Bass management -- the trick of putting absorbers at a front null


Very interesting discussion with Anthony Grimani. He advocates both traps and multiple subs and goes through the basics and tactics of bass management.

What's of interest to me is a "trick" he mentions -- putting an absorber panel at null between the listening position and the front wall. This, he says, can help even out the bass and take the place of the brute (and impractical) physics of trying to absorb the standing wave with absurdly thick absorbers.

He mentions it very soon after this point (which provides some context): https://youtu.be/QYpAbv7gKrs?t=1853

Has anyone tried this? Any details or outcomes you can share will be welcome.

P.S. He mentions Todd Welti, who did a Ph.D. thesis on using multiple subs. He's now with Harman. There is a paper by Welti, here: "Low-Frequency Optimization Using Multiple Subwoofers" https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Low-Frequency-Optimization-Using-Multiple-Welti-Devantier/00da...

This looks interesting, too: "How Many Subwoofers are Enough"
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/How-Many-Subwoofers-are-Enough-Welti/96b772af4ea937d8028c2f845...
128x128hilde45
Hi hilde45
So, it is absolutely true that your traditional 2-3’ panels have a very hard time with this. If you look in the GIK site you can find specs which show how effective the panels are at different frequencies. Their absolute best bass traps are the Soffits.


Also, it IS true that without EQ you need massive traps, so the recipe is not just to rely on bass traps, but to rely on a combination of traps, placement of sub and listener AND EQ. Without the traps, the EQ wont work down low.
Thanks, Erik -- good to have that reality check -- "a combination of traps, placement of sub and listener AND EQ."

I've figured out placement of listener and speakers, and am trying to dial the room in now with traps and, to a degree, a single sub. I have a second sub in the house, but it was too complicated initially (because I was figuring out the other things). I hope to have a couple more good traps to work with, soon, and will try to work those in as best I can and then see how the addition of subs can help. Then, I'll move to EQ. I hope that process sounds logical.
I sure like the spring traps. I would pay the 900.00 for that trap. Heck I’d pay for 4 of them. That is a bass trap. It will handle 3 different frequencies. that is my room. 40-50, 75-85 and 110-120.

A problem might arise with what ever the surround material was made of too. Need 20-30 years of life too. Treated BR or silicone

A single axis accelerometer, shouldn’t be any more expensive than a tonearm and phono stage, PLUS there is a phono stage between you and the readings.. That part didn’t make sense to me.. The tuning part with a tone arm. I’m not sure it’s accurate, but a test after will surely tell..

Doesn’t a phono stage EQ stuff? :-)

I also have suckout at 250 -6db and 350 -8db.

I like classical guitar. Start messing around in those ranges it really messes with what I like.

Who would make "Spring Traps" NOW? Me I guess. My hands are already hurtin’. :-(

50 years ago. Carpeting, acoustic ceiling, book shelfs and curtains.. Tamed a room pretty good.
Actually there wasn’t a lot of bass back then either come to think of it.. Wasn’t much of a need to tame it :-)

Some rooms just start out right...
The idea is that a frictional absorber necessarily is placed away from a wall ... not always very practical.
Angled corner traps work a bit differently (angle of incidence ... ?) with angled (design dependent) half filled corner type trap.
Something to remember is that the illustration (flat 2D) references only left / right / up / down and no depth ...
@hilde45, if all those traps are piling up and not being used I can take one or two.
Thanks, Rego. I will message you if I am buried under traps! When you say, "The idea is that a frictional absorber necessarily is placed away from a wall ... not always very practical."

I know that frictional absorbers are placed away from walls -- to gain the extra absorption from a distance to the wall roughly equal to the width of the traps, if I remember right. 

But Grimani is suggesting something different than this. He is suggesting placing them very very far from the wall in order to capitalize on a null endemic to the room's modes. That is an application utilizing a different phenomenon, no?