 
|
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 |
192.94.94.105
I have a 16' wide x 5' high knee wall about 8' behind the listening position. The knee wall transitions to a 12/12 pitch ceiling that flattens out at 10' high. The angled portion of the ceiling is 7' "long" by the 16' width of the room (what's the trig term for the "z" of a right triangle? memory is failing me).
I'm sure there are reflections being bounced back into the room and towards the listening position from the angled ceiling (however, the presentation is quite good as it is now).
I am researching foam sheets/panels and such, and thought about building a couple of treated partitions that I could put behind the listening position while I am in the (semi-dedicated) room, then move them out of the way when I am not.
The other option would be to treat the reflective surfaces.
I could probably save a few bucks by building partitions, and I would not have to worry about mounting to the angled ceiling. But I am curious as to what affect each approach would have on the soundstaging and presentation. Anyone have experiece with either approach or both?
This is my first semi-dedicated room, and one that the wife spends VERY little time in, so WAF is not a concern (woohoo).
Looking forward to some insight! TIA...
Follow Ups:
It's not clear whether the sloping part of the roof slopes forward towards you from the vertical part or backwards away from you. I assume forward towards you. Since sound is reflected at an angle equal to the angle of incidence, that would mean direct sound from the speakers is going to be reflected down towards the back of the room behind you.
You said "I'm sure there are reflections being bounced back into the room and towards the listening position from the angled ceiling". That's true, but it's also true for every surface in the room, not only the sloping one. What is important isn't that it is reflecting sound towards you but what sound is being reflected. Since it won't be direct sound from the speakers, it will be sound that has already been reflected at least once from some other surface so we're talking about sound that's already part of the reflected sound field. That means it's less likely to cause problems than might be the case were it direct sound from the speakers causing a first reflection from an unlikely angle to reach the listening position.
You say the presentation is quite good as it is now. That means you don't have a problem that needs treating. That's not to say that you may not be able to get sound you prefer more by adding some acoustic treatment to the room but it does raise the question of which locations in the room would give you best results and the answer to that question depends a lot on what sort of result you want to achieve. Pretty well every room benefits from bass trapping at the junctions of room surfaces such as corners, especially at the points where 3 surfaces meet. After that, we get down to things like treating first reflections and discussions about which walls to treat and whether or not to add diffusion or to use diffusion instead of absorption. The answers to those questions tend to depend on matters of taste such as whether or not you want to increase or decrease imaging and soundstage effects. It isn't a case of there being one way to treat a room, there are several ways and they will give different sorts of results. Some people like it one way and some like it another way. Speaker type and the distance of the speakers from the front and side walls can also play a part in the results.
My feeling is that absorption is more beneficial than diffusion in a small room but others have the opposite view. There are those who think the front wall should be treated and others who prefer the rear wall treated. There are arguments for and against treatment of side walls. The angled part of your rear wall is a bit of a wild card making it difficult to predict whether it would be better to treat it or not. The simplest solution is to make a number of absorbing panels and try them out on the front wall, then on the back wall, and also on both in order to find out which approach you prefer. Also experiment on whether you prefer the side wall first reflection points treated or not. You can experiment with using things like blankets or quilts as quick and dirty test treatments in order to start getting a feel for the different sorts of presentation that will result from the differing treatment options.
The approach that is best is the one that you prefer. Some people like a presentation like that which you get seated towards the centre of a concert hall, a sound that isn't strong on imaging, while others like strong pin-point imaging and a very clearly defined soundstage. There's no right or wrong about that kind of choice, it's a matter of personal taste. Getting a result you like more than the result you get without treatment is what room treatment should deliver. If you like things less after treating the room in a particular way, then you've done something wrong and I think that's true whether or not other people agree with your assessment or not. It's your room and system and you're the person who will spend most time listening to it. If a given treatment strategy doesn't make you happy, then my view is that you're doing it wrong.
David Aiken
One point that I wanted to get across was the fact that this is the first room I will have the opportunity to treat, up to a point ($), without having to worry about appeasing my significant other.
When I am seated, the 5' knee wall is directly behind me about 8' back. The slanted ceiling slants towards me and meets the flat ceiling above my head and back about a foot or so. So the slanted ceiling is pointed downwards toward me. The speakers are obviously in front of me, toed in pretty hard as that position has given the best sound so far.
But I did not have them toed in as hard in my previous room in another house. But I sat further away from the speakers, and the room opened up behind me. I'm not so sure that the current presentation is going to keep me satisfied in the long-term.
