Acoustic treatment and acoustic mechanical control over gear upgrade for improvement


«NO speaker can beat the room»... I dont remember where i read these words coming from the mouth of an acoustician....😁😊

No speakers at any cost will beat, by their upgrading power ALONE, over another good speakers we owned before it, the power of acoustic control over them two...

 

 

 

 

Here are these 6 aspects of acoustic control parameters in a room i experimented with :

1 -Balance between absorbing surfaces,

2 -Reflecting one,

3 -Diffusive one....

This was "classical" passive material treatment of a room...

Now these 3 new other factors are related to my concept of the mechanical active control of a room ( what i called a mechanical equalizer):

4-control over reverberation time and timing of the wavefronts by using reflecting devices at the right spot...( the great advantage of a small room is the possibility to control reverberation time and timing in a positive way, in a way that amphiteater or great hall could not so easily, making speakers/room synergy better)

5- control over the distribution of the pressure zones with a grid of H.R from one speaker to the other around the room...And with some other devices...

6- fine layering and tuning of the flow of the sound waves by working with tubes of different zize and straws for example in the right location on the shear velocity of the waves and their sound pressure...

 

 

 

In a small room remember that at the speed of sound 1100 feet by second, the sound weaves cross your small room of 13 feet, like mine for example, cross it 84 times per second...Your room atmosphere is tense like a violin cord for the ears/brain. who take decision and make his computing between your 2 ears in couple of ten milliseconds... Do you begin to understand why even a straw or tube diameter/lenght/volume, can change the sound of a room /speakers relation ?

 

These 3 last aspects described above could be controlled with Helmhotz mechanical method NOT by electronical equalization...

( Imaging, soundstage, dynamic, timbre percption, listener envelopment, sound source dimension, colors,etc any acoustic qualities are all related with one another and changing one is changing the others a bit also, the key is changing all of them together with mechanical control in a fine tuning incremental optimizing process of listenings experiments)

Electronic E.Q. can be a useful tool but cannot tune a room nor be a PART of the room like a mechanical equalizer...And E.Q.uing with a frequency test ask for a location which could be accurate only in a millimeter range, anywhere else causing havoc...

Then the piano will not sound the same from the same pair of speakers in a non controlled room and in a controlled one...Not even close...

 

 

Dont upgrade good speakers with costly one BEFORE studying and experimenting with acoustic...

My acoustic devices and experiments were all homemade and cost me nothing...

I can then claim that great hi-Fi experience is possible at low cost contrary to what is claimed or supposed almost everywhere by almost everyone...

People dont know acoustic and never seriously try experimenting with it in a dedicated SMALL room...

Anyway if electronic engineering design is a mature technology for 70 yeears now with major improvement behind, acoustic of SMALL room is a new venture for few decades only because customers demands was not there enough till very recently....

A living room is not an audio dedicated room... I am happy to be retired and i could experiment for the last few years in acoustic and made the above discoveries for myself...

A dedicated audio room is the ONLY one luxury in audio not the price tag of the gear at all...

Basic relatively good gear is enough to give a very good audiophile experience FOR MOST PEOPLE... Claiming the opposite is most of the times ignorance of acoustic....Reviewers sells gear not acoustic information...Then the customer is conditioned to upgrade the gear not to understand acoustic...

By the way i am only a not skilled, non crafty, ordinary dude, but dedicated in my passion : listening music with a good sound but at NO COST or very low one...

Is it possible? Yes i proved it to myself and my goal here is to point to the right direction for improvement and spare people their money...

I learned a bit of acoustic by listening experiments not by resolving equations...Anyway acoustic phenomenon are too complex in a small room with his multidimensional numerous parameters to be reducible to simple linear equations...It is mostly non linear phenomena...

Anyway the ears could beat computer on the qualities recognition... It is the reason why blind people develop bat skill and learn to see sound...

Human ears evolve million of years to recognize "timbre voices" not tested frequency and qualities in the sound source not reflective abstract waves for themselves...A map is not reality....

Acoustic has a taste, a color, a touch, and a life of his own so to speak in a poetical way... 😁😊😊😊

 

P.S. My system basic value is around 500 bucks but every part is well chosen and after 7 years i dont think to upgrade any part at all thanks to acoustic...

The photo in my virtual page by the way are too old and are in no way able to describe my actual room....

It is way nuttier and more silly now than some here said it was, trying to discredit my claims and discoveries...But my room is more a LABORATORY, not a living room and not the usual audio room, and "at no cost", none of my devices homemade and with improvised design are esthetical and suited to a normal living room... More skilled people than me must make their own device more beautiful and more efficient...

