Mark's Studio Build Diary - The Construction Phase

Post and discuss acoustic topics, Studio design, construction, and soundproofing here

Postby Paul Woodlock » Sat Jul 03, 2004 10:03 pm

Marlon Wolterink wrote:Mark,

did you consider to baffle your speakers?
It did wonders for me, in terms of clarity and definition.
On the picture below you can see how it's done in my homestudio.

The baffling is approx. 8 inches on each side.
Bert Stoltenborg has helped me with this. ( thanx again Bert!)
We started out with using cardboard and that helped alot immediately. Later I made the plywood baffles as you can see on the pictures.

greetings,
Marlon Wolterink.


Sounds like a cool idea to me.

Same reason I'm soffit mounting my speakers. :)

Paul
Paul Woodlock
Strange Being
 
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 1:32 am
Location: Peterborough UK

Postby Paul Woodlock » Sat Jul 03, 2004 10:09 pm

MarkEdmonds wrote:
Paul Woodlock wrote:You should always measure just ONE speaker at a time.


Yes, I never have both on together and the mic is always aimed at the centre of the tweeter (on axis as well).


Cool. just checking :)

Also don't expect to get the room FLAT.


Seriously, why not? I know the chances of me getting sub 250Hz flat is laughable but above that, shouldn't it be possible?


Well I did mean from 20Hz to 20kHz :)

Of course the bass is gonna be nigh on impossible to get flat in your size room, but the upper freqeuncies? Well it should be possible. But you gotta have 'flat' speakers in that frequency range for starters.


Actually, flat or not, what I am aiming for is something that is listenable, accurate and not "hi-fi". At the moment it isn't any of those characteristics.


AS well as that of course, you should be aiming for accuracy, being as it's a mixing room. 'Pleasant to listen to doesn't always mean the system is accurate


I don't mind an early tail off on the bass if it needs to be there - as long as I know it is there. Likewise the treble.


I still reckon you should try and measure your speakers outside ( with rockwool on the floor between mic and speaker ) so you can get a clearer picture of what the speakers are doing in the first instance. :) :)


Paul
Paul Woodlock
Strange Being
 
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 1:32 am
Location: Peterborough UK

Postby mtl777 » Sun Jul 04, 2004 4:32 am

I'm no expert but from what I've read (see the following thread), maybe your laminate flooring has something to do with your dissatisfaction with the sound of your room...

http://www.3daudioinc.com/cgi-bin/ultim ... 6&t=000026
mtl777
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 6:10 am

Postby MarkEdmonds » Mon Jul 05, 2004 8:13 pm

You guys are serious about the baffling then? I always thought that was frowned upon unless the speakers are specifically designed for it. Maybe that has something to do with them being a ported design or not? (he says waffling, trying to sound like he knows what he is talking about)

The Mackies I use are infinite baffle (I think - depends how that internal passive radiator works) and I've got some huge and thick sheets of cardboard I kept for a rainy day from some furniture deliveries. Never figured I would cut them up to try this out!

mtl777 - thanks for the link on that floor thread. I know that the floor has changed the room tone from the 18mm ply which is under it. It is going to be a gut-wrenching job to remove the laminate as it looks so damn good so I am going to leave this option as a last resort.

RIght, time to cut cardboard...
MarkEdmonds
 
Posts: 493
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 9:15 pm
Location: Peterborough, UK

Postby Marlon Wolterink » Mon Jul 05, 2004 8:50 pm

I always thought that was frowned upon unless the speakers are specifically designed for it. Maybe that has something to do with them being a ported design or not?


I have no idea ;-)
I only can tell from experiencing the change in detail, stereo imaging etc, that it works works with my speakers.
I can remember one significant change, a dip around 239 Hz disappeared after baffling the speakers. ( there were more, don't have the specific measurements , Bert has them ).
It became very clear to me after repeately listening to ''you can't get what you want'' by Joe Jackson ( the horns especially).

greetings,
Marlon
Marlon Wolterink
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: Meddo, the Netherlands

Postby Paul Woodlock » Mon Jul 05, 2004 9:57 pm

Greetings

I always thought that was frowned upon unless the speakers are specifically designed for it. Maybe that has something to do with them being a ported design or not?


