Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share you ideas and experiences.
Return to Room Acoustics Forum by Rives Audio
In Reply to: 45° corners good or bad posted by BERN on July 28, 2003 at 14:28:25:
Basically, you're trying to construct an enormous monitor speaker cabinet. The main issue is to deparallel all surfaces hat may produce standing waves. So, many slant the ceiling 5° up away from the speakers & likewise bevel the speaker walls as shown.♪ moderate Mart £ ♫ ☺ Planar Asylum
Follow Ups:
You'll still get standing waves, even without parrallel surfaces. They will become a lot harder to predict as a result of the angling of the surfaces and you may end up with standing wave behaviour across a bandwidth instead of at quite distinct and specific frequencies. They may even prove more troublesome as a result.I spent ages a bit over a year ago when we were house hunting, just looking for a house with a decent sized rectangular room for the system and failed to find one. I ended up with an L shaped room and have actually managed to get the best sound I've ever had. That's not a recommendation for an L-shaped room as a solution. Rather it's just meant to illustrate the thought that we spend a lot of time dreaming about our perfect room and we never quite get it. The doors and/or the windows are in the wrong spots, the layout or shape is wrong. Always there's something which never seems quite right, yet if we work with it and are prepared to trust our ears and our own sense of what is right for us, it always seems possible to get much better results than we anticipate.
My big beef with rooms with non-parrallel surfaces is that they really are a very high cost option, needing to be built to design or requiring expensive modifications to an existing room. I'm not certain they really are a cost effective option though they may work well in a cost no object situation. I have a sneaking suspicion that for the extra cost required by the shape modifications, you could do as well or better with sensible treatment in the rectangular room that could be builtt in the same space.
David Aiken
... reduces spikes & nulls which make treatments able to solve problems rather than just reduce them, IMHO.PS: I don't doubt there are excpetions to every rule but I wouldn't count on them.
♪ moderate Mart £ ♫ ☺ Planar Asylum
just pointing out that they can make it more expensive to build the room or modify an existing one, and they don't eliminate standing waves despite what some people think.As I said, I think the room without parrallel walls can probably be done very well, but the ones I've heard of have been treated too. I suspect they work fine in a cost no object situation but for most of us mired in the real world I suspect that investing the money saved by going with a normal room in appropriate treatments will produce a better result than what we'd get for the same money with the untreated non-parrallel walled room.
I have a friend who had a house built which was designed on curves, no parrallel walls (not for audio purposes - he just liked the idea) and he had a very rought time with the building process. I doubt he'd want to move away from more normal construction again. The construction is not easy and there's a lot more opportunity for blunders to be made.
David Aiken
Namely concave curves. Something funky can happen somethimes but those peculiar quirks are very speaker position sensitive. I can only assume something non-linear happens during a focusing reflection.
♪ moderate Mart £ ♫ ☺ Planar Asylum
this friend isn't into sound. He just had ideas about the house he wanted.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: