Is the significance of room acoustics overrated?


Don't get me wrong as I realize just how important room acoustics are (I think).

However, let me share some recent experiences:

In our previous home, an audio reviewer/columnist evaulated my system. Very positively I might add. Anyway, upon telling him that my family and I were preparing to relocate to the West coast after his 3 hour evaulation, he responded with "good luck trying to find another room with these acoustics." And I knew exactly what he meant.

Well, we found a home that may have had even better room acoustics but it failed the home inspections. I'm still bummed about that one, but it was on to the next...

We settled on another home and it was either the living room or the family room for my listening room. Because of it's isolation from other rooms (very open floor plan) I selected the family room even though the living room had better acoustics and immediately had an electrician install the dedicated lines there. But this family room has no where near the level of acoustics of my previous room.

Although the same basic sonic characteristics where there in the new room, the bass had peaks and valleys like a rollercoaster. And off-and-on over the next 7 months, I'd move the speakers around trying to locate the best position for overall best performance/best compromise.

Lo and behold about a month ago, I located a position in which the bass peaks and valleys have all but disappearded and overall and in some ways the absolute bass control and response as well as the overall presentation is even better than my previous room.

Of course I can't help but wonder what if I had devoted this kind of attention to speaker placement in my previuos room with better acoustics?

But at the same time, I find it difficult to believe that simply relocating the speakers to an 'optimal' location could cause the interactions with the room's poor acoustics could be minimalized to such a degree.

Therefore, I ask:

Aside from ensuring basic room treatments i.e. thick wall-to-wall carpeting and padding and generally good room demensions/symmetry, etc. is not speaker placement far, far more important?

And lastly, I suppose this thread may offer hope for some that there very well be a better speaker placement to cover a multitude of sins in what should be deemed an otherwise acoustically poor room.
stehno
Warnerwh, I agree but, if you have the correct room, the correct speakers, and proper placement, the need for acoustic treatments is reducted to ordinary furnishings. Treatments beyond that is a band aid for lacking in any of the 1st three. But, you need a dedicated room! Not too many folks are lucky enuf to have one, ergo the need for acoustic treatments. Most have wives that want the stuff in some small extra bed room. :-)

Stehno, FWIW by attacking Ohlala you are defining yourself more than you are him. He is what he is and he will be seen by others for what he is, as will you. We do not need your assistance in assessing his worth. This forum is supposed to be about audio!
Newbee, very good points all around. Thanks. Warrenh, I do not necessarily agree with everything you say above or at least not to quite the same degree as you, but I understand where you are coming from.

-IMO
I agree with several posters here--if anything the influence of a room's acoustics is UNDERrated. When my wife and I moved into our first house a year ago, I conducted a rather unscientific (but still instructive) experiment. I decided to turn the house's unfinished basement into a listening/media room. Using my second system, I played a few tracks in the unfinished basement and took notes. The sound was generally harsh, unfocused, and echo-y. A month later, when the drywall (backed with foam insulation) was up, I played the system again. I noticed a mild improvement--the biggest difference was a reduction in the amount of echo. A few weeks later, when the carpet (a thick one) was in, I hauled out the system again and played it. That was when I noticed the biggest difference--with the carpet installed. What echo remained was largely gone, and the sound was much smoother and the imaging more focused. Then I started installing room treatments, and the sound improved with each treatment. What all this means--at least to me--is that the room was having a PROFOUND effect on the sound quality I was getting. I think I've gotten things to the point where I've transformed a bad-sounding room into a good one. Of course, I'm limited by the room ratio (24' x 20' x 7'), but all things considered it's turned out pretty well. As I said, my "experiment" was unscientific at best, but it confirmed for me the importance of a good-sounding room. The encouraging news is that most rooms, I think, can be made to sound good without having to spend boatloads for a ground-up design of a dedicated room.
I think that every part of the system, including the room, is important. For an audiophile, we strive to get each part to do the best it can. Rooms included. We have to work with what we have, and what we can afford. Many times rooms are not as good as we'd like, and the same goes for our systems. Maximizing the entire system in the context of the room, with speaker placement, room treatments, and a good quality system will get us all pretty close to the best we can have in each of our particular listening environments.

Attempting to place unusual emphasis, or importance, on one part or another can get out of hand. Balance and synergy play a big part here.
Twl, perhaps yours is the more intriguing response. When you said "attempting to place unusal emphasis, or importance, on one part or another can get out of hand."

Maybe that's what was in the back of my mind. Because up 'til now, the most common response for ingredients necessary to aquire good sound has been room acoustics. And with that response I've heard and read too many times that room acoustics account for typically a whopping 80%. And with my previous room's excellent acoustics I agreed.

But now my current room has nowhere near the same level of acoustics, yet speaker placement has more than made up for that deficieincy.

So getting back to your statement, perhaps that room acoustics accounting for 80% of the sonics is the unusual emphasis, importance, or the one part that may have gotten just a bit out of hand?

I mean, couldn't room acoustics account for a still whopping 40 or 50% while speaker placement accounts for the other 40 or 30% ?

-IMO