DSP is just a tool, which most professionals use as part of their toolkit. Room design, acoustic treatments, speaker location, and DSP together is the best solution for most. Sometimes you can’t treat the room, sometimes you can’t place the speakers where you want to. I agree with you... My mechanical equalizer so powerful it is cannot be used in a living room and setting it by ears is not for everyone... Not much more that setting a piano strings is for everyone... But i learned much in the process about speakers/ room /ears relations... Audiophile experience is here not in electronic design upgrade... Acoustic is key but you know yourself already that...But most did not.... Thanks for your numerous interesting threads.... |
I forgot to say that my room is now near perfectly refined for my particular structured hearing abilities and potentials not for ALL human ears like in a very great hall...But i dont doubt that my room sound relatively well tuned for all ears...It seems so if i see the reaction of my children... Acoustic of irregular or difficult small normal room obey and react to sound in a different way than a theater, or than an ideally acoustically designed audio rrom... Geometry, topology and content matters.... The mechanical equalizer was a cheap way in money to design my own audio room without the need to reconstruct my room...Passive absorbing, reflecting, and diffusive materials, even well balanced are not enough sometimes...Especially in 13 feet, irregular, but square room with 2 windows and with a complex acoustic content.... We must accomodate the response of the room to the speakers not only the speakers to the room... the mechanical equalizer can do the 2 function at the same time without modifying the basic parameters of the speakers directly...The different pressures new zones created by the equalizer itself are intermediary between the speakers and the room in the 2 directions, because the pipes grid begin with a few inches straws from the speakers and increase to 8 feet high, like observed an astute observer, oldhvymec ,the organ tuning pipe in a church... We can call the Helmholtz mechanical equalizer, a "silent organ" indeed and i called it so indeed in my first post about it in my thread... My best to all.... |
It seems that human ears react better to first wavefront of relatively "large" bandwith called a " voice timbre" not to a precise test frequency signal one after the others, like a microphone feeding it back to a correcting program...
Then i succeeded to correct my room with materials passive treatment but mainly with an Helmholtz "mechanical equalizer" calibrated by the the first wavefront of sound created by the specific timing of the frequencies of early and late reflections adding themselves to the direct waves from the speakers and coming also from the waves modified themselves by their near 80 crossings of the different zones pressure of my room each one second...
This mechanical equalizer is made, not of bottles like the original one, but of tubes and pipes, sometimes one inserted in an another thinner one, with a short or longer neck(various type of straws) which length i tuned with hearing and listening experiments... It takes me a week and perhaps 50 hours to tune the 22 tubes and pipes....Location is important... All refining parameters were dictated by sound like a piano tuner use his ears and implemented by cut in section of various diameter of straws inserted in one another....
I also use golden section in 3 set of 3 pipes among all the other singular 13 tubes and pipes... My longer tube is 8 feet long under my 81/2 feet ceiling.... Correcting these 9 pipes together was the more easy part , they were very impactful ...I also used 5 smaller pipes of various size near the tweeter of one speaker (3) and near the bass driver of the other speaker (2) to create a more audible first wavefront signal without changing the basic identical parameters of the speakers but only their response to the room but not their frequency response more their first wavefront timing response... It worked marvellously.... It was my adding modification piece in relation to speakers, to the original mechanical equalizer before the invention of the speakers itself....
I say all that because Helmholtz was able to set a room without DSP better than DSP... WHY?
We forget that, and we called DSP a progress and it is one indeed for "precise" measurements of a tested frequency in relation with a "precise" location in millimeters...
BUT we forgot that human ears is used to hear not a frequency alone, but a wavefront constituted of many frequencies together, usually a human vocal timbre, and we forgot that a room must be tested for itself not from and for a precise location in millimeter mainly ... And a room is not a set of passive bouncing walls waiting for the tested emitted frequency anyway, but an enclosure for the human voice, and an heterogeneous set of variable presssure zones, with the tubes and pipes being some of them...
The mechanical equalizer work on all audible frequencies not only on bass like many think, and they work at same time from near listening location and regular location in the room...not from an ideal "imaging spot" that is never an ideal spot anyway, the ideal spot is not made only for "imaging" but also for the " listener envelopment" factor ....The belief that near listening shield us from the room problems is completely erroneous in "small" room...
DSP is and could be a marvellous tool, but those who think that he can replace human ears must wait that new learning neural algorithm implement it in an A.I. expert system... Soon it will be done.... But the cost will be high.... In few years tough we will use it...
