 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
174.72.186.110
I thought it might be nice to talk audio a bit
I'm in the middle of rebuilding my dedicated listening room to get the best possible acoustics I can. The idea was to adjust the dimensions to make the room modes more manageable. And to remove the entire ceiling and turn the entire attic/crawl space into a massive wide band velocity bass trap. Then sound proof the room to lower the noise floor and then kill all the wall and floor reflections with some high tech absorption.
The goal is to kill the room as much as possible from 20hz-20khz and isolate it acoustically as much as is practically possible.
This should make an ideal space for a BACCH SP /Sanders 10E two channel system.
The trap is about 3,000 cubic feet with the first 8" being Rockwool and the rest R-11 fiberglass insulation. The walls and floor are being sound proofed using the Soundproof Cow system and the wall absorption will be done with Quietfiber from Acoustiblok.
Follow Ups:
decided to go with near field planars. Golden ears and he is a happy camper.
I would certainly consider something like that as a possible alternative to $50K risky construction investment.
If the construction doesn't meet your hopes then what? Tear it all down and start over? Can't sell the room as used equipment right?
Good Riddance !
The reverberant field of the original recording venue, as captured by the recording and decoded by Atmos, could be reproduced with extreme accuracy, since the room itself will be imposing very little of its own sonic signature to confuse or obscure that information.
Of course you get some of that same benefit with 2-channel, just not as immersive.
that approach isn't taken in theaters?
Nor with very high end home flavors like from this retired cinematographer's system ?
Later got the theater of the decade accolade.
It is much less expensive to use loudspeakers that have high directivity than treat the room effectively and the larger the room (like stadiums etc) the larger the difference in cost is.
For example the IMAX sound systems being up dated the last few years use a proprietary Synergy horns made under license for mains, surround and overheads while the larger E-magine theaters use standard Synergy horns and custom subwoofers..
I doubt Mr. Hahn was faced with similar budgetary concerns with his massive project.
View YouTube Video
In commercial sound, one is often replacing a sound system the person responsible for, isn't happy with (or they wouldn't be considering a change) and it's usually concert style speakers that were used.
The larger the room, the more difficult it is to get good sound.
In that case, a sale often involves an on site demonstration from the companies under consideration.
That is how we came to be, we are in about half of the 100,000+ seat stadiums now, those side by side demo's and the results other heard bypassed the need to have a marketing department or advertise much.
Compared to a large arrays of sources, a full range horn that radiates as if it had one driver, if powerful enough can cover an entire stadium clearly, much more clearly than a concert array. The picture is one of those, although FSU, used 2 of them.
In a larger home system, this would be a consultant that specifies everything not the owner and in very large applications it is often a consultant that designs the overall system.
I'm curious, if you can share, details of the amplification used to drive your loudspeakers in a 100,000 or 40,000 seat stadium and an IMAX theatre.
Sure, Imax, i don't know, those are made under license, but the sports venues and EDM events we are more involved with often use the 10K and 20K amplifiers (10Kw and 20Kw) in a rack with a controller. I found an old installations article that shows a typical medium size sports venue and the amplifiers . That is a "distributed system" while other venues require an end or center system.
The largest venues often have an air conditioned room that is able to keep all the old style amps cool, there one might have had 80 old style power amplifiers while with the modern amplifiers it might only take 10 to 20.
the question of applying semi-anechoic room treatments (which prompted my first response) to improve the HT experience. The former cinematographer who had consultants design his multi-hundred thousand dollar room doesn't seem to agree.Compared to a large arrays of sources, a full range horn that radiates as if it had one driver...
BTW, you're preaching to the choir to one who has used single driver full range electrostats since 1977. There's no need for the "as if" qualifier. :)
Edits: 03/28/24
I can relate to electrostatics, in the 80's i made probably a dozen pairs of large panels and built a direct drive tube amplifier for some of them..
It was "fixing" my Boss's ESL-63's in the 90's, that radiate like a point source and the levitation sources at work that made me think more about how sound radiates.
At 4 feet sitting on the floor the ESL63's were excellent but i wanted +10dB capacity and to go down to low bass when present.
So far as the small room design consultants, we do sell to jobs some do but most of the smaller speakers go into the recording and video production area.
