Hahn played violin with the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra at age 11. You would have booed her off the stage for her temerity.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
How NOT to set up speakers and room treatment ( Goldensound)
- Thread starter Nkam
- Start date
- Status
Hahn played violin with the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra at age 11. You would have booed her off the stage for her temerity.
Last edited:
tuga
Major Contributor
Definitely GS's.
Since you're asking: the Salon2's and 4 subs in the GS room, thanks.
You seem to be annoyed by the guy's attitude, age and the fact he has a dedicated listening room. But try to focus on what was actually said in the video. This is not 'snake oil power conditioners and cable lifters' stuff folks.
- Thread Starter
- #245
like I said.
he should be the next speaker at Munich high end with a white board and presentation with a Q&A at the end.
lol
now THAT is a vid I would love to watch.
- Thread Starter
- #246
That's not what I said. I said that if you have an empty dedicated listening room like his, you are more than welcome to use acoustic products. The problem with his approach there was not that he used acoustic products. But that he was teaching people to chase all reflections seen in a measurement with one microphone (instead of two ears and a brain) and stomp them out using absorbers. This is just wrong. Yes, you need absorption but start with the carpet, put in the chair and rest of bits in the room and see where you stand. If you need some absorption, put them behind the speakers/listening spot. He instead chased the usual first reflections on the left and right which is just bad idea as I and Dr. Toole have explained thousands of times.
Put another way, do NOT focus on measurements above transition band of a few hundred hertz. It will mislead you and big time. Your ears do not hear what the instrument shows.
For bass frequencies, yes, you measure. And once you measure, your weapon of choice will be DSP/Equalization. Just pulling down a couple of peaks gets you most of the way there if not where you want to stop. Then use the target curve to create a slop from bass to highs that is to your liking. Do not waste space and money on "bass traps."
For all of the above, you need to know what you are doing as far as setting up the smoothing in REW. The measurements he showed tells me he is applying way too much smoothing for bass. In addition, he may also be using the wrong vertical axis for proper assessment of flatness of the response.
The problem isn't that treatment doesn't work. The problem is rather that many commercial products don't work well. Or that not enough isn't being used. Wrong placement is another cause.
But it's not true either that one necessarily have to cover whole walls for effect. Let me show you a few examples.
Here's the response on the left channel with no side wall treatment.
And here we have added two panels on each side. Dimension of each panel were 120x60 cm (4'x2').
Another example where we have a dip at around 120 Hz and measured with both channels:
And adding one panel on each rear side wall (behind speakers to deal with SBIR). Dimension of panel 120x80x10.4 cm:
If we increase the size of these two panels to 150x80 cm, we can see an higher effect because we're covering more surface area:
And finally a measurement where two panels on each rear side wall were used (total of four panels). Panel dimension for all: 150x80x10.4 cm. The increased dip here at 33 Hz was related to some diffusers removed from the front wall, so disregard that.
So we can see some good effect with only two panels, but better with four panels where the dip has more or less been removed.
However, if we are to see huge differences at very low frequencies, more surface area needs to be covered. Below is an example of before and after where two short walls were covered completely. Waterfall is important to show, since it also shows what frequencies ring out in time.
Frequency respons ovelay before and after treatment:
Waterfal of lows before:
Waterfall after treatment:
There's no way the use of EQ could have achieved the same result as treatment, but obviously few can add so much treatment and it would require a dedicated room. The treatment used were highly reflective of mids and highs, so no overdampening. Cost was low.
There are many before and after graphs at Gearspace that shows treatment of lows can be highly efficient. But I also very much agree that many commercial bass traps either don't work well and that adding a few in each corner isn't going to make a big difference in the frequency response. In the time domain, a few highly effective bass traps can be quite effective though with less resonances and ringing and which can be very audible.
While it's possible to also achieve a good result with multiple subwoofers, that's not going to address the most sensitive bass area/low mids above approximately 80-100 Hz. A benefit with quality treatment is that it addresses a larger frequency area, it always works in the important time domain, and it improves the whole room and not only a specific position in the room.
