• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Room Treatment opinions and seeking Help with REW

mitchco

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2016
Messages
369
Likes
1,021
#21
Yes, looks pretty good. Change the vertical scale so it reads from zero to 500ms and repost. Thanks.

Wrt to frequency response balance. Harman and Sean Olive have performed many listening tests and a slope of 20 Hz to -10 dB at 20 kHz is perceived as neutral sounding. Some info here (see slide 11) and here (see slides 24 and 25) - of course both entire presentations are good.

So as you flatten the bass, the top end needs some attenuation, like a tilted tone control, in order to maintain that spectral balance between bass, mids and treble. That's why it feels like you have lost the bass. @Krunok and @pozz have you on the right path there.
 

mitchco

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2016
Messages
369
Likes
1,021
#24
Looks pretty good. A bit extra energy being absorbed from about 250 Hz to 650 Hz and not quite enough absorbed between 800 Hz to 2.5 kHz. This will in itself give the impression of a leaner sound quality. But you have Equalizer APO and with some jiggery pokery you should be able to smooth the frequency response out and tilted as mentioned in post 21. That should make a substantial improvement in the tonal balance.
 
Joined
Mar 26, 2018
Messages
40
Likes
7
#25
Looks pretty good. A bit extra energy being absorbed from about 250 Hz to 650 Hz and not quite enough absorbed between 800 Hz to 2.5 kHz. This will in itself give the impression of a leaner sound quality. But you have Equalizer APO and with some jiggery pokery you should be able to smooth the frequency response out and tilted as mentioned in post 21. That should make a substantial improvement in the tonal balance.
but why do we only look from 100hz? is it a small room issue?
 

mitchco

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2016
Messages
369
Likes
1,021
#27
What @Krunok says. Absorbing anything under 100 Hz requires a specially designed room as bass traps of any kind, unless the room is stuffed, will do very little absorption below 100 Hz. But if stuffed with bass traps will make the suckout at 250 Hz to 600 Hz worse.
However, your APO Equalizer should be able to smooth out the frequency response enough at the LP under 100 Hz to sound nice and even. I don't know the APO program, but I am assuming it can do it...
 

Ron Texas

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 10, 2018
Messages
2,344
Likes
2,059
Location
Equidistant From Everywhere
#28
My take: The OP's room is likely over treated because of the very near field listening position. His speakers are not overly bright, and they probably have a switch on the back to cut the highs even more. I would get rid of the panels covering the window and door at a minimum. As for the bed, you never know when it will come in handy.
 

Thomas_A

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
434
Likes
227
#29
My take: The OP's room is likely over treated because of the very near field listening position. His speakers are not overly bright, and they probably have a switch on the back to cut the highs even more. I would get rid of the panels covering the window and door at a minimum. As for the bed, you never know when it will come in handy.
I would agree. Remove the panels at listeinig areae and work on the wall behind the speakers. Rockwool alone will not work, use panels with perforated masonite, holes diameter 5 mm with 20 mm c-c and 10 cm rockwool behind. Cover the whole wall (floor to roof) behind the speaker and leave a reflective surface between the speakers.
 
Top Bottom