You cannot soffit mount speakers with ports ( or passive radiators ) on the back, but this isn't the same as baffling them.

The great thing about baffling them, is it's a LOT easier than soffit mounting.

It will change the sound quite a lot of course, but that's the idea. And hopefully for the better. :)

Paul
Paul Woodlock
Strange Being
 
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 1:32 am
Location: Peterborough UK

Postby Bob » Mon Jul 05, 2004 11:06 pm

My understanding is that if you use baffles or soffits or in-wall, while using free standing speakers, that you have to EQ to reduce the bass to the speaker. Other than that it's fine.
Regards
Bob Golds
"The only thing we regret in life is the love we failed to give."
"Be a rapturist -- the backward of a terrorist. Commit random acts of senseless kindness, whenever possible" - Jake Stonebender
Bob
 
Posts: 4358
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 4:37 am
Location: Oakville, Ontario, Canada

Postby Paul Woodlock » Tue Jul 06, 2004 12:16 am

Bob wrote:My understanding is that if you use baffles or soffits or in-wall, while using free standing speakers, that you have to EQ to reduce the bass to the speaker. Other than that it's fine.


It's true for soffit mounted speakers becasue the bass that is normally thrown at the wall, is thrown out front instead. Which normally gives you more headroom in the speaker. Cool!

I'm not sure it would be the same for freestanding baffles though, as the speaker is still radiating from the back into free air. Although the baffles would help prevent any push-pull motion of the bass from the back to the front. Interesting? :)


The Genelec site has some cool articles on soffit mounting. There's also a study of a lot of Studio monitoring rooms on there too.

Paul
Paul Woodlock
Strange Being
 
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 1:32 am
Location: Peterborough UK

Postby MarkEdmonds » Thu Jul 08, 2004 9:38 pm

I've been guilty of not following what is going on round here over the last couple of days but I've had to push for a decision point on how I am going to plan this work (and money) out - so lots of testing been taking place.

I tried the baffles. I've obviously got to do some background reading on how this works or what it is meant to do. It foxes me. I could understand it if you extended the baffle as one piece and had the drivers mounted hard on the baffle so you had a perfect physical coupling but just using cardboard held on under tension???? Well, it did make a difference. I cut out approx 3 foot square sheets of 8mm thick corrugated cardboard and mounted them flush with the front of the speakers. Difficult to assess the effect but I felt the stereo spread was in a smoother arc. However, the edgy treble and nasal mids were still there.

Next up was to go through some extremes of stacking RW3 on the rear wall. No real benefit and although I thought the best sound was when the depth was 140cm (!), I can't afford that loss of space because...

I have decided that the piano is going to go on the rear wall - period. Kawai should be getting their new CA series in the shops next month so that will happen then. It will be a digital so no soundboard and strings to cause problems and digitals aren't as tall as acoutic uprights so hopefully, this wont crap out the sound too much.

The AudioAgency (Auralex distributers) don't do loans on treatment unfortunately (understandable really) so that idea is ruled out for now. I was hoping to borrow a load of Venus traps and T'Fusors to see how they worked.

Anyway, my mixer is a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro (or something like that) and I've always felt it had an agressive sound so I decided to remove that from the chain and run the speakers direct from the sound card using the Lynx software mixer for control. This is temporary at the moment as the only way I could wire it was to couple two leads which means I've lost the balanced cables and currently have about 5 metres of unbalanced which can't be good - noticeable hum.

However, as suspected, removing the mixer and all its grungy electronics radically transformed the sound. Did I say radical? Well, let's say, it sounds like a new system. The gritty treble has gone completely. The bass is much much tighter. If you don't believe your ears, you can just rest your hand on the speakers and feel that there is much more energy in them now. The bass is really kicking hard. The treble is like a smooth brush of a ride as opposed to an 8bit china crash.

It is quite strange really and difficult to describe without sounding like a prat. Put it this way - I now no longer have any real sense of volume. It seems so clean that I am sure I am listening louder than ever but without any real fatigue.

There is a bit of fatigue in that the treble is too bright for my liking. I want to shelve this off slightly but the other odd thing is that if I play back commercial tracks through Nuendo and use Cambridge to eq out the treble or add warmth lower down, it sounds un-natural and causes unpleasant artifacts elsewhere.