I am looking at this as an opportunity to gain some experience in room treatment. With the room being nearly square at the floor, and two opposing slanted ceilings, I think absorption is the way to go. I have some foam bass traps in two corners. Third corner has built-in microwave and mini-frig. The other a computer desk.
Thanks for the input. I will give it another read and digest it a little better when time permits over the weekend.
Glad I guessed right on the direction of slope. Not difficult since it was the only way that really made sense but some architects can do some strange things.
The slope is behind you, ending just above you. If there are going to be problems with reflections, they will come from the highest part of the slope. the part closest to you, rather than from further back/lower down on the slope. That's because that will be the only area where you may possibly get a first reflection from. Later reflections arrive later in time and are weaker in level relative to the direct sound you hear and both of those factors minimise the problems they can cause.
I've actually got a soft spot for irregular shaped rooms—mine is L-shaped with 2 open archway entrances. That makes it awkward in some ways but I think it also helps in others. I suspect your slope may do the same and if you can minimise the problems you may find you quite like the room. The key to minimising the problems is actually speaker and listening position placement so my advice is to experiment with that first. Get the best results you can with that first, then fine tune those results with treatment. Apart from bass traps which are always best at surface junctions, the location of other treatments tends to depend on the speaker and listening position placement anyway.
Norm said in his reply "There is little that I haven't tried and have since abandoned". Maybe I've been a bit luckier but I've also abandoned some of what I've tried and over time I've also ended up modifying the placement of quite a bit of the treatment I haven't abandoned. I think you need to try different things out for yourself in order to find out both whether or not you like that sort of thing and also, if you like it, how much of it works best for you and where it works best for you. In the process you also learn a lot about what you like and that's a big help also.
My last bit of advice is not to worry about what other people think, just satisfy yourself. Not everyone likes the same thing so you can't satisfy everyone but, in my experience, if you get results that really make you happy you will find that most people will find things to enjoy in the sound you get. On the other hand, if you're unhappy with the results I think you'll tend to find others will also tend to be unhappy. We may not all like the same things but do something well enough to really satisfy yourself and I think you'll find that there will be aspects of that result which will also interest others, even if their preference is for something else overall.
So take your time, play around, and enjoy the process. You'll learn a lot about rooms and about your own tastes, get good results if you stick with it, and end up surprising yourself more than a few times along the way.
David Aiken
Unfortunately, this room is "semi-dedicated", meaning my 2 boys have a small entertainment center with a tv, dvd player and wii in it. And my chair is actually our old sofa, 7 1/2' long.
I measured the room this morning. The 2 walls with the slanted ceiling (facing each other) are 19 1/2' apart. The other 2 walls are 17' apart. One 19' wall has the entry hallway coming through it.
While this is not what most would consider to be a small room, when it comes to accommodating both "systems", placement becomes very limited. Keep in mind ac outlets, cable outlet, long sofa, computer desk, doorways (entry and closet) and the ability to be able to face one system at one moment, and the other system another moment. The only way to do that is to have them set up perpendicular to each other. So my system is set up along a 17' wall, the tv/wii along a 19' wall. The sofa is shared between the two systems.
Treating the side reflection areas would be relatively inexpensive. It's the slanted ceiling and all of it's nearly 120 sq ft that has me concerned. My idea is to build 2 partitions, about 4' wide each. They would be based on Risch's bass traps, but rectangular or oval in shape. Build them about 6' tall, and place them behind the couch while I am listening. A "mini-environment" if you will.
As far as cost and results goes, that seems like the most reasonable solution. I was hoping a fellow inmate had tried something similar and had some input. Thanks for the input thus far!
Sorry for the delay in replying—I missed seeing your post.
As I've said, I think with your current setup as described, the sloping wall may well not be a problem.
I can appreciate the space constraint issues and the inability to use part of the total room area because it's used for other purposes.
I don't think dividers, at least ones such as you've described, will do much for you. If you build them based on bass traps, they really won't provide effective bass trapping placed out in the open in the locations you describe. Bass traps work best close to room boundaries where pressure is highest. If you're going to make something to use as room dividers, then simply make ones similar to the panels you would use on walls at first reflection points. Since you won't get effective bass trapping at those locations, simply go for panels that work well at mid to high frequencies and experiment with their placement.
