Does the first reflection point actually matter??

Early lateral reflections contribute to spaciousness and expand the "apparent source width", according to Floyd Toole.

When "presence" is lacking the earliest reflections are the most responsible, according to David Griesinger.

Which I agree with, but is subtly, different than what I am arguing about. :)

I don't think the laser line matters so much as having the area in general treated.

Erik wrote: " Which I agree with, but is subtly, different than what I am arguing about. :)"

I guess I missed that subtlty. Could you rephrase it? Pretend like I’m really dense... or don’t pretend, as the case may be... 

;^)

Thanks.

Duke

We think we know acoustic.... But acoustic is like other science full with unresolved mysteries....

I just read an article, an interesting one, where 3 specialists discuss without being able to be in total accordance about the basic acoustical treatment....And they are specialists....

https://www.acousticsciences.com/media/articles/room-acoustics-audios-final-frontier

Myself how can i change my room acoustic with cheap metal buckets glued together with an array of different stones on them ? The stones making a difference in the reverberation time control....

Is there a set of linear differential equation to explain that?


:)

For reflections we can use them or neutralize them..... In a small listening room it is better to use them......In a control room it is better to neutralize them.....

Myself i use them .... With success.....



« Complex waves of sound are akin to some cellular animals, they live a long life themselves but that look like milliseconds for us» -Groucho Marx

Is this discussion only limited to lateral reflections? It seems to me the floor is the largest first reflection. Is there a contention that rugs or room furniture don’t matter?

Hsw wrote:  " Is this discussion only limited to lateral reflections? It seems to me the floor is the largest first reflection. "

The floor bounce usually is the strongest early reflection, but perceptually is is not as detrimental as its magnitude seems to imply.

The floor bounce doesn't have a strong spatial effect, as it occurs in-line with the direct sound from each speaker.   

The floor bounce does result in a cancellation (comb filter) notch in the  frequency response at the listening position at the frequency were the reflection arrives 1/2 wavelength behind the direct sound.   

From a perceptual standpoint, the floor-bounce notch can be filled in by energy which arrives within a few milliseconds, such as by the ceiling bounce.  The ceiling bounce and the floor bounce will have different notch frequencies and will tend to perceptually fill in one another's bounces.   

The floor bounce notch is most audible when there are no soon-arriving reflections to fill it in. An example of this situation would be when talking with someone outdoors.  There will be a lower midrange frequency response notch from the bounce off the ground or pavement, with no other reflections arriving to fill it in.  Walk indoors to continue the conversation and the timbre of the person's voice noticeably warms up, and I think this is at least in part due to the floor bounce notch being filled in, perhaps largely by the ceiling bounce.   

The argument has also been made that our ears are so accustomed to the floor bounce notch and other naturally-occurring comb filter effects that we largely tend to ignore them.  That's NOT to say that there is no benefit from minimizing or removing them - only that they do not tend to cause colorations which draw attention to themselves.   

Imo there IS benefit from reducing the magnitude of the floor and ceiling bounce notches, or otherwise breaking them up.  But it is also my understanding is that they tend to be perceptually relatively benign in a home audio setting.   

Duke