I can relate to electrostatics, in the 80's i made probably a dozen pairs of large panels and built a direct drive tube amplifier for some of them.
I met Jim Strickland in 1976 when he brought a pair of his Acoustat X with 3kV servo amps (using 6HB5 horizontal deflection tubes) to Atlanta for TAS reviewer JWC. There was a dealer there that evening as well and picked up the line immediately. I later worked for him and got mine. Challenge is delivering enough power that way. Those amps were good for about 100 watts each and used a modest TL072 opamp based input stage. Later versions moved to a dual transformer approach (to tame the impedance curve) using your choice of amp. The bias on my current SL stats is variable up to about 12kV depending upon humidity.
At 4 feet sitting on the floor the ESL63's were excellent but i wanted +10dB capacity and to go down to low bass when present.
Such exists today with enough diaphragm area using a scalable design like that of Dr. West. You can make them darn big if you want with controlled radiation. ;)
Wow!! (in full crocodile Dundee voice) now that's what i call an electrostatic speaker!!
Where was that do you know?
is their controlled radiation over a 22, 45 or 90 degree angle. Like your designs, you can employ either horizontal or vertical arrays to increase coverage. Those are 922s.
LDS Conference Center downtown SLC.
> It is much less expensive to use loudspeakers that have high directivity than treat the room effectively and the larger the room (like stadiums etc) the larger the difference in cost is.
Yes, horns are by far the least affected by room acoustics, though reverberation can't be mitigated by horns. I've tried all sorts of speakers and the directional nature of carefully-chosen horns means they can be placed close to walls and room treatment is often unnecessary - apart from obvious features such as furnishings, carpet, etc that most home are likely to have anyway.
Good horns can be expensive, but compared with the OP's project are very cost effective.
nt
full IMAX theaters have quite a budget. :)
Or are going to be one of the first (on earth) ?
With your room being built with specific gear in mind, what happens if you decide to go with other, more mainstream gear in the future?
Would you have to redo the room, or just add some reflective, non-absorbent surfaces?
"Man, that mouse is Awesome." - Kaemon (referring to Jerry, of Tom and Jerry fame)
I would simply cover up some of the absorption with some thin reflective panels. That way, the absorptive stuff underneath the reflective overlays might still absorb some bass.
Edits: 03/25/24
toaster.
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
Keith Emerson's Moog Modular!I loved EL&P in high school. They were a gateway band to enjoying classical. Brain Salad Surgery was a bit too much for many of my classmates at the time. :)
Cable management was a consideration for our major home reno a couple of years ago. Previously, there was such a snarl with the HT. I had the contractor put cable chases in the wall and floor to hide as much as possible. Tucked away what gear I could in a hidden closet. I later discovered the Oppo remote would go through the canvas photos. Now easy to walk behind the Acoustats without tripping on anything.
Edits: 03/23/24
Reminds me of the days in the early 70's when I was a student at Cal Arts and Morton Subotnick, a pioneer in electronic music, was there with his synthesizers. The Moog was popular. He's still at it at 90 I understand.
I was at CalArts in the late 70s! :) He certainly is a character. I've always liked him. He'll be 91 next month. :)
one of the guys at Fat Julian's Audio in Atlanta introduced me to Oxygene and I was hooked. It was a popular sonic backdrop at Fernbank Planetarium...
View YouTube Video
The ceiling chamber you're including is very interesting and something you don't hear of too often. One of the best venues for Music I've ever heard is the Overture Center in Madison Wi. For handling bass they have a three story high open chamber above the adjustable ceiling for low frequencies to be trapped and dissipated. I've seen the local symphony orchestra there a few times as well as some other concerts. Two comments I remember that the performers made about the acoustics were Doc Watson and Leahy, a Canadian family band. Both commented that the acoustics were so good you could record an album in here. Doc Watson commented that it had just the right amount of reverberation. The acoustic designer was a Chicago firm, Kirkegaard Associates
A great live performance venue.
Gsquared
The idea was to adjust the dimensions to make the room modes more manageable.I lucked into having a both generously sized (25x16) and pretty near to Golden Ratio (1.56) primary dimensions that empirically provide very linear response in Schroeder land using measured placement and traps.
I confess my preference is for having natural room ambience controlled by diffusion.
May you find success with what you seek.
Edits: 03/22/24
Adios.
