Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message
"Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot com wrote in message ... First you should measure, with oscillator or a Stereophile Test CD, and a lowly Radio Shack SPL meter. If the room is pressurizing below a certain frequency, the measured SPL at or below that frequency will be independent of position. So far so good. As you go up in frequency, you should see the modes. Chart them out in 1/3 octave steps. The train seems to be headed off the tracks. Small rooms do have this situation where they start tipping up the bass below a certain frequency. Ideally, you match that up with the roll-offs of the woofers, and it really works. There are two problematical situations, one where the woofer starts rolling off out before the room starts picking up, and the other where the room starts picking up before the woofer starts rolling up. The first situation gives you a hole, while the second gives you a peak. The peak is more troublesome, but neither is ideal. This is independent of modes, but your measurements will probably show both. The only useful information about modes would relate to how you use your knowlege of them to more precisely identify any mismatches between your woofers and the room. One approach to backing modes out of room measurements is to take measurements at diverse locations. The modes are location-dependent so they will eventually average out. Unfortunately, you might grow old taking enough data to get reliable results. I've seen arrays of like a dozen mics and complex averaging hardware used to get reliable high resolution results in a reasonble amount of time. Thinkable for developing small rooms with audio systems that are produced in volume, but otherwise not. IOW, the automotive guys have been here, and left. Third octave tests are not useful in small rooms. I've seen peaks and adjacent nulls closer than a musical whole step. This is not only common, but typical. So third-octave is mostly a "spot check" here and there, and completely misses the true response and the mode frequencies. Agreed. I'm giving him a methodology for which the tools are cheap and simple. If I were doing the job, I would use a spectrum analyzer. Won't help. A detailed view of mud is still mud. But you're wrong about the traps. His room is too small, and the problem too severe. What small rooms do is either a problem or an opportunity, depending on how you manage it. In the end, you might end up with both traps and some eq. The traps are going to help you make any remaining problems more clear, and easier to manage. |
#42
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
On Mar 18, 8:04 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
What small rooms do is either a problem or an opportunity, depending on how you manage it. In the end, you might end up with both traps and some eq. Going back to the original message, his room is 9 x 13 feet with a 7 foot ceiling. It's smallish, but not that small. People record in smaller rooms, and use smaller rooms as control rooms, and they make them work. One of the solutions is to simply get rid of the bass fed to the monitors, that's throwing off your perception of the mix and leave correcting the "unknown" low end to the mastering engineer. Of course if the mastering engineer is you and the mastering suite is the same room in which you mixed without any low end, that's a problem. But like most problems, it can be solved with money. The question is where to throw the money: - Into your room directly - At a professional who will help you throw money into your room - At a professional who will allow you to ignore your room's problems and fix them for you afterwards. |
#43
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
But
like most problems, it can be solved with money. The question is where to throw the money: - Into your room directly Been there, done that, but would do it again if it really worked. - At a professional who will help you throw money into your room Someone who knows more than I about getting it right technically? sure, it's a good investment. - At a professional who will allow you to ignore your room's problems and fix them for you afterwards. Never. If It's not right within MY 4 walls, it doesnt leave the studio. |
#44
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
ups.com On Mar 18, 8:04 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: What small rooms do is either a problem or an opportunity, depending on how you manage it. In the end, you might end up with both traps and some eq. Going back to the original message, his room is 9 x 13 feet with a 7 foot ceiling. It's smallish, but not that small. People record in smaller rooms, and use smaller rooms as control rooms, and they make them work. Agreed. One of the solutions is to simply get rid of the bass fed to the monitors, that's throwing off your perception of the mix and leave correcting the "unknown" low end to the mastering engineer. That amounts to equalization. Of course if the mastering engineer is you and the mastering suite is the same room in which you mixed without any low end, that's a problem. But like most problems, it can be solved with money. The question is where to throw the money: - Into your room directly - At a professional who will help you throw money into your room - At a professional who will allow you to ignore your room's problems and fix them for you afterwards. ;-) |