It might just be that I have hit on a balance that is showing incredible accuracy but is a bit treble biased and could be the best I'll get from what I have. For the first time, I feel that this is a sound I want to learn so I know how it translates and that for me is a breakthrough.

Next step then is to live with this for a while to prove it really does work and then I need to investigate a suitable gain control so I can keep the mixer out permanently.

Does anyone know of a suitable device for this? Preferably with a high shelf filter as well? Is it possible to build one if I source some high quality pots or to keep the wiring balanced, do I need to introduce extra electronics?

Well, back to listening. This is an odd sensation. The system is working hard and pushing lots of air but it doesn't sound like it and I've got this super clean sound which I feel the desire to learn. Does this mean I have found the signature sound of my room? Time will tell...

Mark
MarkEdmonds
 
Posts: 493
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 9:15 pm
Location: Peterborough, UK

Postby Paul Woodlock » Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:00 pm

MarkEdmonds wrote:I've been guilty of not following what is going on round here over the last couple of days but I've had to push for a decision point on how I am going to plan this work (and money) out - so lots of testing been taking place.

I tried the baffles. I've obviously got to do some background reading on how this works or what it is meant to do. It foxes me. I could understand it if you extended the baffle as one piece and had the drivers mounted hard on the baffle so you had a perfect physical coupling but just using cardboard held on under tension???? Well, it did make a difference. I cut out approx 3 foot square sheets of 8mm thick corrugated cardboard and mounted them flush with the front of the speakers. Difficult to assess the effect but I felt the stereo spread was in a smoother arc. However, the edgy treble and nasal mids were still there.

Next up was to go through some extremes of stacking RW3 on the rear wall. No real benefit and although I thought the best sound was when the depth was 140cm (!), I can't afford that loss of space because...

I have decided that the piano is going to go on the rear wall - period. Kawai should be getting their new CA series in the shops next month so that will happen then. It will be a digital so no soundboard and strings to cause problems and digitals aren't as tall as acoutic uprights so hopefully, this wont crap out the sound too much.

The AudioAgency (Auralex distributers) don't do loans on treatment unfortunately (understandable really) so that idea is ruled out for now. I was hoping to borrow a load of Venus traps and T'Fusors to see how they worked.

Anyway, my mixer is a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro (or something like that) and I've always felt it had an agressive sound so I decided to remove that from the chain and run the speakers direct from the sound card using the Lynx software mixer for control. This is temporary at the moment as the only way I could wire it was to couple two leads which means I've lost the balanced cables and currently have about 5 metres of unbalanced which can't be good - noticeable hum.

However, as suspected, removing the mixer and all its grungy electronics radically transformed the sound. Did I say radical? Well, let's say, it sounds like a new system. The gritty treble has gone completely. The bass is much much tighter. If you don't believe your ears, you can just rest your hand on the speakers and feel that there is much more energy in them now. The bass is really kicking hard. The treble is like a smooth brush of a ride as opposed to an 8bit china crash.



Yeah, problem with cheap mixers I'm afraid.

The same here with my Mackie 32-8.

Most of the problem lies in the cheap op-amps used in Mackie mixers ( well any prosumer mixer really ).

You can cut down the distortion of them quite easily by running signals at a lower volume through the mixer, as op-amps ( particularly cheap ones ) increase distortion the higher the level you stick through them. This is particularly important at the sum bus, so keep input gains low, and channel faders low, and make up for the gain at the master fader/Outputs

It's at the expense of noise though, but thankfully Mackie mixers are renowned for being quiet. I still get -85dB noise on masters, which is more than enough for most music.

Oh and btw, I measured the distortion on various inputs to my mackie, and found the Insert returns to have the lowest distortion, followed closely by the Tape inputs. The Line/Mic inputs ( shared pre-amp ) had the highest distortion. I chose to use the tape inputs, as the insert return's impedence wasnt compatible with my Apogee outputs.


It is quite strange really and difficult to describe without sounding like a prat. Put it this way - I now no longer have any real sense of volume. It seems so clean that I am sure I am listening louder than ever but without any real fatigue.