For now my ears is the main tool and it is enough...
It is a good thing also to learn acoustic by ears not by equations mainly....
I am not a scientist at all.... All that is my experience only and could be wrongly explained .... But here we describe our own experience and i tried.... |
There are two basic issues in rooms: absorption and reflection. A room is not a passive set of walls where we put reflecting or absorbing surfaces sorry... Save for sellers of acoustics panels publicity...You even forgot the diffusive surfaces... A room is a living animal resembling to a violin when a musician plays it...Any room speak his own language translated for human ears in a universal meaning by acoustic.... I cannot go further because i will type too much words.... Some people hate me already for my long posts and too numerous posts.... 😁 My metaphor is so right and good i will stay with it at the risk of being completely not understood... I go back to music anyway.... Chopin Mazurkas by Jakob Flier.... |
Only 4 rooms competed in my last audio show in L.A. 2017.
Thanks interesting post... I am not surprized at all tough..... 😁😊 Acoustic is most of there is about audio experience.... |
I think if people understood basics of what happens to a sound wave and what reverb means, the accoustical trade profession would collapse.
It aint that complex. Heres what you need to know.
dont want reflected sound interfering with fist waves from a speaker. They collide and muddy sound. Solution, buy an absorp panel. The first part is correct the simplification part is too simple and wrong... It is a precise timing of early and late reflections, that will create the essential wavefront that will produce imaging,and soundstage...The interference from reflected sounds are not a problem and could be a solution if the timing is right....In fact reflection coming from the back can contribute greatly to the listener envelopment (LEV)... Then nothing can be simple before understanding it...I tried myself to figure it out, being ignorant in acoustic, in the last week when designing my "machanical equalizer" i just finish to refine it after a week of fine tuning... My audio system sound right for the first time really,unbeknownst to me before... I refined my Helmholtz equalizer in listening choral music, orchestra, and very complex instrumental timbre like some harpsichord... But you know that all elements falls into place ONLY when the human voices are distinctly perceived each one in his space with his natural timbre...50 hours of listening experiments to adjust all pieces...Nothing is simple... 😁😊 Human ears are designed by evolution and history to perceive accurately timbre tonal speech in all circonstances...Music come ONLY from this fact save for the rythmic body movement accompanying language... What is simple is buying a costly acoustic materials or gear....But it is not my way....I prefer peanuts costs.... But we cannot spare the use of a room nor spare the great amount of time for listenings experiments tough....The room may or may not cost peanuts....It is a WAF..... 😁 «One is an auditory source width (ASW) which is defined as the width of the sound image fused temporally and spatially with a direct sound’s image and the other is listener envelopment (LEV) which is the degree of the fullness of sound images around the listener, excluding the sound image composing ASW.»Internet |
mahgister,
I am not accusing you of anything. Even less of psychosis. Never said it, never meant it. And even then, it could not be accusation. Short of taking some hallucinogenic drugs, people do not get psychotic by intent. Why you found yourself in my general observation is not known to me.
