Room Treatments Advice

nicoff said:
AJ, thanks for link to the article by Dr. Toole.

Very interesting read. He and others concluded that:
- “The aural scene is ultimately limited by the recording.”
- This is what I have called the “circle of confusion”. The result is that the most “perfect” loudspeaker in the most “perfect” room, will not always, or possibly ever, sound “perfect”.
Click to expand...
You're welcome Nicoff. I assume you are referring to this:
recordings are highly variable, and he concludes “The aural scene is ultimately limited by the recording.”
This is what I have called the “circle of confusion”. The result is that the most “perfect” loudspeaker in the most “perfect” room, will not always, or possibly ever, sound “perfect”.
In all of our loudspeaker evaluations, over several decades now, the highest scores have gone to those with the most uniform directivity, not the highest or any particular directivity. In fact one of the highest scoring loudspeakers for a period of time in the NRCC double-blind evaluations was an essentially omnidirectional bipole design, which would generate maximum reflections from all vertical surfaces. This makes sense in that the precedence effect would remain intact because there is a spectral similarity between the direct and reflected sounds. That was a learning experience.
Click to expand...
I agree of course and do note, he is saying an "omni" speaker (like yours??) can sound excellent in a "living" room (see pic of his long ago space) *IF* the spectrum of the reflections has the same DNA as the original (which it rarely ever is). No "treatments" visible, just smart layout, furnishings, etc.

nicoff said:
Toole even proposes that speakers/room be adapted for different types of music (say rock versus classical).
Click to expand...
Once again, I presume you refer to this:
For optimum stereo listening if your music tastes are as eclectic as mine, one really needs adjustable acoustics and, possibly, variable-directivity loudspeakers, but we know that won’t happen.
Click to expand...
The last part, I obviously vehemently disagree with. Going on 20 yrs now. :)

cheers,

AJ
 
Yes. I was referring to those paragraphs that you just noted.
 
TheOctopus said:
Great idea! Let’s see, what will it be tonight? The cozy and intimate “Jazz Room”? The bigger “Rock Room” Or should I retreat to the “Classic Hall”
Click to expand...
I agree.
Since I have just that ability and it's raining, might as well get started a bit early.;)
 
TheOctopus said:
Great idea! Let’s see, what will it be tonight? The cozy and intimate “Jazz Room”? The bigger “Rock Room” Or should I retreat to the “Classic Hall” that doubles as a ballroom? Hmm, choices, choices :)
Click to expand...

I know the dilemma. [emoji16]

However... I have used room filters ('correction') and in my current room configuration I have noticed that I prefer the filter enabled when listening to classical music and off for rock/jazz music. So in my case, the Classical Hall and Rock/Jazz rooms are just a click away.
 
nicoff said:
I know the dilemma. [emoji16]

However... I have used room filters ('correction') and in my current room configuration I have noticed that I prefer the filter enabled when listening to classical music and off for rock/jazz music. So in my case, the Classical Hall and Rock/Jazz rooms are just a click away.
Click to expand...
To be honest I’ve never relied on any filters or even EQ. I guess I’m a purist... to my ears they always seen to add some haze or artificial edginess that I’m sensitive to. My Luxman integrated has some “old school” loudness and tone controls which are actually “not bad” but they are always bypassed and never used.

The only time I’ve ever even used a device such as an outboard crossover, (a Bryston) was to split the signal between the preamp and the monoblock amps. This was done to completely remove the signal below 70Hz (using a slope) to let the JL Audio subs do all the work and the driving between 70 and 20Hz so the Sonus Faber Guarneri Memento speakers can be free from those octaves since they were two-way speakers. Results were fantastic. Much more coherent sound from their midrange drivers. Intoxicating results and clean and authoritative bass to boot.
 
AJ Soundfield said:
I know what FIR and IIR filters are. What are you using FIR for?
You understand Toole is referring to changing the aural scene in room? I quoted him.
Click to expand...

Yes I understand.

