mcreyn:
" As far as room treatments, I believe that most rooms can benefit from them. The speakers and their interaction with the room are by far the largest determining factor in sound. I do believe in optimizing placement as a first step, but then what? Most rooms have long decay times and the first reflection points are too close, causing image smearing and brightness. $500-1000 in room treatments can transform how a system sounds. There is very solid science behind the reasons for and how to treat a room. You might find this article interesting:
http://www.gikacoustics.com/room-setup-case-study/
Finally, I think DSP is a great idea when placement and room treatments have not worked. I see the three all working together as a system."
Perhaps I wasn't clear but my comments were concerning the use of room treatments for optimizing in-room bass response, not midrange and treble response, and their general futility.
I've come to the conclusion that it's best to treat my system as 2 systems: a bass system and a midrange/treble/sound stage illusion system. The 4 sub dba gets the bass sounding powerful, accurate and defined throughout my entire room without the need for any dsp, equalization or bass room treatments. It creates a solid foundation for all music and is excellent for ht.
The final step is positioning the main speakers to optimize the midrange. treble and sound stage illusion at the listening position sweet spot (unfortunately, there's currently no known method of optimizing this response throughout the entire room as currently exists for bass response. via the 4 sub dba.) I completely agree with you that there are very necessary and beneficial methods, backed by solid science, of employing room treatments for optimizing the in-room midrange and treble response along with optimizing the sound stage illusion/imaging at the designated listening position.
Tim
" As far as room treatments, I believe that most rooms can benefit from them. The speakers and their interaction with the room are by far the largest determining factor in sound. I do believe in optimizing placement as a first step, but then what? Most rooms have long decay times and the first reflection points are too close, causing image smearing and brightness. $500-1000 in room treatments can transform how a system sounds. There is very solid science behind the reasons for and how to treat a room. You might find this article interesting:
http://www.gikacoustics.com/room-setup-case-study/
Finally, I think DSP is a great idea when placement and room treatments have not worked. I see the three all working together as a system."
Perhaps I wasn't clear but my comments were concerning the use of room treatments for optimizing in-room bass response, not midrange and treble response, and their general futility.
I've come to the conclusion that it's best to treat my system as 2 systems: a bass system and a midrange/treble/sound stage illusion system. The 4 sub dba gets the bass sounding powerful, accurate and defined throughout my entire room without the need for any dsp, equalization or bass room treatments. It creates a solid foundation for all music and is excellent for ht.
The final step is positioning the main speakers to optimize the midrange. treble and sound stage illusion at the listening position sweet spot (unfortunately, there's currently no known method of optimizing this response throughout the entire room as currently exists for bass response. via the 4 sub dba.) I completely agree with you that there are very necessary and beneficial methods, backed by solid science, of employing room treatments for optimizing the in-room midrange and treble response along with optimizing the sound stage illusion/imaging at the designated listening position.
Tim