#45
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
On Mar 18, 12:34 pm, "Ben - TheStudioRI.com"
wrote: - At a professional who will help you throw money into your room Someone who knows more than I about getting it right technically? sure, it's a good investment. That's what they're supposed to do. The trick is to find the right one. If It's not right within MY 4 walls, it doesnt leave the studio. That's fine if your studio will support that and you're good enough, but takes a pretty big ego. Some of the best engineers and producers in the business depend on another set of ears and a different monitoring environment to get it right. It's nothing to be ashamed of. Correcting for room deficiencies that affect a mix is big business for the Mastering Industry today. But like with the professional acoustic consultant, you have to find the right one. But do whatever you want. It's your money, your studio, your reputation, and your ego. |
#46
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
On Mar 18, 1:11 pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message One of the solutions is to simply get rid of the bass fed to the monitors, that's throwing off your perception of the mix and leave correcting the "unknown" low end to the mastering engineer. That amounts to equalization. OK, you're stating a fact, but I wonder if you mean it in the sense that it's a bad thing, something to be avoided. It probably can be avoided (at least as a gross solution) if the room is properly built, but in this particular case, it sounds like that isn't going to happen. Ben has already "treated" his room, he doesn't trust his monitors, and he doesn't seem to be ready to call in someone who can properly analyze his problem and suggest a practical solution. We're just guessing here, suggesting things that have worked in other rooms, but as you know, every room is unique. And while there are a number of products on the market designed to improve any room, apparently the choice (or quantity) isn't right for this room. |
#47
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
Mike,
Ben has already "treated" his room Yes, but with foam bass traps. :-) --Ethan |
#48
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
Bob,
the effect he reports is too severe to be dealt with by traps alone. Bass traps can help down to about 40 Hz if you have enough of them. The lowest mode in his 13 foot room is 43 Hz. I agree that bass traps, even really good bass traps, will not do much down there. A SMALL amount of EQ could be used to reduce that one lowest mode. But in most rooms the real problems start around 60 to 80 Hz, and good bass traps will definitely help there. Traps have no effect below the fundamental room modes. If you think about it, bass traps are never needed below the fundamental room mode frequencies. I am the only person in this thread who has actually given Ben a prescription. Not so! My prescription is more and better bass traps. That will help Ben far more than any EQ. If he chooses to ALSO use EQ cut for the one lowest mode, that's his decision. But that would be after adding enough good traps to take care of what is the much larger problem - the bass range from above 60 to 80 Hz. Also, bass problems in small rooms are not only modal. Comb filtering is another major cause of peaks and nulls, and the frequencies are often related to the distance between the listener and the rear wall behind. --Ethan |
#49
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
oups.com On Mar 18, 1:11 pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Mike Rivers" wrote in message One of the solutions is to simply get rid of the bass fed to the monitors, that's throwing off your perception of the mix and leave correcting the "unknown" low end to the mastering engineer. That amounts to equalization. OK, you're stating a fact, but I wonder if you mean it in the sense that it's a bad thing, something to be avoided. Not at all. I'm as critical as anybody of the idea of equalizing out the nulls and peaks that are always there below 200 Hz. My point is that in certain applications, broadband equalization which is what this roll-off is, can make some sense. It still might not be the best solution, but it might be the most practical solution. It probably can be avoided (at least as a gross solution) if the room is properly built, but in this particular case, it sounds like that isn't going to happen. Also, there's this problem of matching of woofers and rooms. Ben has already "treated" his room, he doesn't trust his monitors, and he doesn't seem to be ready to call in someone who can properly analyze his problem and suggest a practical solution. Some broadband eq in the LF range may help. We're just guessing here, Totally agreed! But I strongly suspect that not using bass traps could easily be a move in the wrong direction. suggesting things that have worked in other rooms, but as you know, every room is unique. And while there are a number of products on the market designed to improve any room, apparently the choice (or quantity) isn't right for this room. Agreed. |