As you, as everyone else, frequently strays from strictly audio-related topic I responded to that Carlo quote which hardly has anything to do with betterment of any sound anywhere. If you dont means any harm it is Ok with me... But discussing with someone who bash others and treat me with the saying that i am an idiot from the beginning , i only answered by a quote from a book you dont know, in a discussion you did not participate to for the last week, then refrain yourself to comment the author of the book out of the context of this discussion... It is free to read this book on the net anyway and the general meaning is in 5 lines on wiki by the way.... I only answered and discussed with arguments, but when to my arguments someone reply by authority affirmation and attack me and others i answer accordingly.... It was or would have been simple for you to read the context of this discussion in ONLY the few last posts to UNDERSTAND that i spoke about audio related matter : a japanese scientific article first about the acoustic concept of "depth imaging", and second a new device i created after reading this article which make me able to refine greatly depth imaging in my system...These 2 contents were my unreplied answers to audio2design who dare not to give any argument but authoritative rejection and call all audiophiles, me included idiots... Instead of answering to this article and the possibility and usefulness and modalities of this new device of mine, audio2design then bashed my posts with no arguments, save blind test claim ... Then who discuss audio related matter with a content here ? Me... Who do resolve to pure authority and bashing without giving ANY arguments to the article and to my claim about my new device? Audio2design... You are a grown man you know that speaking like you just did, "insinuating" psychosis and borderline personality trouble is NOT AUDIO RELATED....but insulting, even if you did it not "openly", especially if you are a stranger or a newcomer in this precise discussion between me and someone else ... Have you read the japanese article yourself? are you interested by my new device? I dont think so.... If i am wrong if you are interested, i am here to discuss audio related matters... Am i clear? I respected you, never insinuated anything about you if you revise ALL my post here TO YOU for months, respect me accordingly , in audio related matters and in friendly term... I will do the same... I am direct and frank and an open mind easy to read, and i always spoke my mind.... Sorry for this clarification post but i dont like to be manipulated....Things are better said between grown men....Life is too short to hate.... I prefer to be creative at risk of being like you said "borderline"....Or worst.... |
Even if one gets pleasure of bashing others, it is worth it. Not to you or me, but to the person getting that pleasure. glupson i accepted your advice about moderation... Because it is wise advice...and i accept all wise advices... For the rest if i can accept a friendly advice about moderation, i cannot permit you to judge me accusing me of bipolar disorder or psychosis... This is insulting... Am i insulting you? i respected you, why not also respecting me? My pleasure HERE is communicating friendly with those who partake passion for the sound improvement.... For my critical faculty it is not necessary to say anything.... |
Glupson you are beside the point....
The pleasure to bash others is not worth anything at all indeed...
The book of Cipolla you never read is universally reviewed for being humorous and right on the spot... Then you could criticize my use of the book but the book itself is very good and free...
Here i proposed ideas of my own and i am open to discuss without bashing others nor any group of people.... That was my point...I correct myself when i am wrong....I am not perfect ....
I am open to criticism...About any concept....I am here to communicate and learn...
Creativity is not a defect by the way, even when wrong...To date all my experiments give me pleasure and also to some others who repeat them successfully... If someone is not interested by my ideas it is not necessary for him to read my posts...
But if someone out of the sky come and trash all others audiophiles ideas, devices, or suggestions, from the start because of his superior knowledge i dont go with that without discussing with ARGUMENTS, if you had read me you already know that...... Bashing audiophiles for being audiophile that seems not too healthy to me...
Perhaps my enthusiasm innerve you then i am sorry....Dont read my posts....And dont add that all "pleasure" are equal.... It is ridiculous and wrong....All pleasures are not right nor equal to each others...I defend myself but i dont take any pleasure to bash anybody, but i am able to defend myself if someone attack me without any sound arguments...Blind test is not an argument nor a reason to reject from the start any unorthodox means to play with sound...And not a reason to accuse all audiophiles to be stupid.... Then i reacted with arguments and experiments to prove my point....
Is it not enough? you said it is too much.... but for whom?
If i cannot be of interest for others here i will quit...It seems some others like my contribution.....Then i go on...
|
Thanks...
But i know already that myself.... All my life i tried to learn a bit more out of my window...
You are right but not the way intended... Some idiot are more reformable and recoverable it seems...
By the way read the best book on stupidity by Carlo Cipolla free on the net.... a masterpiece...
He define stupidity being someone who bash others without gaining anything for himself in the process even at the price of losing his own credibility ...Except the pleasure to do it.....
Who knows perhaps i suffer the Kruger-Dunning syndrome like you observe perhaps even rightfully ? But i prefer to be an idiot than being stupid in the Cipolla sense... I dont like despising group of people and any people...
Then the difference between being an idiot and being stupid is the idiot dont bash others, the stupid did it all the times.... I definitely prefer to be a reformable idiot....Even with this Dunner-Kruger syndrome....