My preference would probably be not to worry with the dividers unless they serve a useful purpose in defining the respective room surfaces. If you do make them, I'd make 4 x 2' wide units rather than 2 x 4' wide units. You'll get the same amount of benefit and have more flexibility in how and where you place them. I recently experimented with putting 2 panels between the 2 I already had at the first reflection points on my front wall. That actually created a solid 4 panel wide expanse since the gap between the original 2 panels was almost exactly 2 panels wide. I found that while the really wide expanse helped in some ways, it "blanked out" too big a space in others and the results I got by moving the 2 panels from between the original 2 to positions outside them, closer to the corners and leaving an open space between each panel gave what I regarded as significantly better results. Smaller panels placed with space between them can give better results under some circumstances than the same area of larger panels.
David Aiken
David,
When I originally posted, I really didn't have a certain freq band in mind. And believe it or not, the bass really has not been an issue as I thought it would be with rear-ported floorstanders rated down to 24 cycles.
When I play tracks that are not too "busy" at moderate levels, the presentation is really good. Sitting closer, in a more intimate setting, is allowing me to hear subtle details I was not picking up on in the bigger room.
But I am a R&R fan, too. And it's the beaming highs that are fatiguing. I used my Rives Audio test cd the other day for some experimentation. I had the RS meter setting on the couch back cushion, so I was behind the couch and under the sloped ceiling. As the freq's got higher, the more fatiguing it became. But I also cannot help but think that these mid-high reflections are having an affect on the imaging/soundstaging on the mellower listening sessions.
The partitions I tried to describe would be made from pieces of 2x8 in the form of a component rack, wrapped with wire mesh and then some sort of acoustic material (mineral wool, recycled cotton panels, fiberglass or foam). I would place them behind the couch during listening sessions, diffusing and absorbing first-arrival, and reflections that are making their way back to the listening position from behind.
The downside to panels is that they would be taking up floor space while not in use. The upside is that they would be less expensive. Treating the walls will require more acoustic material, but it would be a permanent installation up off the floor. I am leaning more towards the permanent install.
So here is where my plan stands for now: buy 2'x4' panels of acoustic absorption material. Choices in descending order of cost are wedge foam, recycled cotton, fiberglass, mineral wool. That is misleading though as the fiberglass and mineral wool would require fabric covering, bringing the cost up to the cotton and foam level. Buy some 4'x8' sheets of coroplast from the local FastSigns franchise, cut it to a 7' length, and glue 3 panels to it spaced equally apart. Remove the excess coroplast from between the panels except for some "tabs" for mounting to the sloped ceiling. The goal is a mounting secure enough for an "upside-down" installation with minimal intrusion to the drywall.
I could also put single panels at first-reflection points, and more importantly, the entry hallway coming into the room. The hallway acts as a waveguide, making the sound just as loud if not louder outside the room. I installed a solid-core door and weather stripping, but any listening done after bedtime requires low volume levels. It would be nice to be able to turn it up a little louder without worrying about too much of the sound making it's way past the door.
Coroplast comes in black, as does the cotton and foam. The room is painted burgundy including the ceiling, so black will blend in and be less visible with the lights low.
Again, thanks for your input. Let me know if you detect any flaws in my plan. I would like to move forward with this project immediately following the holidays.
High frequencies actually get absorbed by air though the amount of absorption depends on air volume, and also tend to get absorbed a bit by a lot of room surface materials such as plasterboard. Your room size should be working for you here because of the increased air volume so if you've got a high frequency problem my guess is that you have a lot of reflective surface area in the room which are reflective at high frequencies, things like uncovered glass window areas, a hard reflective floor surface with no floor covering, stone walls, and possibly even a lot of glass or similar surfaced furniture.
The excess mids/highs could have an effect on imaging/sooundstaging if they are coming from the first reflection points so I'd map those points out and see what kind of materials you have at those points.
If it's the nature and size of the reflective surfaces in the room that is the problem, I'd start with things like curtains, a rug between you and the speakers, removing any highly reflective furniture I could, and so on. If you have reflective furniture providing first reflections, then I'd move that furniture elsewhere in the room if I couldn't remove it. TV screens are reflective at high frequencies and can be covered with a blanket or quilt during listening sessions. If that doesn't tame things enough, then adding absorption for the mids to highs would be necessary. When adding panels I'd start with first reflection points but you may need to add some elsewhere if that doesn't do enough to suit you.
You said you couldn't move the listening chair to test out other placements because it's a sofa. If that's the case, leave it where it is, grab a lightweight chair and experiment with other locations to see if you can find one that works better, with or without some speaker position adjustment as well. When you've found a location consider whether you can move the sofa there. If not, then consider using a comfortable, easily movable chair at that location for listening sessions.
