAN illustrate this. But not at this time.


I come across this EVERY single time I lay out the front end of a CR...to the point I FINALLY got so mad over at Johns site on a thread regarding this whole soffit thing that I point blank told a long standing member(STUART), there are NO STINKING ABSOLUTES!!! And to prove my point that Stuarts statement was incorrect, I used one of Wes Lachots designs to do so. Here is the what I posted, which was in regard to the area of the soffit face around the monitor, among other things(on another thread Stuart suggested the area around a monitor on a soffit face MUST be at least TWICE the width of the monitor...which when you view this design from Wes...laughs in Stuarts face.:rolleyes:)

is.php


Which, to my surprise...Wes even joined Johns site, and commented on that thread that I was ABSOLUTELY correct...there are NO ABSOLUTES!! Which tells me something, but conversely, leaves me wondering about lots of other things that have become so called "schools of thought", especially after seeing many of Wes and other designers projects that illustrate Wes is right. There are NO absolutes...other than maybe what Francis Manzella told me when I asked him what is it that "certifies" any given design meets the "acoustical parameters" set in the designer/client contract..to which he replied...THE CHECK.:eek::D;) Even the "acoustical parameters" are a thorn in my side, as "standards" such as the EBU seem to be used like a client/designer financial and acoustical arbitration checklist...ie...Client: "well, I can't afford to move this wall so forget meeting ISO### or EBU###..I'll let you slide on that one..besides, no one will know but me and you(designer):p

Sorry for the fantasy Rod, but I think you get my point. Afterall, Manifold's geometry goes against everything I ever read about Studios. Even a few comments on Michaels Manifold thread at gearslutz reflects my view that nothing is sacred when it comes to clients wishes.:laughings: Even if its a studio looking like a circus(see Newells book:rolleyes::D)

But back to the "sweet spot" issue. I would like to illustrate my point, but will do so on another thread so I don't hijack this one any further. I will post some Sketchups and maybe you can help eliminate a few of my questions. I mean...I fight this battle every time I work on a CR/Soffit design. Hopefully you can clarify some issues for me. Reason is, I have some Sketchup tools for sketchup newbees, that will help them with their layouts...IF I can back up my reasoning and perspective for the way the tools work, with PRO logic.:) Once I have that, then I will post these Sketchup studio layout tools here.

Anyway, carry on gents.:D
fitZ:confused:
 
Back
Top