😊
|
But no, i read a paper once, now my knowledge is superior to everyone else. You only know how to bash and attack... NEVER here i mention myself being superior, on the contrary i discuss with all friends here about many simple devices to help each other S.Q. improving method... The ONLY ONE here bashing all audiophiles and being sperior is yourself... You bash, a real pro musician explaining TIMBRE, another engineer discussing with you about imaging and drivers, all turntables lovers, and anyone who dare to try a "tweaks" or any device out of your narrow perspective window... I created my last device trying to understand something you NEVER explain here, the " depth imaging" creation in audio, i read some article trying to improve my IGNORANCE, and that inspired me a new device, which i use at the time where i typed these words on my computer.... Call that the name you want, i never pretend to be knowleadgeable like you to all here all the time, i am creative tough, know how to read when someone has nothing for arguments, except all the logical fallacies in his bag like strawman argument and appeal to authority and all fallacies in between .... I could deconstruct all your posts if it was not for a waste of time.... You never read the article suggested by me to you, and you have never figure out how work my "mechanical Helmholtz equalizer"...Anyway i dont think that you even know that you dont understrand epistemology, and real acoustic out of the recording engineering window... Sorry.... I am ignorant too but i proved for myself that i tried to learn, my device is my exam....I dont need your superior knowledge, it is not useful to improve my S.Q. .... I erased my question..... I will retype it now for the reader sake... Is it me the idiot? 😁😊 |
You are listening to two rooms. The room where the sound was recorded, and your listening room. You have a choice. Listen to one, or both. Your room is the more powerful one, when disapearing itself she can let emerge the acoustic atmosphere of the original recorded event, and more importantly when she compensate for what has been lost in the recording event in his own way AND increase the positive aspects of the original acoustical event... This is how powerful your room acoustic controls could be....I know it first hand....Passive materials treatment by the way are only HALF of the story, unbeknownst to most... Activation of the room/speakers relation with Helmholtz science is the missing half.... Acoustic sellers of bass traps dont inform us about that part...A right balance between,reflection,absorption and diffusion is not enough... It is half the story especially in small room irregular geometry, or complicated topology and acoustic content....We must recreate a depth imaging space encompassing the listener in spite of the irregular obstacle in the small room and we must refine the speakers/room timing frequencies wavefront for that.......Helmholtz science here help a lot.. I use a homemade simple "mechanical equaliser" only made of tubes, pipes and straws with capacity to modulate the neck at will.... The location is crux of matter... I will explain my method in my thread "miracles in audio" in the week to come...I called my device "Helmholtz pipe meeting the first wave front"...An electronic equalizer is NOT a mechanical equalizer... One work with a microphone, mine with ears, one work with very narrow frequencies responses,mine with large dyssimetrical modified frequencies response different fom each speakers without modyifying the drivers responses of each speakers but instead their first wave front relation with one another in the room...I am not a scientist only a creative mind who gave to myself the right tool... It work even if my knowledge of acoustic is elementary ....Peanuts cost by the way... A room is NOT a passive sets of walls only , it is an organized sets of different pressure zones... All seems good when you think that upgrading electronic is enough, save for those ignoring acoustic which pay the price, unwilling it or not... By the way i only used discarded materials and homemade devices THEN setting a room could cost nothing... Listening time is the price.... The greatest asset in audio is NOT a 100,000 speakers and amplifier but a room you can control....It is not a turntable or a dac either, nor a tube amplifier instead of a solid state one; it is a room you can learn how to control sound.... This is the myths and useless wars between audiophiles in all threads.... Simple acoustic is always the main player....All the others players are secondary choices with their positives or negatives... Acoustic reign supreme, uncontested queen of musical and sound perception for millenia.... Not your dac or your vinyl so good they are.... |
That's the problem, most people use a living room for their listening pleasure, so it can't look like a laboratory. I'm not trying to say all your ideas are bad, some are quite good, just seems like you have every tweak known to mankind in there. I don't know how every tweek you use can add up to a sonic benefit.
Thanks for your observation... You seems a fine soul then i apologize for my rude and direct asnwer... I perfectly understand that people cannot transform their living room like mine... In the other hand we cannot erase the fact that an audio room is the best asset... if only one of my suggestion is helpful i will be pleased thats all... My regards to you..... |
The only mystery for me is whether some room treatment might dramatically improve imaging.
The stuff I've read so far sounds awfully complicated though.
