![]() |
Room Acoustics Forum by Rives Audio Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share you ideas and experiences. |
|
We are/were having a discussion of the Cathedrals after a great user review posted on Tweakers forum of AA. Initially, Ultrasystems (Cathedral distributor) listed the "Before" and "After" waterfall plots as being done by Rives Audio, but that no longer is so in the past 2 days.Anyway, a couple question popped up as to how to interpret the waterfall plots done by Rives on these panels. From the look of those posted on their website, it looks like the Cathedrals caused an approx. 16dB reduction in levels, across the board, from 20-200Hz.
Is this accurate?
Are the decay times nearly halved?
It was mentioned that these plots look exactly the same, just a much lower output level.Can someone at Rives help put these waterfall plots into perspective, performance-wise?
If true, these new "Venturi effect" panels are awesome. I personally need about 8 of them, which is a lot of money, but a hell of a lot cheaper, more effective, and less intrusive than any other acoustic approach.
I've enlarged and super-imposed dotted lines to make it easier to see the comparative dB levels.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - Help understanding the Rives Waterfall plots of Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels.... - darkmoebius 13:03:25 02/28/07 (38)
- Re: Help understanding the Rives Waterfall plots of Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels.... - Rives 16:20:56 05/16/07 (1)
- Oh. (nt) - Kal Rubinson 16:51:47 05/17/07 (0)
- Re: Help understanding the Rives Waterfall plots of Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels.... - robertopisa 12:29:51 05/08/07 (0)
- Re: Help understanding the Rives Waterfall plots of Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels.... - Ethan Winer 11:35:25 03/01/07 (32)
- I was hoping some technical explanation might appear.... - darkmoebius 11:44:03 03/03/07 (31)
- Re: I was hoping some technical explanation might appear.... - Ethan Winer 10:46:46 03/04/07 (30)
- Re: I was hoping some technical explanation might appear.... - David Aiken 13:07:31 03/04/07 (29)
- Re: I was hoping some technical explanation might appear.... - Ethan Winer 06:44:27 03/06/07 (27)
- Re: I was hoping some technical explanation might appear.... - David Aiken 14:27:18 03/07/07 (26)
- Re: I was hoping some technical explanation might appear.... - Ethan Winer 10:11:24 03/08/07 (24)
- Ethan and MahlerFreak - David Aiken 19:15:06 03/08/07 (23)
- Re: Ethan and MahlerFreak - MahlerFreak 16:00:33 03/09/07 (21)
- Re: Ethan and MahlerFreak - Ethan Winer 12:30:57 03/10/07 (20)
- Re: Ethan and MahlerFreak - David Aiken 22:17:51 03/10/07 (19)
- Re: Ethan and MahlerFreak - Ethan Winer 14:37:38 03/11/07 (1)
- See the hypothetical scenario in my response to MahlerFreak. How would you answer the questions posed? NT - David Aiken 17:39:30 03/11/07 (0)
- Re: Ethan and MahlerFreak - MahlerFreak 11:46:14 03/11/07 (16)
- Re: Ethan and MahlerFreak - David Aiken 15:24:22 03/11/07 (15)
- Re: Ethan and MahlerFreak - MahlerFreak 21:26:12 03/11/07 (14)
- Re: Ethan and MahlerFreak - David Aiken 23:45:46 03/11/07 (13)
- Re: Ethan and MahlerFreak - Champion 01:11:48 03/12/07 (12)
- An explanation/apology/conclusion to this thread? - caution: somewhat long but hopefully non-contentious - David Aiken 14:58:33 03/12/07 (11)
- Re: An explanation/apology/conclusion to this thread? - caution: somewhat long but hopefully non-contentious - MahlerFreak 19:41:29 03/13/07 (5)
- Re: An explanation/apology/conclusion to this thread? - caution: somewhat long but hopefully non-contentious - David Aiken 20:39:42 03/13/07 (4)
- Re: An explanation/apology/conclusion to this thread? - caution: somewhat long but hopefully non-contentious - Ethan Winer 14:54:13 03/14/07 (3)
- :-((((((((( - David Aiken 15:57:14 03/14/07 (2)
- Re: :-((((((((( - Ethan Winer 10:54:02 03/15/07 (1)
- Re: :-((((((((( - David Aiken 17:42:55 03/15/07 (0)
- Re: An explanation/apology/conclusion to this thread? - caution: somewhat long but hopefully non-contentious - LarryB 17:47:08 03/13/07 (3)
- Re: An explanation/apology/conclusion to this thread? - caution: somewhat long but hopefully non-contentious - Ethan Winer 14:56:25 03/14/07 (0)
- "Absence of proof is not…" states it a lot faster and better than I did. NT - David Aiken 19:58:07 03/13/07 (1)
- It's a good thing I don't get paid by the word - LarryB 08:18:06 03/14/07 (0)
- Re: An explanation/apology/conclusion to this thread? - caution: somewhat long but hopefully non-contentious - Champion 16:05:33 03/12/07 (0)
- Re: Ethan and MahlerFreak - Ethan Winer 14:53:31 03/09/07 (0)
- Re: I was hoping some technical explanation might appear.... - MahlerFreak 15:35:34 03/07/07 (1)
- Re: I was hoping some technical explanation might appear.... - Ethan Winer 14:59:21 03/05/07 (0)
- Re: Help understanding the Rives Waterfall plots of Cathedral Sound Acoustic Panels.... - MahlerFreak 10:11:45 03/01/07 (1)
- In addition..... - Kal Rubinson 19:47:27 03/04/07 (0)