As for lateral reflections, I want to mention that by not treating it; the frequency response will generally suffer compared to good treatment. And we see that even those with speakers with a good power response often prefer treatment over no treatment when they actually experiment for themselves. The question here is if a short listening section in a specific room is actually transferable to what we prefer over time, with different types of music in rooms with different geometries and distances to side walls.
But it's not true either that one necessarily have to cover whole walls for effect. Let me show you a few examples.
Here's the response on the left channel with no side wall treatment.
And here we have added two panels on each side. Dimension of each panel were 120x60 cm (4'x2').
Another example where we have a dip at around 120 Hz and measured with both channels:
And adding one panel on each rear side wall (behind speakers to deal with SBIR). Dimension of panel 120x80x10.4 cm:
If we increase the size of these two panels to 150x80 cm, we can see an higher effect because we're covering more surface area:
And finally a measurement where two panels on each rear side wall were used (total of four panels). Panel dimension for all: 150x80x10.4 cm. The increased dip here at 33 Hz was related to some diffusers removed from the front wall, so disregard that.
So we can see some good effect with only two panels, but better with four panels where the dip has more or less been removed.
However, if we are to see huge differences at very low frequencies, more surface area needs to be covered. Below is an example of before and after where two short walls were covered completely. Waterfall is important to show, since it also shows what frequencies ring out in time.
Frequency respons ovelay before and after treatment:
Waterfal of lows before:
Waterfall after treatment:
There's no way the use of EQ could have achieved the same result as treatment, but obviously few can add so much treatment and it would require a dedicated room. The treatment used were highly reflective of mids and highs, so no overdampening. Cost was low.
There are many before and after graphs at Gearspace that shows treatment of lows can be highly efficient. But I also very much agree that many commercial bass traps either don't work well and that adding a few in each corner isn't going to make a big difference in the frequency response. In the time domain, a few highly effective bass traps can be quite effective though with less resonances and ringing and which can be very audible.
While it's possible to also achieve a good result with multiple subwoofers, that's not going to address the most sensitive bass area/low mids above approximately 80-100 Hz. A benefit with quality treatment is that it addresses a larger frequency area, it always works in the important time domain, and it improves the whole room and not only a specific position in the room.
As for lateral reflections, I want to mention that by not treating it; the frequency response will generally suffer compared to good treatment. And we see that even those with speakers with a good power response often prefer treatment over no treatment when they actually experiment for themselves. The question here is if a short listening section in a specific room is actually transferable to what we prefer over time, with different types of music in rooms with different geometries and distances to side walls.
- Thread Starter
- #249
On the subject of reflections.
Once again , it’s evolution. Our brains expect some reflections
he totally ruined the reflections by eliminating all of them.
probably because he thinks speakers should sound like headphones.
his example below is dumb as nails. He says huge improvement.
yeah , you know what else would make that graph look even better in his mind?
an anechoic chamber , by the way he thinks.
here are also guys who do this for a living.
the funny thing is that eliminating so many side reflections is an OLD way of thinking.
Once again , it’s evolution. Our brains expect some reflections
he totally ruined the reflections by eliminating all of them.
probably because he thinks speakers should sound like headphones.
his example below is dumb as nails. He says huge improvement.
yeah , you know what else would make that graph look even better in his mind?
an anechoic chamber , by the way he thinks.
here are also guys who do this for a living.
the funny thing is that eliminating so many side reflections is an OLD way of thinking.
DanielT
Major Contributor
Based solely on taste and preference. Green ugly 70s carpet and a hell of a lot of red cushions pushed up here and there. It is not on the map that I would have that style in my combined listening room, living room. Ugly as a beating.
Why not a nicely furnished living room, with a NICE thick carpet (in front of the speakers)? Maybe, if you think you need it (you can try) some nice sufficiently thick absorbents on the side, the side wall, of the speakers? And nice thick curtains at the windows NOT as it looks like in the picture above some thick red pillows push up the windows.