There is a bit of fatigue in that the treble is too bright for my liking. I want to shelve this off slightly but the other odd thing is that if I play back commercial tracks through Nuendo and use Cambridge to eq out the treble or add warmth lower down, it sounds un-natural and causes unpleasant artifacts elsewhere.

It might just be that I have hit on a balance that is showing incredible accuracy but is a bit treble biased and could be the best I'll get from what I have. For the first time, I feel that this is a sound I want to learn so I know how it translates and that for me is a breakthrough.


Don't foget the speakers themselves can be adding distortion too.

Next step then is to live with this for a while to prove it really does work and then I need to investigate a suitable gain control so I can keep the mixer out permanently.

Does anyone know of a suitable device for this? Preferably with a high shelf filter as well? Is it possible to build one if I source some high quality pots or to keep the wiring balanced, do I need to introduce extra electronics?


There's the Mackie Big Knob. Specifically designed for DAW volume and input solutions. Of course it will use similar cheap op-amps as the mixers, but there'll be less of them, so a hopefully a cleaner sound. At least the Big Knob is cheap. To get ultra pristine, you'll have to shell out over a grand, ro build you're own.

And no you can't just use a fader, because the impedence,and thus the sound, will change over the fader's travel.

You need at least one op-amp before and after the fader to act as buffers.



Well, back to listening. This is an odd sensation. The system is working hard and pushing lots of air but it doesn't sound like it and I've got this super clean sound which I feel the desire to learn. Does this mean I have found the signature sound of my room? Time will tell...

Mark


Sounds like you're getting there mate :)


Paul
Paul Woodlock
Strange Being
 
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 1:32 am
Location: Peterborough UK

Postby Marlon Wolterink » Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:39 pm

I tried the baffles. Well, it did make a difference.


Have you made measurements before and after applying the baffles?
If so, what are ( or aren't ;-) ) the differences?

Anyway, my mixer is a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro (or something like that) and I've always felt it had an agressive sound so I decided to remove that from the chain and run the speakers direct from the sound card using the Lynx software mixer for control. This is temporary at the moment as the only way I could wire it was to couple two leads which means I've lost the balanced cables and currently have about 5 metres of unbalanced which can't be good - noticeable hum.

However, as suspected, removing the mixer and all its grungy electronics radically transformed the sound. Did I say radical? Well, let's say, it sounds like a new system. The gritty treble has gone completely. The bass is much much tighter. If you don't believe your ears, you can just rest your hand on the speakers and feel that there is much more energy in them now. The bass is really kicking hard. The treble is like a smooth brush of a ride as opposed to an 8bit china crash.

It is quite strange really and difficult to describe without sounding like a prat. Put it this way - I now no longer have any real sense of volume. It seems so clean that I am sure I am listening louder than ever but without any real fatigue.

There is a bit of fatigue in that the treble is too bright for my liking. I want to shelve this off slightly but the other odd thing is that if I play back commercial tracks through Nuendo and use Cambridge to eq out the treble or add warmth lower down, it sounds un-natural and causes unpleasant artifacts elsewhere.

It might just be that I have hit on a balance that is showing incredible accuracy but is a bit treble biased and could be the best I'll get from what I have. For the first time, I feel that this is a sound I want to learn so I know how it translates and that for me is a breakthrough.

Next step then is to live with this for a while to prove it really does work and then I need to investigate a suitable gain control so I can keep the mixer out permanently.

Does anyone know of a suitable device for this? Preferably with a high shelf filter as well? Is it possible to build one if I source some high quality pots or to keep the wiring balanced, do I need to introduce extra electronics?


My speakers are directly connected to my soundcard ( RME multiface) and I'm using the software mixer to control the gain. I previously used a behringer mixer for volume control.
RME's totalmix software makes routing very easy, I have several presets for volume and routing. (I don't know if the Lynx card can do that).


Well, back to listening. This is an odd sensation. The system is working hard and pushing lots of air but it doesn't sound like it and I've got this super clean sound which I feel the desire to learn. Does this mean I have found the signature sound of my room? Time will tell...

Mark


Great experience, isn't it ? :-)

greetings,

Marlon.
Marlon Wolterink
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: Meddo, the Netherlands

Postby MarkEdmonds » Fri Jul 09, 2004 10:04 am

Paul - my understanding of the internal circuits in the mixer is nearly zilch but it is interesting to read what you said because I thought the problem was the eq which is permanently linked in (you can switch it out on the 32-8 can't you?). My theory was that the whole combination (amps, eq and routing etc) was degrading the sound. I've certainly proved that things are better without the mixer anyway.