I say that my room is a laboratory because nobody teach me acoustic here and how to control a room...

-Passive treatment is NOT active mechanical control for example, they are COMPLEMENTARY but one cannot replace the other at all,

-square small room are not "bad" if we know how to adress them , ( there is no bad room only improved one, my room : 13 feet by 13 feet and 8 feet 1/2))

-and near listening will be affected by the room acoustic like regular listening position in a small room...( then thinking that near listening will make acoustic treatment and control unnecessary is wrong)

These 3 facts for example were personal discoveries contradicting popular claims in audio thread.......

And to give you an idea about my speakers/room relation NONE of my 7 headphones, hybrid, electrostatic or magneplanar or dynamic are interesting to listen to now , they are in my closet retired....

I begin my audiophile journey by buying headphones and modifying them with success hoping to reach the better...But Headphones are not for most of them satisfying on all acoustical count even when modified positively... I decided to try my luck with speakers...

After i have sold my stupendous Tannoy dual gold 12 inches speaker...I was lucky enough to buy the best speaker Mission ever designed for 50 bucks : Mission cyrus speakers 780 for sure they dont have the Tannoy potential but they are smaller and very good with acoustic control... Ratio quality/price more than good...But this is only relatively good basic gear, nothing to brag about...Acoustic is more important than the gear piece...

I learned for 2 years of acoustic homemade treatment and many months of experiments in acoustic control non stop... I am retired and time was no problem only money was... 😁😊

😁😀😊😁😊

I sell creativity not gear .....I sell a method not "tweaks"...

128x128mahgister

For those who doubt that my Helmholtz tuning method with a grid of tubes can tune a room here, what i call "mechanical equalization", here are some simple basic observations to read from a MASTER book i just discovered 5 minutes ago ...

I cannot reproduce images of the text here, nor the equations correctly, but the text say it all and give some basic understanding about an important fact in my grid of tubes : The more absorbing tubes and the more diffusing one, or the open/closed tubes and the open/open tubes and the case in between these 2 types, with mutiples littltes tubes inside a bigger one, and also some tube with  a cloth fabric filtering device at one end and the other end open... These are the 4 types of tubes of various size at different locations i used in my "mechanical equalizer"...

 

 

«2.5.3 Sinusoidal wave excited by a velocity source in an acoustic
tube.

In the last subsection sound waves were shown to be excited by a sound pressure
source at the entrance x = 0 of an acoustic tube. Another type of exciting source is a
velocity source.
Fig. 2.16 shows an image of an acoustic tube with an open end at x = L, and a
sinusoidal velocity source at the entrance x = 0.


The boundary condition can be formulated such that
p(x,t)|x=L = 0 (Pa) and ∂p(x,t)∂x ����
x=0
= −iωρV eiωt, (Pa/m) (2.54)
where
v = V eiωt (m/s) and − ∂p
∂x
= ρ
∂v
∂t
= iωρv (Pa/m) (2.55)
hold [1][7][13] between the sound pressure (Pa) and the particle velocity v (m/s) for
sinusoidal plane waves, and ρ (kg/m3) denotes the volume density of the medium.
Assuming the general solution given by Eq. (2.43) once more, then the solution
must satisfy
Ae−ikL + BeikL = 0 (Pa) and Ak − Bk = ωρV (Pa/m) (2.56)
under the boundary condition specified by Eq. (2.54). Solving the simultaneous equation in Eq. (2.56) for A and B, then the general solution can be rewritten as
p(x,t) = iρcV
sink(L − x)
coskL
eiωt. (Pa) (2.57)
Comparing the solution given by Eq. (2.57) with that by Eq. (2.46) for the sound
pressure source, the poles of the solution for the velocity source are located at lower
frequencies:
cosknL = cos
ωn
c
L = 0 or ωn =
c
2L
(2n − 1)π. (2.58)
The fundamental (n = 1) is lower than that for the pressure source by 1/1−octave.
The pressure response to the velocity source is purely imaginary. In addition, the
poles are composed of odd harmonics without the even harmonics. The difference in
the poles between the pressure and velocity sources can be interpreted as the difference in the boundary conditions for the acoustic tubeFig. 2.17 displays the two types of boundary conditions for acoustic tubes: openopen and open-closed end conditions [17]. The open-open tube represents the case
for the pressure source that makes the condensation or dilation of the medium at the
entrance. Assuming the impulsive condensation at the left end, then the pulse-like
positive pressure travels inside the tube. The pulse-like pressure wave is reflected at
the right end (open end) by the negative magnitude. The return of the negative pressure wave to the left end changes the sign of the pressure to positive, which goes
toward the right end. The periodic traveling yields the fundamental frequency.
In contrast, the propagation wave from a velocity source can be interpreted as
the traveling waves in an acoustic tube under the open-end boundary conditions, as
shown in the right panel of Fig. 2.17. Velocity excitation might be made by piston
motion of a “plate” at one end of the tube. As happens in the open-open tube, the reflected pressure wave with the negative sign comes back to the source end. However,2.5