#50
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
"Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot com wrote in
message Mike, Ben has already "treated" his room Yes, but with foam bass traps. :-) Given how acoustically-transparent most foam is at low frequencies, isn't "Foam Bass Trap" an oxymoron? ;-) |
#51
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
On Mar 18, 2:08 pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
I'm as critical as anybody of the idea of equalizing out the nulls and peaks that are always there below 200 Hz. My point is that in certain applications, broadband equalization which is what this roll-off is, can make some sense. It still might not be the best solution, but it might be the most practical solution. My thought was not to try to equalize the low end to flatten it out, it was to just whack it off so that it wouldn't distract him from making a good mix EXCEPT for the low end. It would be like using speakers that don't reproduce anything below, say, 100 Hz, but are nice and smooth otherwise. He wouldn't know what was going on down there, but chances are there's something useful but it needs to be thinned out. That can be done by someone who can hear what it sounds like, assuming that the mastering engineer has good taste and is told that this is to be part of his mastering job.. |
#52
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
"Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot comedy wrote:
Bob, But you're wrong about the traps. His room is too small, and the problem too severe. In fact, the smaller the room, the great amount of bass trapping it needs. I'm curious as to what negative result you believe will occur from adding bass traps. Won't leave enough room for CD players. -- ha Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam |
#53
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
Soundhaspriority wrote:
My advice to Ben may seem rough and ready, but I am the only person in this thread who has actually given Ben a prescription. My personal experience with the given prescription is that it further sickens the patient. -- ha Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam |
#54
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message ups.com On Mar 18, 8:04 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: What small rooms do is either a problem or an opportunity, depending on how you manage it. In the end, you might end up with both traps and some eq. Going back to the original message, his room is 9 x 13 feet with a 7 foot ceiling. It's smallish, but not that small. People record in smaller rooms, and use smaller rooms as control rooms, and they make them work. Agreed. One of the solutions is to simply get rid of the bass fed to the monitors, that's throwing off your perception of the mix and leave correcting the "unknown" low end to the mastering engineer. That amounts to equalization. But in the case, not narrowband EQ. And I agree that I have seen that work, but not without the rest of the room's physical problems being dealt with acoustically. -- ha Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam |
#55
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
"Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot comedy wrote:
Mike, Ben has already "treated" his room Yes, but with foam bass traps. :-) A marshmallow prison wall... -- ha Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam |
#56
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Ethan Winer" wrote Mike, Ben has already "treated" his room Yes, but with foam bass traps. :-) Given how acoustically-transparent most foam is at low frequencies, isn't "Foam Bass Trap" an oxymoron? ;-) Well, they work okay if you have lots of "foam bass". Otherwise, not. -- ha Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam |
#57
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
oups.com On Mar 18, 2:08 pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote: I'm as critical as anybody of the idea of equalizing out the nulls and peaks that are always there below 200 Hz. My point is that in certain applications, broadband equalization which is what this roll-off is, can make some sense. It still might not be the best solution, but it might be the most practical solution. My thought was not to try to equalize the low end to flatten it out, it was to just whack it off so that it wouldn't distract him from making a good mix EXCEPT for the low end. It would be like using speakers that don't reproduce anything below, say, 100 Hz, but are nice and smooth otherwise. He wouldn't know what was going on down there, but chances are there's something useful but it needs to be thinned out. That can be done by someone who can hear what it sounds like, assuming that the mastering engineer has good taste and is told that this is to be part of his mastering job.. From what I can tell, a lot of the world of recording worked this way up until the 80s or 90s. A lot of tracking and mixing was done with monitors that really didn't have a lot of bass. If the mastering room was also bass-challenged, stuff went out that sounds fine until you played it on a system where you can hear the difference. Given how intolerant vinyl is of too much bass, I'm wondering how the cutter room boys defended themselves. Maybe they just listened carefully to their lacquers, redid the ones that sounded bad, and trash-canned the ones that needed high pass filtering. |