Given the email you sent me, I should be banning you forever.
I've asked nicely for you to be less argumentative. Most inmates don't like constant bickering. You just need to state your position and leave it at that, not into unending back and forth posts.
It takes two to tango, so don't tell me that it's someone else's fault.
Just consider your part in these debates and understand that you won't change others positions and learn to simple agree to disagree.
Do what you want or not.
-Rod
*
> Then sound proof the room to lower the noise floor and then kill all the wall and floor reflections with some high tech absorption.
> The goal is to kill the room as much as possible from 20hz-20khz and isolate it acoustically as much as is practically possible.
Think twice (or at least reconsider) about that much deadening of reflections, etc.
You may end up listening to music in, effectively, an anechoic chamber or an open field. Neither would be good - in fact pretty dreadful. Outdoor concerts have to add a reflective surface behind the orchestra to prevent a "dead" sound and anechoic chambers are only used to measure equipment without the benefit (for normal listening) of reflections.
You need reflected sound but nodes and peaks should be avoided by the room design and furnishings or artificial means such as bass traps.
I'm no expert in room acoustics but I started with a difficult room - huge, semi-circular, low ceiling) and set about improving matters with conventional methods - furniture, carpets, curtains, etc. I think I've achieved a pretty good room acoustically without resorting to room treatment and certainly not "room correction" DSP.
Good luck anyway
"Think twice (or at least reconsider) about that much deadening of reflections, etc."
I have given it a lot of thought and consulted numerous experts including the man who created the BACCH SP.
"You may end up listening to music in, effectively, an anechoic chamber or an open field. Neither would be good - in fact pretty dreadful."
I think we have to be careful with our terms here. "Music" is an overly broad term. I will be listening to a two channel stereo with the BACCH SP effectively in an anechoic chamber.
That's the goal. Eliminate the room, eliminate cross talk and get the full stereo effect, spatial cues and ambient cues on the recording with zero interference from the room.
"Outdoor concerts have to add a reflective surface behind the orchestra to prevent a "dead" sound and anechoic chambers are only used to measure equipment without the benefit (for normal listening) of reflections."
I don't think an outdoor orchestral concert is in any way analogous to stereo playback of an orchestra recorded in a reverberant acoustic space.
My room won't be an anechoic chamber. Those cost seven figures to build and are not practical domestic spaces. I think there is more urban legend surrounding the effects of actual anechoic chambers than real substance. I don't know of any first hand accounts of someone setting up a proper two channel stereo in an anechoic chamber and listening to it. I don't think you could do that given their size constraints and floor or lack there of.
"You need reflected sound but nodes and peaks should be avoided by the room design and furnishings or artificial means such as bass traps."
Well Edgar Choueiri, the rocket scientist who created the BACCH SP says zero room reflections is the ideal. He is less worried about bass trapping because he feels the BACCH ORC will deal with room modes. I am trapping the **** out of the room anyway because I want that optimum impulse response all the way down to 20 hz.
Not sure how a bass trap is "artificial." It just absorbs bass energy and prevents bass wave interaction which created the peaks and dips.
"I'm no expert in room acoustics but I started with a difficult room - huge, semi-circular, low ceiling) and set about improving matters with conventional methods - furniture, carpets, curtains, etc. I think I've achieved a pretty good room acoustically without resorting to room treatment and certainly not "room correction" DSP."
Cool!
You said, "My room won't be an anechoic chamber. Those cost seven figures to build and are not practical domestic spaces."
Earlier you said, "I will be listening to a two channel stereo with the BACCH SP effectively in an anechoic chamber."
?
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
> Earlier you said, "I will be listening to a two channel stereo with the BACCH SP effectively in an anechoic chamber."
And sound in an anechoic chamber will be BAD. Why even consider this approach, I wonder? Music needs a room around its source (musical instruments or loudspeakers) to be enjoyable for its audience.
tell us how you know this because you've witnessed live or recorded music in a chamber
You can read about, eg Gilbert Briggs talks about these in his audio books. It is like listening to music in an open field. This also has no reflective surfaces.
That's very close, outdoors one is left with the loudspeaker alone and is the best place to hear what they do...plus a floor or ground bounce.
Out doors, you don't have the progressive containment that lifts the bass at the couch and produces wall reflections the degrade the stereo image between the speakers.
An anechoic chamber "just feels wrong", partly because it sounds like that AND that your floating in space (assuming you are walking out on the wire grid inside the chamber). That part is also weird as the grid is springy and at mid height in the room so look down and you are in mid air and your brain says there is nothing around you, a very unfamiliar situation.
We can all speculate on the outcome of the OP's project, but, in the end, it's his project with a very specific sound system and very specific acoustical goals, and for which he has consulted experts who know their stuff. Who knows how it will turn out? He's done his research, and the project is in progress , so I think it's best to not speculate or "advise" further, and just let it be. Speculating/advising in the middle of a project can result in a mish-mash of directions/concepts/ideas/etc., and can result in delays, disaster and wasted money (not to forget what his wife might say when it doesn't get her approval).
In any case, he wrote "adios" the other day, so, "whatever".
One other thought: There will be a floor, so, not anechoic.
*********
We are inclusive and diverse, but dissent will not be tolerated.
...not to forget what his wife might say when it doesn't get her approvalHe can do what he chooses with the 16x11 room and furnishings.
I'm having trouble wrapping my head around spending $50k on a space smaller than my bedroom.
Edits: 03/26/24
Back in '75 I went to Bell Labs in Murray Hill NJ with the son of one of the Engineers for a tour of the whole facility and spent the entire day there.
Among the technologies we witnessed like the lasering of integrated circuits and LED's, we also spent some time in the largest Anechoic Chamber on the East Coast, maybe the world. It was in a separate building bigger than a basketball arena, and 5 stories divided in 2. We were suspended on a bouncy mesh floor where testing was being conducted. They had speakers and assorted devices they were testing in there as well. Bell Labs was legendary until the court case which they lost. Now we have AT&T and Lucent, good gosh what anti-progess
The objective of Testing like this should be obvious. No reflections from any boundaries including floors. I worked in one chamber for the military in California and it had a floor to stand on and wasn't nearly as large and more like a house room with a lot of wedges on the walls. I'm familiar with chambers.
When my friend turned around and spoke out loud, all I perceived was his voice out the back of his vibrating skull, not his throat which was not there at all. Reflections were down to infinitesimal levels. I was there, I heard it. If you listened to a stereo in it you would hear reflections only off the speaker and enclosures themselves.
I would not "call it BAD" whatsoever. I and anyone else would call it "the sound of a source with no or insignificant reflections" (as low as you can go on Earth).
The sound in it was much different from "Outside" where sound reflects off the grass and ground and whatever equipment is being used.
Time-Delay Spectrometry or variations thereof are used now because chambers like this one are now long gone
and what was the purpose of that anechoic space? My guess is that it was solely for measuring the response of speakers and other noise-emitting devices. It was surely not a place to enjoy listening to music. Reflections are required to listen to music in such as way it resembles a live performance.
...pretzel logic I would say.
I said you were wrong about it sounding BAD, remember?
Lets forget about it, have a nice weekend
Apparently, like an anechoic chamber, hypocrisy has no boundaries. :-)
"All thoughts are prey to some beast" - Bill Callahan
"I'll be your mirror
Reflect what you are" - Lou Reed
"Blind belief in authority is the greatest enemy of truth." - Albert Einstein
The $1-million plus listening room I worked on at The University of the South in Sewanee TN was originally designed with no engineered architectural materials for diffusion. I persuaded them to add diffusion panels--what a difference.BTW, they just upgraded to the Wilson Audio Chronosonic XVXes.
john
Edits: 03/22/24
and for the same or less money could have had Sound Labs ...
Lack of skill dictates economy of style. - Joey Ramone
The Sound Labs and the Wilsons both have their issues.
I would not opt for either in a room designed for multiple listeners. That's where the Toole/Olive based speaker designs really shine. Wide even dispersion with flat on axis response and smooth off axis response is ideal for such applications.
I'm going with no diffusion. The optimum room for this system is no room. So it's 100% absorption.
Diffusion in a multi seat room like the one in your picture that aims for a wide sweet spot makes sense. You want an even diffuse sound field like a movie theater for all the listeners to get decent sound.