Acoustic tubes with open-open and open-closed ends, where pulse-like waves propagate
between the two ends; from Figs. 4.1 and 4.5 [17].
no sign change occurs at the end because the end is closed by the piston plate, which
reflects the wave without a sign change. This traveling of the pulse-like wave is periodic; however, the period is two times longer than that for the open-open tube. The
longer period makes the fundamental lower by 1/1− octave than that for open-open
tube [17].
The two types of boundary conditions may represent the conceptual models for
a flute by the open-open condition, and a clarinet by the closed-open condition. The
difference of the boundary conditions might explain the difference in the fundamental
frequencies with their harmonics. However, the boundary condition for a clarinet
might be mixed rather than purely open-closed [5]. The harmonics can be composed
of even and odd harmonics even for a clarinet.»

 

Acoustic Signals and hearing by Mikio Tohyama 2020

 

Apart from classical passive acoustic treatment which seek to optimize the balance between absorbing and reflective surfaces and diffusive one,

Apart from the mechanical equalization of the room by modification of the pressures zone distribution and modification of the shear velocity of the waves in some location with different Helmholtz open/closed/filtered tubes which act as resonators and diffusers...

The most important addition to my room were the low cost grid of Schumann resonators modified and tuned with copper/shungite+quartz ....

But way less known and underestimated is the ionization effect on the room acoutiscal properties...

I used three type of ionizer, 2 low cost chinese ionizer for cars but that work well after a year of non stop use in my small room, a more costly one of french design which is the most powerful i put between my speakers and near listening position, and 3 himalayan salt lamp which are the less powerful device for sure but anyway work for me under my desk with a glowing orange light that create anyway  also by his beauty a placebo effect ....The effect of all these ionization is very audible and easy to verify when you shut them on or off...

 

But Ionization is the LAST so call "tweak" to add to a room...

It is the ice on the cake with the cherres in room installation ....

If you put it first BEFORE passive material acoustic treatment and with no mechanical control over the room the odds are you will be in the camp of those objectivist who mock any audible sound effect not measured yet because you will not hear it in a bad room... An effect which is audible but stay subtle is no less spectacular than a more evident effect like improving timbre or dynamic or bass ....The cherries distributed on a chocolate cake change the taste of the cake even a few cherries will do....

Then beware...

Acoustic embedding control has a list of priorities:

--Passive material treatment...

--Mechanical control after Helmhotz....

--Schuman generators...

--Ionization of the room....

Perhaps the title of my thread would have better been named : gear fetichism and consumerism conditioning over acoustical method and some other embeddings controls...

But the subject matter is so vast and complex anyway and acoustic and psycho-acoustic are the more underestimated matter in audio and at the same time the most important matter...

Only consumer conditioning and gear fetichism conditioned ignorance explain why the essential of hearing and listening experience is considered secondary to the gear choice and "taste"....

It is the audiophile paradox: Sound is associated with the name of a favorite brand over acoustic knowledge...

RCA victor dog entered DEEP  in our subconcious understanding... The dog listened music or his master voice  from the pavillion of a turntable or gramophone WITHOUT ANY ROOM between his ears and the gear...

Think about it....

 

CAN WE HEAR THE SHAPE or SEE THE SOUND  OF A DRUM ?

 

The mathematician Marc Kac treated mathematically all aspects of the relation between the form of a drum geometrically and topologically and the "sound" or waves patterns emergence...

But can we hear the sound of a room and his acoustical content ?

For sure i cannot treat this problem, but the analogy is striking me....

I use this analogy to illustrate the way we can "see" the sound and the way in which sound waves waited to be seen so to speak...

 

 

But perhaps why it is possible to see sound and hear shape in some way to some degree  is explained by one of the most important thinker in mathematic and physic nowadays Alain Connes...

His last discovery is to interpret the zero of the dzeta function to be spectre not of some frequencies in some dynamical unknown  space but to be  an expression of the spectre of time itself... His demonstratiion use the distribution of primes musically to metaphorically make us understand time evolution to be fundamental...

i am not qualified for sure to decide that he is a genius and his idea is true.... But.... My intuition say so... Think by yourselves....