Here is inspiration that in many cases can be seen as works of art:
Wood acoustic diffusers have become a decorative item - loved the idea!
Hi As an acoustician I am tired to tell people not to think room treatment only as absorption. In most small rooms absorption often creates more issues than it solves. Diffusion is a better solution. However, all I hear: they are expensive, ugly and difficult to place in a room. I am hence...
audiosciencereview.com
Wood Sound Diffuser - Etsy UK
Check out our wood sound diffuser selection for the very best in unique or custom, handmade pieces from our wall decor shops.
Edit:
OT. Red in the living room is perfectly fine, if it fits. I like colorful, cozy living rooms. Preferably with a lot of furniture (even what is considered overfurnished). Others may think it looks ugly but i like that style.
See attached pictures for examples of that.
Attachments
Last edited:
Vuki
Senior Member
I'm sure GS doesn't sound bad, but I would really love to hear Tooles system playing stereo with those speakers on the wall...
So can you, as you are clearly demonstrating in this thread.
- Thread Starter
- #254
All I see are internet kids that feel like they have to stick up for some kid who has zero credentials because the internet is their world.
this IS their social life.
they need to belong.
whether that is a golden forum or whatever.
speaking your mind won’t get you anywhere on the internet.
it’s not my world.
My argument is that I want credentials.
the whole thing of this was “ oh wow I finally made my room, hey buddies at headphones.com , should I make a video of it for us to get more hits?”
“ oh yeah man sure, release it”.
its a monologue as well
like I said the video I’d pay to watch is him at Munich high end or some respected audio show giving a lecture on acoustics.
yeah I’d pay to watch that. Wouldn’t even ask a question. Would just sit back and enjoy the show.
im NOT an expert. But that’s why I don’t have an audio youtube channel
this IS their social life.
they need to belong.
whether that is a golden forum or whatever.
speaking your mind won’t get you anywhere on the internet.
it’s not my world.
My argument is that I want credentials.
the whole thing of this was “ oh wow I finally made my room, hey buddies at headphones.com , should I make a video of it for us to get more hits?”
“ oh yeah man sure, release it”.
its a monologue as well
like I said the video I’d pay to watch is him at Munich high end or some respected audio show giving a lecture on acoustics.
yeah I’d pay to watch that. Wouldn’t even ask a question. Would just sit back and enjoy the show.
im NOT an expert. But that’s why I don’t have an audio youtube channel
Why are you so rude? You complain about keyboard warriors and then proceed to be one yourself. You complain about young people but then give a terrible example as a supposed older, wiser individual. I’m now guessing that you are trolling. You are young. The lol and lmao give it away.
Keith_W
Major Contributor
I wonder why Ethan Winer hasn't popped up yet. Is he a member of ASR? Anyway, Ethan has long believed that DSP can not treat bass nulls, only peaks. I too believed the same until I did some more reading recently. Anyway, as recently as 2019, Ethan evaluated Dirac and Acourate. From his conclusion:
Of course, Ethan sells bass traps. However, I do not want to see replies that his findings can be dismissed because of financial interests. I am only interested in discussion of his findings. In the same way, all the discussion about Goldensound's age, lack of publications, etc. are noise. What matters is whether what he said is correct, scientifically sound, and accepted by the scientific community. See logical fallacy - an attack on the person making the statement does not make the statement untrue. I am NOT saying that what Ethan or Goldensound said are true, but that it is the statements and arguments that should be discussed, and not the person.
Ethan Winer said:I agree with proponents that EQ can help to reduce the level of boomy peaks.
I know several audio professionals whose ears I trust, and I can’t refute the improvement they claim. I heard it myself when testing the Audyssey system in a small square room, as described in the Audyssey Report linked earlier. But we can’t overlook the added ringing, or the listening seats where the response was made worse.