Regarding a gain control, the Mackie device looks very interesting but like you, I suspect the quality could be suspect. Over a grand for pristine eh? That is going to damage the budget. My studio slush fund has 1K left after the piano purchase so a current serious idea is a Focusrite ISA428. Two channels would do the output and the other two would be the main input channels, independent of the Mackie mixer.

The 428 doesn't have a high shelf but I would expect the amp quality to be in the right area. How does this seem? I've spoken to a dealer and have arranged a loan for next week but before I pay them a deposit, I'd welcome any comments on whether this is a sensible idea or not.

If the 428 doesn't work out, there is the TL Audio PA-1 but that doesn't give me extra channels for input.

Any other ideas please for a stereo pre-amp/channel strip at the 1K price point that are good contenders?

Marlon - no I didn't do any measurements but it will be a simple job to do them and I want to do some new measurements anyway to see what is happening with the current mixer-less configuration. I really need to get round to posting my ETF results but I have some tedious preparation work to do first with the files and stuff which is why I've been putting it off. It has been more fun to tweak and listen than use a PC!

Any feedback on the ISA428 idea gratefully received folks.

Thanks,

Mark
MarkEdmonds
 
Posts: 493
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 9:15 pm
Location: Peterborough, UK

Postby Paul Woodlock » Fri Jul 09, 2004 1:30 pm

MarkEdmonds wrote:Paul - my understanding of the internal circuits in the mixer is nearly zilch but it is interesting to read what you said because I thought the problem was the eq which is permanently linked in (you can switch it out on the 32-8 can't you?).


Yeah, you can switch them out on the 32-8, and I do. Leaving the EQin whill add to the crap, and futhermore you'll be lucky if the centred EQ knobs are really centred , to pot inaccuracies



My theory was that the whole combination (amps, eq and routing etc) was degrading the sound. I've certainly proved that things are better without the mixer anyway.


Yep, more circuitry, the muddier thesound.

Regarding a gain control, the Mackie device looks very interesting but like you, I suspect the quality could be suspect. Over a grand for pristine eh? That is going to damage the budget. My studio slush fund has 1K left after the piano purchase so a current serious idea is a Focusrite ISA428. Two channels would do the output and the other two would be the main input channels, independent of the Mackie mixer.

The 428 doesn't have a high shelf but I would expect the amp quality to be in the right area. How does this seem? I've spoken to a dealer and have arranged a loan for next week but before I pay them a deposit, I'd welcome any comments on whether this is a sensible idea or not.

If the 428 doesn't work out, there is the TL Audio PA-1 but that doesn't give me extra channels for input.



Although the quality will be there in the ISA428, I don't hink that 's a suitable product. You willget some cool mic-pres, but how are you gonna arrange putting outputs through mic amps?

Before you blow a wad of cahs mate, make sure you get the right product.

I'm not sure what would suitable. There must be a 'Quality Big Knob' out there somwhere ( Ooer Missus! :) )



Paul
Paul Woodlock
Strange Being
 
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 1:32 am
Location: Peterborough UK

Postby MarkEdmonds » Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:26 pm

Paul Woodlock wrote:Although the quality will be there in the ISA428, I don't hink that 's a suitable product. You willget some cool mic-pres, but how are you gonna arrange putting outputs through mic amps?


The 428 has three switchable inputs per channel for mic, line and instrument so hopefully that wont be a problem.

Before you blow a wad of cahs mate, make sure you get the right product.

I'm not sure what would suitable. There must be a 'Quality Big Knob' out there somwhere ( Ooer Missus! :) )

Paul


Fredo posted me some links on the Nuendo forum and the Coleman M3 looks the most suitable/affordable and although I haven't found a UK price yet, I would expect this to be about the same as the 428.

No, I'm not parting with the cash until I am really sure I have the right product and even though it is a lot of money, this has to be a sensible area to focus on given the sonic benefits.

New mixer? Forgedaboudit. Surely you can't get ultra-transparent mixers without a second mortgage and I only need two channels anyway.

