Does the first reflection point actually matter??

Mahgister, it sounded to me like you have created a "stunning audio experience" by doing something to you room, but I have absolutely no idea what you have done. I have no idea what your "change of perspective" is, but would like to. You seem to be very excited about it.  Have you discovered something new?

It also sounds like you may feel offended by something I said, which was not my intent. If you want to talk about that too, feel free.

Which Floyd Toole article are you referring to? I’m somewhat familiar with his work on sound reproduction, and on the acoustics and psychoacoustics of loudspeakers and rooms.

Duke

Like usual i react too swiftly to your post...

I apologize to you...

You are a good faith person and i am too passionnate...

I apologize in double...

https://www.audioholics.com/room-acoustics/room-reflections-human-adaptation

This article is only few months ago...very interesting to say the least...

I had not speak about my own way and experiments with my room here my goal was not to derail the thread...

I only refer to them by the concept of active controls of room by relation to passive treatment of room...

I related my 2 years journey in my thread...

"Miracles in audio....."

My goal was with only homemade device and very low cost materials transform an audio system to a totally new level...

I expose how with the concepts of the 3 embeddings of an audio system, the most powerful being acoustic, but the electrical embeddings being also very powerful.... The mechanical embedding being important but less powerful...The acoustic methods has 2 way: active and passive.... The active way is almost unheard of in any audio thread... The "superstition" that we must eliminate reflection points instead of working with them comes from that ignorance about active controls and the way the brain work to recreate a lived sound event from a recording in an actual room....

Ok i dont wanted to derail the thread ....

My deepest regards to you....

Seems like the only alternative to avoid all this is to buy acoustic measurement software like from Dayton audio and figure out your room. Then treat it accordingly.

Sigh, I don't know.  I mean, honestly, I know speakers more than acoustics, and I think that for the average audiophile, this is a steep learning curve.  I mean, if you want to learn about acoustics, then YES, get yourself a mic and some software young lady/young man and go west with the wagon train...

Fun stuff.

But when I think of how to be helpful, what can I say which helps audiophiles enjoy their systems longer, better, asking the pros for help is a better way to go, along with some experimentation here and there.

Mahgister wrote:  " I related my 2 years journey in my thread... 

"Miracles in audio....." 

Thank you very much.  And thank you for the link to the Audioholics article,    I'll look at both. 

Duke

As a fanboy of active room eq and the means to accomplish such...

A pair of ears, however compromised and even biased, can hear and discern 'details' that a calibrated mic with it's software may only hint at, or 'gloss over'.

Mho, one would need to be running some rather sophisticated wares, running in r/t into a 3D waveform to catch 'reflections'...and, even then. they'd likely be effected by frequency, harmonics...and even ones' presence in the space....

...and be very persistent and equally patient in the measurement routine.

I am an imperfect being in an imperfect world, surrounded by imperfect 'things' playing imperfect sounds.

Eventually.....one has to accept ones' limitations...

(Thanks a whole bunch, Harry....*smirk*)