This is why I prefer bass traps over EQ, though I agree that EQ can help in square rooms that already have bass traps.
No matter what the vendors of “room correction” devices claim, it’s simply impossible to improve one problem without creating others. And it’s also impossible to reduce ringing by a meaningful amount, or to improve nulls without adding even more ringing.
This last graph (Figure 8) from my article Bass Trap Myths shows a bedroom size space with and without bass traps. As you can see, the response and ringing are both improved, at all locations in the room, and not one location was made worse.
In home-size rooms low frequency peaks are generally 6 dB or less, but nulls are often 20-30 dB or even more. So nulls are usually the bigger problem — in a hi-fi listening room or home theater nulls are responsible for weak bass, and in a home studio nulls cause you to add too much bass to your mixes making them sound boomy everywhere else. But in square and cube shaped rooms the peaks can double up or triple, respectively, and be much more than 6 dB.
So in those rooms EQ really can help. It doesn’t reduce ringing, and it won’t help the nulls, but just lowering the level of the worst few low frequency peaks is a welcome improvement.
Of course, Ethan sells bass traps. However, I do not want to see replies that his findings can be dismissed because of financial interests. I am only interested in discussion of his findings. In the same way, all the discussion about Goldensound's age, lack of publications, etc. are noise. What matters is whether what he said is correct, scientifically sound, and accepted by the scientific community. See logical fallacy - an attack on the person making the statement does not make the statement untrue. I am NOT saying that what Ethan or Goldensound said are true, but that it is the statements and arguments that should be discussed, and not the person.
View attachment 289157
Based solely on taste and preference. Green ugly 70s carpet and a hell of a lot of red cushions pushed up here and there. It is not on the map that I would have that style in my combined listening room, living room. Ugly as a beating.
Why not a nicely furnished living room, with a NICE thick carpet (in front of the speakers)? Maybe, if you think you need it (you can try) some nice sufficiently thick absorbents on the side, the side wall, of the speakers? And nice thick curtains at the windows NOT as it looks like in the picture above some thick red pillows push up the windows.
Here is inspiration that in many cases can be seen as works of art:
Wood acoustic diffusers have become a decorative item - loved the idea!
Hi As an acoustician I am tired to tell people not to think room treatment only as absorption. In most small rooms absorption often creates more issues than it solves. Diffusion is a better solution. However, all I hear: they are expensive, ugly and difficult to place in a room. I am hence...
Wood Sound Diffuser - Etsy UK
Check out our wood sound diffuser selection for the very best in unique or custom, handmade pieces from our wall decor shops.www.etsy.com
Edit:
OT. Red in the living room is perfectly fine, if it fits. I like colorful, cozy living rooms. Preferably with a lot of furniture (even what is considered overfurnished). Others may think it looks ugly but i like that style.
See attached pictures for examples of that.
Despite my joke upthread I'm pretty partial to old timber. And cozy/cluttered/eclectic works for me too, not what I've done but nice to hang out in.
- Thread Starter
- #258
rude?
you haven’t seen rude.
I don’t like even seeing a wannabe and Tooles name in the same sentence.
yeah it bugs me.
work hard for something and then speak.
he doesn’t even cite anyone’s work. Just speaks as if he came up with it all himself.
yeah I have a serious issue with that. Maybe cause I’ve worked hard for some credentials.
My experience is similar, at least treating the wall behind speakers. Covering large surface and broadband down to approx 80-100 Hz give effects on SBIR. It can be done without looking bad but it will remove some room space. Regarding lateral and closest wallI think they just need to be reduced in level which can be achieved by heavy toe-in for mids and highs. Otherwise I believe those reflections belong to the room regardless if it is a natural sound source playing in front of you or speakers. ”Being there” is another scenery which I believe needs multichannel.
Last edited:
napfkuchen
Senior Member
Your obsession with age and your condescending attitude are of course a guarantee for a relaxed, respectful exchange of ideas. The insults out of nowhere ("trophies for 15th place ...") are also very helpful.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