New monitors? I'd only upgrade into the Genelec 1037C/PMC AML1 territory which is the 4K+ bracket and still doesn't solve the gain control problem.

What else? It has to be a line level pre-amp or gain control.

Mark
MarkEdmonds
 
Posts: 493
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 9:15 pm
Location: Peterborough, UK

Postby Andy_D » Fri Jul 09, 2004 3:09 pm

Hi all - very new here but I started following this thread and I am hooked now! (found this forum linked from recording.org btw)

Anyway as I understand it you are looking for some form of speaker level control. I saw this on harmony-central the other day. I haven't checked out UK prices or anything (I am UK based myself) but this maybe what your after...

http://www.presonus.com/centralstation.html

...but possibly even overkill!

From HC:

"PreSonus Audio Electronics is now shipping the Central Station studio-monitoring interface, featuring five stereo inputs and outputs (two digital and three analog) and a street price under $500.

The main audio path of the Central Station is completely passive. This signal path has no amplifier stages including op amps, active IC's or chips eliminating coloration, noise and distortion they can introduce. To minimize noise and maximize signal integrity, the unit is equipped with 34 sealed relays, which utilize a minimal signal path design so that the audio does not pass through extraneous electronics. "

Hope this helps.

Andy
Andy_D
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 3:01 pm
Location: Bristol, UK

Postby hashbrown » Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:03 am

Hi everyone, foudn you guys while hanging over at John Sayers forum, glad to be here.

Mark, I've been following your progress for awhile now. I've been thinking about the high frequency problem you're having. Someone suggested ripping out the laminate. That would probably do it, I think your getting early reflections off that wood floor. But a much easier solution would be to just lay down an area rug around the mix position. Have you tried this?

Well I registered just to give you that simple tip, hope it works out for you.

-HB
hashbrown
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 4:57 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN USA

Postby MarkEdmonds » Sun Jul 11, 2004 9:58 am

Hi everyone,

Thanks for all the feedback and suggestions - I've been working on them so here is the latest.

Firstly on the baffles. I've done measurements before and after and the only real difference with baffles was a big dip which IIRC was round about 500Hz. I've used them on and off over the last few days and always prefer the sound with them off. Maybe if I made them bigger that would change the characteristics?

Onto the gain control, with help here and a couple of other forums, I have narrowed my choice down to:

A high quality stepped passive control with constant input impedence

or

A Coleman Audio M3

or

A Presonus Central Station

Each has its own benefits but in terms of flexibility and price and UK availability, the Presonus looks the best value - thanks for the suggestion Andy!

Needless to say, a high quality channel strip style pre-amp is now completely out of the question - which I am happy about because my gut was telling me it was the wrong thing to do.

Next up, the old laminate floor. Time for some retrospective analysis.

The first time I listened to the new room was before the laminate went down. The floor at this time as 18mm structural spruce plywood, heavily screwed down at 1 foot intervals onto the original floor boards and joists. The wood has a slightly rough texture and you wouldn't want to rub your fingers over it. The sound quality was pretty good - smooth as I recall with no undue treble problems. However, I didn't pay a great deal of attention because I knew there was going to be another layer on top plus all the kit and furniture to go in.

Anyway, having done the laminate and put the basic kit in for the first listen, I knew straight away that something had changed in the treble. Problem was, I didn't know if it was the floor or the furniture or the speaker positions or whatever - there were too many new variables to positively identify the floor.

Since then, I have been chasing round in circles trying to get a good sound. Sometimes I get something I like but invariably, the next day it sounds rough. I sometimes wonder if I don't wake up with a different set of ears each day!

Now, through everyone's feedback, there is clearly a common link to explain the edgy treble sound - the damn laminate floor.

Yesterday, I started laying down old blankets, curtains and rugs over the laminate. Even as I was just laying them down with no music playing, I could feel the acoustic changing.

On listening, the difference was immediate - much smoother and none of the needles in the ears syndrome. Progress! So Hashbrown and everyone else who pused me into looking at the floor, many thanks! because this is where the problem is.

I ETFed before and after. The log freq response is about the same but the difference shows in the linear response which whilst still a bit wild, has fewer anomolies. Bizarrely though, the RT plot shows inreasing values in relation to high frequency which is the opposite of what I was expecting!