#58
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
"Ty Ford" wrote in message
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:45:42 -0400, kooz wrote (in article .com): On Mar 15, 8:58 am, Ty Ford wrote: On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 12:02:35 -0400, Ben - TheStudioRI.com wrote (in article . com): Ok, here we go. my control room measures 9x13x7. the speakers are against the 9 back wall. I've done EVERYTHING I know how to do to tame the bass. I have bass traps in every corner, a custom 8" bass trap on the back wall behind the speakers, foam bass traps along the rear wall, diffusers above the mix position, etc. nothing has really helped. aside from redesigning the entire room (which I would do, but only if nothing else helps), what are your suggestions? Ben, Specifically, what is the problem? Regards, Ty Ford --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services Acting and Voiceover Demoshttp://www.tyford.com Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU This thread started with an earlier post. Ben was asking for advice on "better" monitors to replace his Mackie HR824s with, since the mixes he is making on his Sennheiser headphones "translate better" and "have better imaging." It seems the group has convinced him to examine his "professionally designed/treated" control room/mix suite acoustics, but his "years of engineering experience" are suggesting that his current set-up is adequate. Hmm, classic case of which one's right. Chances are neither are totally right, but since "fixing" the headphones isn't really an option, you start thinking room. I have nodes in my room. I know where they are. I know how much more to expect from them. I go to them to check mixes. If I'm hear more than X in them, I have to pull back the LF EQ. I haven't been in a studio yet that doesn't have audible nodes somewhere; walls, corners and other places. Try not to get hung up on nodes. I don't know where you have the Mackies in relationship to the corners walls and ceiling. Could yo post a jpg of an overhead view? In a related note: I'm breaking in my Acura RSX speakers as translation speakers and find a BIG difference between them and my JBL L100. Driving me a bit nuts on the present project, but I'll get it. Ironically, the Acura RSX speakers are probably a good example of dovetailing speakers with limited bass extension to a room that starts kicking up the bass at a relatively high frequency. If they get it right, this technique can be pretty impressive. Thing is the car sound boys can get it right with the speakers and then blow it elsewhere in the system. My Milan (Fusion with different grille and taillights) gets it right, but only if you first turn the bass control *all* the way down. You also have to turn the treble almost all the way down. Suddenly, the sound very extended and reasonably smooth in both directions. Dynamic range improves dramatically. It's almost like they shipped it with the loudness contour from an old Fisher tube receiver turned on all the time. ;-) Some of the best OEM sound systems in the industry end up in Chrysler trucks and Jeeps. |
#59
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
On Mar 19, 9:15 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
From what I can tell, a lot of the world of recording worked this way up until the 80s or 90s. A lot of tracking and mixing was done with monitors that really didn't have a lot of bass. If the mastering room was also bass-challenged, stuff went out that sounds fine until you played it on a system where you can hear the difference. A local cassette duplication house that I worked with in the '80s, for their first pass listen, used to throw a 100 Hz high pass filter on anything that came in from a source they didn't know. They were getting in tapes from people who loved to put a lot of low end on from their synths, but couldn't hear just how much was there, and the dupe house lost a few woofers by playing overly-bassy recordings. Given how intolerant vinyl is of too much bass, I'm wondering how the cutter room boys defended themselves. Maybe they just listened carefully to their lacquers, redid the ones that sounded bad, and trash-canned the ones that needed high pass filtering. Generally there was a limiter to protect the cutter, but it was routine to pan the bass to the center where there would be minimum vertical motion of the stylus. The automated pitch adjustment would usually keep the grooves apart, but sometimes they just had to do it over. |
#60
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
Ben has already "treated" his room, he doesn't trust his
monitors, and he doesn't seem to be ready to call in someone who can properly analyze his problem and suggest a practical solution. have you been reading my posts or just skimming them? I specifically recall asking if anyone could refer me to someone good in my area (RI). For the record, i'm ready. gimme names and numbers. |