This is simple acoustic law... Yes it seems complicated... But it is not complicated at all with some basic principle in acoustic... The only thing which was difficult but also it was all the fun, was the time it take me to did it right.... 2 years at turtle pace in the beginning, but a high speed in the last 3 months... My room is now very good ... Peanuts cost and only fun.... But it is a dedicated room, it will cost me much more to install "esthetic " solutions, and efficient one in a common room...I dont even know if i could do it..... The greatest asset for sound quality is not the costly gear, it is a room acoustically well set only for music.... |
May not be putting them at risk, but might get them on an episode of hoarders. If i suggest ONLY one good idea to one people my goal is reached... What do you suggest: i must silence my creativity because you feel lost and obliged to negate all my ideas at once? Go on buying your costly upgrade and let others decide for themselves if something is useful for them or not .... Are you a censor in audio thread? And dont insult my audio room because this is a "laboratory" for me not a living room... Take what is good for you or not, but mute useless irrational criticism like " putting others at risk" or hoarding accusation... Put yourself in my shoes and and you will know the name by with i can call your post.... Perhaps i will be in the "hoarder" series next episode, but i prefer that, than to be in "complaining neighbour" series next episode to come... Be creative instead... |
Know what, that one acoustic panel transformed my room into one of the best sounding rooms I’ve heard anywhere. i understood you perfectly, a room could be transformed by ONE single straw... For uneducated mind it is magic or snake oil... For Helmholtz and me now, pure acoustic science, a science far more important for audio experience than electronic engineereing and in the worst case on par with electronic engineering.... For sure Helmholtz results are integrated in electronic design itself now, but i speak for those who could use his results like me at low cost in acoustic of room, like his famous sets of bottles....This experiment i go on with to reach new suprizing result for my speakers, cost me NOTHING... This is the gist of the journey i started.... Others will prefer to buy a costly equalizer without even knowing the limitations of this gear in acoustic settings.... I dont have the money to buy plug sit and boast.... 😁 But for you i offer my deepest respect and thanks for your observation useful for all.... 😊 |
Then there are the Squids the guys who buy cheap bikes, make them loud and ride like idiots in traffic.They are screaming for attention like the Poser but put others at risk in the way they ride. All metaphors has the limit intended or unintended by their user... For example myself, i bought cheap audio, i make listening experiment , with conventional scientific datas, for example Helmholtz acoustic, and sometimes taking my own way, for exemple investigating the effect of shungite on my electrical grid at low cost... What do you call riding like idiot in the traffic? and putting others at risk in my case? Communicating cheap way to experiment and improve the system is not putting others at risk, but limiting the illusion of consumerism and contesting with some fact the linear relation between price and S.Q. Your metaphor is right for part, in any group, there exist poser, and squid and true pro....But also the solitary out of the crowd persona....The stranger...And you miss it... Why? Anyway your metaphor is only a tool to simplify human relations in a group and classify very different humans in three categories FOR YOUR OWN PURPOSE AND AGENDA...I add here the category that was missing...The most important category for Hollywood...The stranger to any group.... I dont work with simplistic metaphors in my life simply because in your group i am the man who take his motorcycle solitary and i dont speak to group members but to human on a one to one basis always.... I hate groups and crowds...The group mentality, motorcycles or of any other mass mentality... I never had a boss in all my life... I go my way....I worked all my life without anyone beside me.... But understand me right i like people on a one to one basis...Any herd mentality will make me quit the game....I am a sorcerer not a sheep classified in your limited 3 categories list... In a virtual audio thread we must take the risk to speak to many and be simplisticly categorized... This post was just to correct for the more important missing category.... The most important one by the way....The stranger....Who is in any list you will make for your use but is truely in none.... The fact that precisely this category was lacking from your list indicate much about yourself no ? My best to you.... |
Apologies mahgister, but I couldn’t resist - just a light hearted (bad?) joke made with benevolent intentions - hope you don’t take it the wrong way 😉
No need to apologize... You make me laugh... For 2 reasons, the first is it is a good joke... But i laugh more because it was true, i modified all my headphones with success... My journey to good sound begins with them... I am "nut" with or without headphone.... For all my friends only tough... And you are a friend.... Thank for the smile..... |
Time to buy better headphones? I owned 2 stax and very good headphones... But those who could beat my 2 listening positions in my room on some count like Stax Omega, or RAAL SR1 for example or some others,are way too costly for me... And at the end a good room has the advantage to be without anything around my head limiting my movement for sure....more practical and easy.... I begin with headphones, 7 years ago, thinking it was the best solution if someone dont have the money for a very good speakers gear... I was wrong, acoustic among other things is the key, not money itself necessarily... My best to you glupson.... |