I ran REW to generate the actual room response. Then I had someone generate the filters based on the REW data. I added the filters to Roon or HQPlayer. When I listen to music, I can choose to listen to it with or without the filter.
 
nicoff said:
I ran REW to generate the actual room response. Then I had someone generate the filters based on the REW data. I added the filters to Roon or HQPlayer. When I listen to music, I can choose to listen to it with or without the filter.
Click to expand...
Nicoff, "REW" stands for Room Equalization Wizard. You're doing "room" EQ, which is in reality, speaker EQ. ;)
Like Toole, I advise this only for low frequencies <500Hz +/-. That would be speaker/room effects eq. Above this is pure speaker eq. A pressure mic does not "hear" what your 2 ears do. It simply records pressures at that point in space. It cannot "correct" the directivity of your mystery speakers.
That is what Toole is referring to in my second quote. He's saying both room "treatment" and speaker directivity should be variable, depending on program material. But he also says that will never happen. Obviously, that's why I disagree with him.
 
Thanks AJ. I used REW to do a tone sweep and measured the room response at different locations in the room. Then I sent those files to Home Audio Fidelity (HAF) and they developed the filters using the room data.
Their website provides more information.
https://www.homeaudiofidelity.com/
 
nicoff said:
Thanks AJ. I used REW to do a tone sweep and measured the room response at different locations in the room. Then I sent those files to Home Audio Fidelity (HAF) and they developed the filters using the room data.
Their website provides more information.
https://www.homeaudiofidelity.com/
Click to expand...
Interesting. About 95% of what they say is all true. But Toole referenced an interesting test (can't recall if he or other researchers did it) in his really informative book. They took a speaker and EQ'd it in an anechoic chamber, they smooth the on axis response a bit while carefully making sure that didn't significantly worsen the off axis. The measurements were free of any room influence.
They then put the speaker in a room and used a EQ process like the one you use, which significantly flattened the measured "room" responses, which of course are a combination of the speaker and room (those cannot be separated, unlike in an anechoic chamber). The anechoic EQ'd speaker measured far worse in room. The microphone was a lot happier with the room EQd speaker.
Then they did a double blind listening test. Can you guess which speaker won? :)
Regardless, if you enjoy the different EQ presets with different material on your players, that's all that matters.
54 posts in, we still don't know what's "ill" about that sound, which requires "treatments" .;)

cheers,

AJ
 
I guess that there is nothing wrong with the room or the sound as long as I like it. [emoji16] BTW, the speakers are MBL.
 
nicoff said:
I guess that there is nothing wrong with the room or the sound as long as I like it. [emoji16] BTW, the speakers are MBL.
Click to expand...


Congratulations. I love MBL speakers. Which model do you have? I've heard MBL sound fabulous with no room treatments though being an omni design they generally benefit from placement away from front and sidewalls.
 
kiwi_1282001 said:
Congratulations. I love MBL speakers. Which model do you have? I've heard MBL sound fabulous with no room treatments though being an omni design they generally benefit from placement away from front and sidewalls.
Click to expand...

Thank you Kiwi! I have the 101e mk II.
 
nicoff said:
I have the 101e mk II.
Click to expand...
Nicoff, not sure why it took so long, but those are terrific speakers. No shame in admitting that whatsoever.
Your speakers have very good off axis.
attachment.php


As I said, feel free to apply EQ below 500hz +/- where you see peaks/dips in the in room response. Cut peaks only, do not attempt to fill dips. I suspect the program you used did that already. I'd be surprised if that filter, engaged with Roon/HQ, doesn't improve at least the bass.
About the only place I would recommend EQ > 500Hz +/-, is a 3-4db cut, Q 1.0 -0.7, at 6.5kHz. There is a bit of a peak there that might emphasize the sshh sounds a touch and add a bit of sibilance to vocals. Or, if you don't hear this, don't touch a thing.
Regarding "treatments", if you are looking to make an audiophile fashion statement, just put stuff everywhere it looks cool. It might even make a microphone and your audio-visual perception happier.
Otherwise, do nothing, or draw a line 90 degrees perpendicular to the speakers and place diffusion/diffusive elements from there back on the side walls and then wherever you can on front wall (behind speaker). Assuming of course, the speakers are already 1m minimum from side and front walls.

cheers,

AJ
 

Attachments

  • 412MBLfig3.jpg
    412MBLfig3.jpg
    53.7 KB · Views: 39
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top