#61
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
If It's not right within MY 4 walls, it doesnt leave the studio. That's fine if your studio will support that and you're good enough, but takes a pretty big ego. Some of the best engineers and producers in the business depend on another set of ears and a different monitoring environment to get it right. It's nothing to be ashamed of. Correcting for room deficiencies that affect a mix is big business for the Mastering Industry today. But like with the professional acoustic consultant, you have to find the right one. But do whatever you want. It's your money, your studio, your reputation, and your ego. My ego? Is it an ego issue that I want as close to a finished product as possible before it goes to mastering? Isn't that what a good recording engineer does? sorry, but if i'm not happy with a mix, it doesnt leave. period. call me an egomanic if that's what it makes me, but in my school of learning, anything else is called being a "hack". |
#62
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
Arny Krueger wrote:
From what I can tell, a lot of the world of recording worked this way up until the 80s or 90s. A lot of tracking and mixing was done with monitors that really didn't have a lot of bass. If the mastering room was also bass-challenged, stuff went out that sounds fine until you played it on a system where you can hear the difference. A lot of places in the seventies did this, but then a lot of places always just would knock all the low end off in mastering anyway to keep records from skipping on a Close 'N Play. But after a while people started expecting real low end on even quick and dirty pop music releases. And control rooms had to get better. Even so, lots of people were forced to use stupid tricks like watching the cone breakup patterns on NS-10s to judge their low end. Given how intolerant vinyl is of too much bass, I'm wondering how the cutter room boys defended themselves. Maybe they just listened carefully to their lacquers, redid the ones that sounded bad, and trash-canned the ones that needed high pass filtering. I worked for a company that did 45s for jukeboxes. We cut around thirty lacquers a day. There was no TIME to do careful mastering... folks tended just to throw the low pass filter on just in case. Of course, most of the disks we shipped sounded godawful, but the customers were happy. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#63
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
On Mar 19, 2:55 pm, "Ben - TheStudioRI.com"
have you been reading my posts or just skimming them? I specifically recall asking if anyone could refer me to someone good in my area (RI). For the record, i'm ready. gimme names and numbers. I don't hang on every word, but I get the gist. I'm also not a reference librarian, but I suspect that you aren't going to find anyone in Rode Island who knows studio acoustics. Boston perhaps. There's a large studio supply house there that I can't think of the name of - three letters, as I recall. John Storyk, who works out of New York likes to do project studios. And if you were to make some drawings of your room and send them to Ethan Winer (who has already made some suggestions without blatantly hawking his company's products) I'll bet he'd send you a design that would work quite well. |
#64
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
Mike,
And if you were to make some drawings of your room and send them to Ethan Winer (who has already made some suggestions without blatantly hawking his company's products) I'll bet he'd send you a design that would work quite well. Thanks much for the plug. I do exactly that every day, for no fee as part of the sale of our products. I'm not opposed to consultants when warranted and when the budget is there. But in cases like this I'd rather see someone put that money into buying more bass traps because in the end that's what's needed most. --Ethan |
#65
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Low End Room Issues
But do whatever you want. It's your money, your studio, your reputation, and your ego. My ego? Is it an ego issue that I want as close to a finished product as possible before it goes to mastering? Isn't that what a good recording engineer does? sorry, but if i'm not happy with a mix, it doesnt leave. period. call me an egomanic if that's what it makes me, but in my school of learning, anything else is called being a "hack". I think you took this the wrong way... There's nothing egotistical about aiming for perfection - that's the recipe for success afterall. However you do have to be reasonable about what you expect out of your facility. It's no coincidence that studios used to cost a lot more and music used to sound a lot better. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Choosing a room: 'rectangular' room vs. a 'triangular' attic | Pro Audio | |||
Choosing a room: 'rectangular' room vs. a 'triangular' attic | Pro Audio | |||
Choosing a room: 'rectangular' room vs. a 'triangular' attic | Pro Audio | |||
Choosing a room: 'rectangular' room vs. a 'triangular' attic | Pro Audio | |||
2001 Tahoe LT Delco CD Player Issues + Possible Tape Player Issues | Car Audio |