But for any BACCH SP based system the less reflections and reverb the better. The improved transparency you get with a near pure impulse response from the speakers is one of the things that makes such a system a major leap in audio playback. Combine that with the extreme low distortion highly directional lighting fast impulse response you get from the Sanders 10Es and you are approaching near perfect two channel audio.
I am considering adding a pair of Perlisten D212s to max out the resolution of the system down to 20 hz.
But one project at a time.
1) Well, Scott, you got it right about Sewanee--we had to design a room with very good sound for 15 listeners (the students) and "good enough" sound for two listeners (the faculty members consigned to the rear corners).
2) Perlisten uses Thin Ply Carbon Diaphragm materials, which are one of the two most major innovations in driver design in at least 10 years, if not 20. (The other recent major innovation is Purifi's Neutral Surround.)
Of course, Rockport and SB Acoustics and Ex Machina Soundworks also use TPCD materials in their drivers.
Here's a link to a loudspeaker review I did that has lots of TPCD information and links.
john
And I do appreciate the warning! Even in consulting a number of experts there was some differences of opinion on ideal room acoustics.
Thanks for the opinion on the Perlisten. They look like serious subwoofers on every level. Their measured distortion all the way up to 110 db spl is way below audibility.
I will check out your review
"The optimum room for this system is no room."
Should work perfectly with your "none System". :-)
"All thoughts are prey to some beast" - Bill Callahan
"I'll be your mirror
Reflect what you are" - Lou Reed
"Blind belief in authority is the greatest enemy of truth." - Albert Einstein
And doesn't actually read the book?
"Are you one of those guys who just looks at the pictures? And doesn't actually read the book?"
1) I'm not quite sure what the context is of the questions you are asking.
2) In general, it depends on the book, Scott.
3) Or, perhaps I should take a suggestion from your AA profile system page and reply with "None of your business.". :-)
Did you miss the smiley face following my posted comment? My comment was meant to be humorous. After reading your post, I was curious about what your system was, so I went to your AA profile and it listed your system as "none". Hence, my humorous comment followed by a smiley face. Apparently, I should have referenced your AA profile system page. Such is the nature of communication on online forums.
"All thoughts are prey to some beast" - Bill Callahan
"I'll be your mirror
Reflect what you are" - Lou Reed
"Blind belief in authority is the greatest enemy of truth." - Albert Einstein
"Or, perhaps I should take a suggestion from your AA profile system page and reply with "None of your business.". :-)"
I don't pay much attention to my profile page or anyone else's.
I just thought it was an odd response to a post that quite literally lists the relevant components of the system going into the room and how the room and the system are meant to work with each other.
No biggie.
"I just thought it was an odd response to a post that quite literally lists the relevant components of the system going into the room and how the room and the system are meant to work with each other."
Got it. Fair enough.
"No biggie"
Agreed.
"All thoughts are prey to some beast" - Bill Callahan
"I'll be your mirror
Reflect what you are" - Lou Reed
"Blind belief in authority is the greatest enemy of truth." - Albert Einstein
Why are you here then?
"WE all pay attention to profiles and posts"
You speak for everybody?
" AA has become a joke " ...Why are you here then?"
To talk about audio. Why are you here? Why get involved in this thread? You don't seem to be interested in the audio aspect of it. So why are you posting on this thread?
So why do you keep being difficult?
I suppose that you just believe that you are a know it all, so why would anyone care about your posts?
-Rod
And how much is this upgrade going to set you back? ;-)
The dimensions of the room will not be as straightforward as with a normal room. The finished room boundaries will be hiding the absorbent material on the walls and hiding the open ceiling.
The dimensions of those boundaries will be approximately 16'2" X 11' 4" X 7' 8" But none of those boundaries will be reflective. So speaker and listener positioning will not be as restricted as with normal reflective boundaries.
Cost is looking like $45,000.00- $50,000.00 But that will depend on just how effective the ceiling trap is. On paper it should act as a near perfect pressure release for everything under the Schroeder frequencies. And the wall and floor absorption should kill everything above those frequencies.
But I am prepared to add a few targeted diaphragmatic traps if needed. I also still have my two PSI active traps to use first before adding any additional specific frequency targeting bass traps.
Looks like a nice project. Good luck. I just completed a build with double 5/8" drywall, green glue, resilient channel, 2x 6 stud frames with blown cellulose. Ceiling same construction but with 8" blown cellulose.
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