Having got the treble under control, I went throgh some more speaker placement ETF tests and got them into a position where I got a good uniform response. For some reason though, the subjective sound quality was very poor. After further tests with ETF and ears, I've ended up with the speakers in a very-high-quality sound position with the penalty that the bass does a Beachy Head below 100Hz. I can live with this though because the quality is so damn good. I can listen to a quiet piece of intimate classical piano where you can really here the piano action working to a full range blast out with the Virus Indigo "Slipstream" demo (I love that track!) with no complaints from the ears.

OK, the conclusion is that it looks like I will have to bite the bullet with the laminate floor and remove it. This hurts because it was a waste of money and time and cosmetically, it looks so damn good. Also the doors are cut to the laminate height and this will change if I put down carpet tiles. Major cock up all round but it is the only thing that has gone seriously wrong so far so maybe that isn't too bad in retrospect.

Well, thanks again for all the feedback that enabled me to crack this nut!

Mark
MarkEdmonds
 
Posts: 493
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 9:15 pm
Location: Peterborough, UK

Postby Scott R. Foster » Sun Jul 11, 2004 1:47 pm

Why remove it?

Does it resonate or is it just a matter of HF reflection?

Try adding some area rugs first... may help in either case... if so, it's less work/money to toss a couple of srea rugs in than redo the whole floor... plus it might look nice.
SRF
Scott R. Foster
 
Posts: 3854
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 12:41 pm
Location: Jacksonville, FL USA

Postby hashbrown » Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:33 am

Yeah I'd defintiely go with area rugs before pulling up that floor. If you want to record acoustic guitar, perscussion, cello, etc in teh room, you'll want to do it over that floor. It would be better to shave the bottoms of thr door, and add those spring-loaded thresholds to the bottoms.

Glad its coming together. BTW- I'd always go with what your ears are telling you first. Measurements can be used to explain what you're hearing, but I don't think you can count on them in place of your own ears, so go with the speaker placement that sounds best to the ear.

-HB
hashbrown
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 4:57 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN USA

Postby MarkEdmonds » Mon Jul 12, 2004 7:30 pm

Yeah, I'm going for the rug solution at the moment but it will be a big rug - currently I have the entire central area covered which is roughly 65% of the floor!

Anyway, did some more real work today and filled two of the trihedral corners which had no treatment at all. I had been delaying doing this because the void is not uniform and I couldn't come up with a neat solution. I wanted to have a nice sweep between the wall to ceiling traps rather than simply putting in a big rectangle. However, getting the angles right for cutting the blocks into a sweep was going to be tricky and might serve to show up the room misalignments.

Well, in the absence of a decent design, I said sod it, just fill it and see how it goes. The plan was basically, fill a rectangle and then maybe use something like an electric carving knife and literally sculpt the block to form an arc between the adjacent traps. In the end, the rectangles look OK so I think I will leave them.

The design is very crude and doesn't look structurally sound as it consists simply of a diagonal support. This means that for 50% of the fill, the COG is the wrong side of the support so of course, it will fall out. To get round this, the slabs are held in really tight. I had to pummle them in on the last section so although I will keep a close eye on it for any movement, I really don't think it is going to shift.

Each rectangle is roughly 80cm x 90cm x 60cm so quite a nice sized fill.

Some pics:

The left rear fill which is over the entrance door.

Image
Image
Image

The left front fill. The blue thing is a blanket draped over a cupboard door.

Image
Image

And the left wall showing both the new corner fills.

Image

The other two ceiling corners are semi-filled anyway (imagine a 3D triangle) so I don't think I will be adding to them.

With that job out the way, the remaining steps are:

Sort out the fan housing.
Finish the doors which includes firmer shutting and panel damping.
*Finalise the acoustics* and modify any treatments as needed.
Finish decorating the exposed wall sections.
Fabric covering.
Skirting boards.

I'm allowing up to six months for this. Not because I am being lazy but because commiting to the final room treatment and sound is going to be a major step so I am allowing plenty of time to find all those hidden characteristics.

Mark
MarkEdmonds
 
Posts: 493
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 9:15 pm
Location: Peterborough, UK

PreviousNext

Return to Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest

cron