My two suggestions are, talk to GIK Acoustics or learn everything in Floyd Toole's book:
Sound Reproduction: The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers and Rooms
https://amzn.to/35WboEV and ignore the trial and error people. :) Best, E |
What does the ideal room even look like. If you can't Precisely answer that question, then you have no hope of stumbling across the right answer...and certainly not by looking at anything that 'seems like a good idea'. The physics will necessarily prove to be too involved to guess at. Nothing at all will be right until you get the bass (100 Hz and below) right. No matter how much you spend on the 100-Hz-and-Up solution - if you spend it before you get the bass exactly right, whatever 100Hz-and-up solution you've already implemented is Guaranteed to be wrong and will have to be entirely redone once the correct 100-Hz-down solution is established. No matter how much money you dumped into the 100Hz-Up, if you've already done the 100Hz-and-up thing, it will All have to come out and you will have to start that part over from scratch. Also, the bass is very hard and usually expensive to get right even in a good room and is too poor a value to attempt to solve in a bad room. If you have a "bad" room (almost every room is bad), you should walk away from the idea of treating it altogether, period. You will have no other real choice than to consider getting a good room. But, there is more to getting the bass right than room volume (although that's a start). As I say, you will need to know what the ideal room looks like. Drywall over 2x4's are not it...neither are 8 ft ceilings. If you have either of those things, you are already starting off in a supremely expensive hole. And about 98% of all the "bass traps" out there cannot fix the problem (never buy Anything advertised as a "bass trap"). If you find yourself in the 'I-think-it-should-be-easy-if-you-just-follow-logic-and-common-sense' camp, then go to acousticfields.com and watch Every video that Dennis Foley has made over the years and then tell me how easy it looks...that should pretty much slap you around some. As others have pointed out, you can't approach the right solution (the right one being the only one that truly works) by guessing or without access to expertise in the field. The physics just won't allow an easy, affordable answer...that really IS a pipe dream. If you cannot afford the right solution or you would rather consider the wrong solution because you know it's cheaper, then financially you are much better off walking away from all but the very least expensive treatments at the first reflection points and calling it a day. |
Take a look at the Realtraps website for good info and excellent, well engineered products: https://realtraps.com/ |
So in the scientific view of acoustics we have a lot of different waves propagating back and forth across the room. Our scientific goal is to minimize the cancellations and reinforcements in order to hear the original signal as clear and undistorted as possible. Miller just described an anechoic measurement chamber. Hahahahahaha. |
It is like medicine an art based on science..... Because of the human factor….Remember that even if the ears are less accurate than a singular dial corresponding to a particular set of a measure instrument, the ears can coordinate multi measuring coming from different kind of apparatus about all dimensions of perceived sound experience (tonal accuracy, imaging etc)......The ears are the only judge and guide through audio.... There is 2 way to act on the acoustical field of a room: 1-The PASSIVE way with some different materials absorbing or reflecting one at different locations... Most people use only this way...I use homemade materials or low cost one at strategic locations... 2- There is the ACTIVE way that is more complex but very rewarding... a- I use a grid of active metal resonator (30) b- I use 20 Helmholtz bottles of different sizes c- I use a grid of connected stones and crystals d- I use a grid of cheap 8 Schumann Generators modified with crystals and stones... e- I use a grid of 70 little bells or cones of 2 different sizes(7mm or 9 mm) with some nano Herkimer diamonds in them ...This grid of cones stabilize for the brain the recognizing process of complementing sounds waves coming with the competing obstructing distorsions created by the topology of the room accidents...This is not science only my way to convey my understanding... The embeddings on an audio system in his mechanical resonant field is 20 % of the S.Q. The embeddings of an audio system in the electrical field of the house is 25 % of the S.Q. The embeddings of an audio system in the acoustical field of the room is 55 % of the S.Q. The % varied relatively to the methods used, but these indications gives an idea of the general results after my experiments …. The final results are a very high S. Q. for a ridiculous cost....All my materials are homemade created or bought for peanuts....But the result is in no way cheap.... :) You can compensate for a modest audio system relatively to a very costly one with the controlling methods linked to these 3 embeddings ,especially the acoustical one.... A vintage low cost amplifier but good product of the past for example, in a controlled room, may sound way better than a way more costly one in a non treated room..... This is the only thing I know for a fact about audio.... Upgrading is most of the times only a game , but if you dont have money, it is not necessary to spend any great amount to buy Hi-FI…. The contrary opinion is "mostly" a marketing myth.... :) In 2 words: The acoustician is more important than the electronical engineer.... :) |