David Aiken
Walls and ceiling are textured drywall, not smooth drywall as is found on the east coast. Floor is plush carpet. There is a maple entertainment center on the left, same arrangement as in the old house in the bigger room.
I did not realize that drywall was capable of absorbing highs. Getting a center vocal image that stood out from the rest of the soundstage required a hard toe-in of the speakers. I have since tweaked my rig and improved the sound a tad, so perhaps less toe-in will still give me a good center image while not directing the highs at me?
My concern with the speakers facing more forward with less toe-in is that they will be facing that 7' long by 16' wide sloped ceiling surface. But experimentation will determine whether or not that concern is a valid one.
I will play with speaker placement as time permits. Like I said, I wasn't going to move forward with treatment until after the holidays, giving our credit card a chance to cool off. I will experiment and keep you posted. Thanks again...
Drywall doesn't absorb much at high frequencies but it absorbs some and is less reflective at those frequencies as a result.
Toe in depends a lot on room and placement. If you have the speakers pointing right at you, you'll hear more high frequency content in the direct sound than if you have them pointing straight ahead down the room and are listening off the tweeter axis. Is the high frequency balance more to your liking with the speakers firing straight ahead rather than pointing at you? If so, then I expect that you may find that leaving them that way and using absorption at the first reflection points solves your high frequency problem and gives you your centre image. You need to experiment. You can also experiment with intermediate amounts of toe in.
If you simply change toe in with the speakers in their current position and face them down the room, what you're going to do is move the direct sound more off axis and the move the side wall first reflection more on axis compared to the situation with them toed in facing you. That will reduce the high frequency content in what you hear but you say it weakens your centre image. Moving the speakers closer together will move them further from the side walls. If you face them down the room in that position you'll get the same axis changes as facing them down the room in their current position, but to a slightly different degree for the direct sound and the reflected sound, and you may get a stronger centre image because you're also shortening the direct sound path and increasing the first reflection path, weakening that reflection relative to the level of the direct sound. That may give you an acceptable high frequency balance and strengthen your centre image without the need to treat the side wall first reflection points. That's also worth trying but you may find you prefer the speakers further apart. You really need to try these sort of changes out to see what the result is and whether it gives you what you want.
The sloping ceiling may or may not be a problem. I think there's a fair chance that you won't get a first reflection from it but checking that is going to be awkward. What you need to do is sit in your normal listening position facing backwards so you can see the ceiling and get someone to slide a mirror over the ceiling surface. If you can see the drivers in the mirror at any point you've identified a first reflection point. Trying to do a scale drawing and seeing if you can find a reflection path that way is going to be very awkward because of the fact that the reflection plane will itself angle over the sloping surface at an angle and you'd really need 3D modelling software to try and plot the path theoretically. My feeling is that because the slope peaks behind you, you won't get a first reflection from it. For that reason I'm not as worried by the sloping surface as you are and I think it may even be a plus for you rather than a negative. I don't think toe in will affect the reflection paths from the sloped surface.
I wouldn't try treating reflection points until I'd explored placement options. Get the best sound you can without treating reflection points and then refine that result with treatment if necessary.
David Aiken
I will definitely play with speaker positioning before forking out the bucks for treatments.
In my old room, I had a system that could do lots of different music right. Jam sessions with R&R were not fatiguing, and quieter sessions had a nice soundstage w/a holographic center vocal. But as stated earlier I was missing some details that I am now picking up on in a smaller room with closer proximity to the speakers.
I dread the thought that perhaps this system in this room is not suited to the jam sessions. I do not want to change my listening habits, but I accept the fact that high-end systems can be best suited to some types of music and listening styles as opposed to others (Maggies and jazz, for example). Perhaps my current set-up is incapable of accommodating all of my music to my liking? Only experimentation and time in the listening position will tell.
I will keep you posted on findings as time permits. Thanks again!
I also agree that you will need to get some experience with room treatment. There is little that I haven't tried and have since abandoned. All I can say is try everything but expect to sell most of it.
Consider 2 movable testable options:
1) Freestanding absorption panels.
2) Room lenses.
I think the latter might work very well for your situation. You can DIY them very cheaply and easily from some wood and 2.5" PVC pipes. The recipe is here in the archives. Make several of them, say at least 2, but more like 3-6 sets of triplets. You can move them all around your room and test many of the favored placements.
Post a Followup:
| 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 ]
