nobody wants room sound??

  • Thread starter Thread starter solaris0031
  • Start date Start date
S

solaris0031

New member
after reading through the threads here, it seems likeverybody is obsessed with getting a "dead" room. what happened to getting a bit of ambient echo? My recording room is somewhat live (to my ametuer ears at least) due to 2 walls be round (its like they took 2 sides of a square room and made them into 4) and having floor to ceiling windows, and i think it sounds cool! i like the short echos it makes when recording drums! why does it seem that nobody is putting up plywood and laquering their walls for natural echo?
 
my thoughts as well when i record acoustic i like a little room tone i have some recording of violins and such and you need some room feel although i end up using reverb any way to get the concert hall sound
 
solaris0031 said:
after reading through the threads here, it seems likeverybody is obsessed with getting a "dead" room.
It's not about getting a "dead room".... it's just that to balance a room's sound requires specialized design/construction and is not cheap.

So for the hobbyist on a budget, it's far better to record in a dead room and add some ambience artificially later-on, than trying to get a good sound from a bad room.
 
Depends on which room, the studio or the control room. The studio should contain diffusion and absorption to create whatever RT-60 your target is, and some even have controlable surfaces, whereas the control room should have a reflective free zone at the engineering position. This can only be achieved in small rooms with absorption panels(dead). Larger control rooms can take advantage of splayed walls and ceiling to create the RFZ. A time delay gap is also advantagous, which is achieved by having a rear wall approximately 18 feet or more behind the engineer, which results in sound not only being delayed by about 2 ms, but also allows sound to decrease in db as each doubling of travel length results in a 6db drop, not to mention energy lost at reflection boundarys. This rear wall usually has a diffuser element incorporated, as well as bass traps. This time delay keeps reflected sound from smearing the direct sound from the monitors and allows the engineer to hear any reflections in the studio. Control room reflections can mask the reflections in the studio that are audible on the monitors. Hence the need for a RFZ. Small home studios usually have to incorporate the studio in the control room, and therefore compromise is the name of the game, although a RFZ is still important when mixing. Thats why many homestudios use absorption at the front, and side walls to the console, and at the rear wall, sometimes with slat absorbers and bass traps in corners, and an absorption "cloud" over the console as usually, there is not enough room length to allow for diffusers at the rear wall or height to splay the ceiling. My .02 only.
fitZ
 
Solaris,

Besides the good answers you already got, it's important to understand that we're not talking about live versus dead only. Far more important is the quality of the liveness. You could have some amount of liveness in a square room with all parallel walls and the exact same amount of liveness in a well proportioned room with no parallel surfaces. The RT60 might measure more or less the same in both rooms, but the second room will sound infinitely better - especially when the microphones are farther from the instruments.

Since most home studios are in less than ideal rooms, a common solution is to use more absorption to kill off the "bad" room tone. A better room would not need that much absorption because its ambience would be more natural and less colored sounding.

--Ethan
 
I prefer a bit of room ambience, almost as a rule,...

and I think my recordings reflect that. Not just idle chat, mind you. I don't care much what other people say or do. That's just me.;)
 
my room sounds like im in a freaking trash can, so i got it as dead as possible. there is no such thing as good reverb in a 6 by 6 room.
 
Back
Top