The myth of "activating a room"

[shawnsingh]

I've seen this phrase or similar phrases used in several threads here, I thought it would be interesting to raise this topic.

There's an idea that playing speakers quietly can avoid "activating a room", and if you can avoid "activating a room", you can hear more of the direct sound of the speakers and avoid problems with room modes and other acoustics problems.

I'm fairly certain this is a myth. As far as I understand, the way that sound interacts with a room does *not* depend on the volume level / strength of the sound. Here's a great explanation from Acoustics Insider which seems quite sound (ah, my first ASR pun!) to me. Thoughts?

 

[audiofooled]

I agree that it all comes down to psychoacoustics and perceived loudness. It does not depend on the room because it's size, acoustics and modes do not change with volume, but rather on the level of the ambient noise, also the noise floor and the amount of nonlinear distortion of the system. Hence during the night you can listen at very low volume and hear more detail, but during the day perception changes very much and you need more volume.
It also varies from track to track, i.e the dynamic range is another huge factor. Funny though, the less nonlinear distortion, the less perceived loudness. There are a lot more factors so it may be that the myth originates from not understanding them. But I believe that there is an individual psychoacoustical "sweet spot" of perceived loudness for any given situation, when a given track sounds best and there is no need to go higher or lower in volume.

 

[Wes]

I use a shaman to activate my room

 

[JSmith]

I use a shaman to activate my room

JSmith

 

[KSTR]

I'm fairly certain this is a myth. As far as I understand, the way that sound interacts with a room does *not* depend on the volume level / strength of the sound.

Acoustics are linear but perception is not, in many ways. That's why this is true. Room modes and reflections become more annoying the louder you are listening.

 

[alex-z]

Avoiding room modes by not playing low frequencies is dumb. Like avoiding a car accident by walking. You may have accomplished your goal, but missed the entire point.

Better to have bass, and optimize your listening position + acoustic treatment.

 

[Hipper]

I've seen this phrase or similar phrases used in several threads here, I thought it would be interesting to raise this topic.

There's an idea that playing speakers quietly can avoid "activating a room", and if you can avoid "activating a room", you can hear more of the direct sound of the speakers and avoid problems with room modes and other acoustics problems.

I'm fairly certain this is a myth. As far as I understand, the way that sound interacts with a room does *not* depend on the volume level / strength of the sound. Here's a great explanation from Acoustics Insider which seems quite sound (ah, my first ASR pun!) to me. Thoughts?

That's an interesting video - thanks!

 

[Shives]

Ummmmm I feel that my brain hurts.. maybe lsot a celllll or two.
Lol so.. OK! Good to know, cool story bro.

 

[holbob]

I use a shaman to activate my room

I use the same guy - Ebeneezer goode

 

[JSmith]

Ebeneezer goode

Involuntary yt search, cannot resist... must post video clip;

JSmith

 

[Frgirard]

I've seen this phrase or similar phrases used in several threads here, I thought it would be interesting to raise this topic.

There's an idea that playing speakers quietly can avoid "activating a room", and if you can avoid "activating a room", you can hear more of the direct sound of the speakers and avoid problems with room modes and other acoustics problems.

I'm fairly certain this is a myth. As far as I understand, the way that sound interacts with a room does *not* depend on the volume leveul / strength of the sound. Here's a great explanation from Acoustics Insider which seems quite sound (ah, my first ASR pun!) to me. Thoughts?

You know so you know the Decay's impact in the mid on the sound level perception.
An EDT of 0,6s or 0,2s is not the same world.
So your assumption is false and and the youtube link a plague and a collection of stupidity.
Why God has created youtube?

The bathroom...

Antonio fischetti Initiation à l'acoustique. Start here instead youtube
https://www.amazon.fr/Initiation-lacoustique-Cours-exercices-1Cédérom/dp/2701136954/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=Initiation+acoustique&qid=1621586132&sr=8-1

God do something.

 

[shawnsingh]

You know so you know the Decay's impact in the mid on the sound level perception.
An EDT of 0,6s or 0,2s is not the same world.
So your assumption is false and and the youtube link a plague and a collection of stupidity.
Why God has created youtube?

The bathroom...

Antonio fischetti Initiation à l'acoustique. Start here instead youtube
https://www.amazon.fr/Initiation-lacoustique-Cours-exercices-1Cédérom/dp/2701136954/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=Initiation+acoustique&qid=1621586132&sr=8-1

God do something.

About EDT. Yes, EDT measurements of 0.6 and 0.2 are not the same. But are you saying that this measurement can change depending on how loud the sound source is? If you believe this, can you please explain the math?

From DSP math that I know, room acoustics are predominantly linear, and the behavior of a linear system does not change with the amplitude (i.e. loudness) of the source signal. Room modes, reverberation/decay times like EDT or RT60, and frequency response (including phase) - are all part of that linear system. None of those properties would change only by increasing the loudness volume of the speakers.

OK so the math of linear systems is established and a foundation taught in every university. The only question is: is it really true that room acoustics is linear? Are effects of nonlinear room acoustics significant enough that humans can perceive them? I don't have enough knowledge to prove it, but it seems that the majority of researchers and engineers in the world do stand on this assumption. I have tried to do superficial searches about this assumption and did not find anything.

Desole, je ne parle pas francais... I am not be able to read the book you recommend. But I would be very surprised if the book says that nonlinear room acoustics is significant to human perception. If this book does claim that, then perhaps it has citations to academic journals, which may be in English - would you please help to provide those citations, I would love to learn more about this!

 

[shawnsingh]

I use the same guy - Ebeneezer goode

Involuntary yt search, cannot resist... must post video clip;

JSmith

I tried listening to it at different loudness levels. It didn't activate my room. But louder does activate more brain cells. =). I wish I'd known about this group 20 years ago, at least thanks for it now!

 

[Tom Danley]

Hi
This may be something carried over from commercial sound. As a general rule, the larger the room is, the less rapidly the room sound (or reverberation in a large enough room) is absorbed. For voice or music intelligibility, the idea is to have the sound that comes directly from the loudspeakers to be at least +10dB over the room or reverberation sound and so the larger the room (all things being equal) the harder it is to have large scale voice intelligibility. HERE is where driving the room comes into play, this is a problem as room sound detracts from the information in the direct sound, that is to say the room sound, sounds like voices somewhere while the direct sound has the words.
So far as SPL being a non-linear effect, i have heard that before but not an explanation. One (and this is my guess) that it has more to do with the duty cycle of the music being played and that low dynamic music is often played louder (so the room level is being pumped more often than being drained / absorbed).
Best,
Tom