Helmholtz resonators aren’t something you can just add to a room willy billy, they are very hard to get right even with proper measurements. FIRST, i never "add willy,billy" it is a process in the course of many weeks of listenings and adjusting volumes and neck... SECOND Throwing the baby with the bath waters is not a very good idea, nor a valid argument... What are the polluted waters? It is the fact which is right that my tuning of my 21 Helmholtz tubes and pipes cannot be "mathematically perfect" and corresponding perfectly to the geometry, topology and content of the room, being set by my ears... But the tubes and pipes are set also to correspond to the specific structure of my ears by feed back successive refinements....This is an advantage that compensate the imperfect mathematical tuning of the Helmholtz tubes and pipes by ears and listenings experiments instead of a complex processed mathematical tuning only with the room parameters and some tested frequencies corresponding to a very precise location each time only... This is one thing....But what is the baby? The HUGE improvement, in imaging, soundstage, and timbre perception, in spite of the absence of perfection, is the BABY.... why do you recommend me to throw it with the waters? I will replace it with what ? An equalizer? Read about the limit of electronic equalization, about the cost of a good equalizer, and after that think again and put in your pipe the important fact that my homemade Helmholtz tubes and pipes COST ME NOTHING.... They are made with discarded tubes, pipes, or straws of various volumes and diameters... Add to this fact that Helmholtz tubes can correct bass in the room on a level which equalization cannot do because equalization work on the gear electronics not directly on the room pressures zones.... Then when you put an argument think about the premises you will use... «Your result is imperfect, only perfection is aceptable, then your result are bulshitt....» Guess what is wrong with your reasoning any logician could call a "sophism" ? Your relative mathematical perfection in relation simultaneously to some specfic ears and to some specific room dont exist to begins with, then it is stupid to reject my relatively imperfect reasult on this basis.... Then, try to think with all factors in balance and without vicious circle.... Thinking like walking or tuning a room is something we must learn...Opinions dont replace thinking except in the "sunday skeptic boy club" and many others clubs.... I figure myself in no club.... |
The state of the audiophile world is easily summed up in two threads. This one, with barely 2 pages, and the schumann resonator thread pushing 6 pages. One of these will make a difference. One will convince you that you made a difference, for a little while till you find something else wrong. Most audiophiles are lazy, this is the real problem.
What great character! Only insults to a complete group of unknown people mixed together for the self pleasure of insulting... No facts, only half truth about timbre and imaging.... Have you read the article by the 3 japanese? No? Are you lazy? Did you guess what was my simple experiment yet? |
"The acoustician knows the problem but can’t imagine the solution, so he doesn’t ask the DSP engineer.” Helmholtz did never own a dsp system but he created room acoustic with bottles... I imitated him and my room with a 500 bucks system trash all my 7 headphones and rival any systen i had listen to... You are right in your post about the great tool DSP integrated will be .... I just want to make a "nuance" that primitive methods using helmholtz tubes and pipes to set the room/speakers together using EARS could work... I did it at no cost... The orchestra fill my room with each instruments in his tonal sphere... |
and he told me that unless I wanted to get a much more significant number of bass traps that would heavily change the look of the room (and my marital status)
You could use Helmholtz tubes and pipes to transform the acoustic decresasing the bass traps to only a minimum level.... But it is all up to your wife acepting a set of 3 groups of tubes in the living room... 😊 For sure the biggest asset in audio is not the gear at all it is using a room ONLY for audio... |
You do not need any room treatments. At least not while you’re using your headphones.
My room settings are now so good that all my 7 headphones are not on the level of the room on any count... Then think twice.... |
Not only ALL rooms need treatment. but audio experience could be 75 % acoustical, 25 % basic good electronic design...
This % is variable, but NEVER in favor of the electronic design like 49% acoustical, 51 % electronic design...
This is pure science....
The sound you listen to come from the room /speakers, NEVER from the speakers alone in a small room especially...
It takes audio magazine market to make us believe that "upgrading" a10,000 dollars amplifier to a 100,000 dollars one, will be the key to audiophile experience.... Helmholtz has known much about sound perception one century ago than consumers magazine now... |
Believe me, almost all untreated rooms sound terrible. Right on the spot.... But even if i dont doubt that all HFT are very good, we can do it ourself at no cost with basic acoustic science... I know, i did it myself.... I say that for those who cannot afford to bought them, not to denigrate good engineering.... Having the money i would have probably bought them... But i did not need them now.... |
Junk Science. Read Helmholtz before writing stupidity without explanation in audio thread....It is no more advanced science now it is simple experiment for children....What is you age? The good news if you are young, writing your graffitis on the walls of audio thread, are you could always learn something in the future....The bad news if you are old is: it is too late, go on with your graffitis.... You perhaps will be lucky and some will call that "art" or "thinking".... Not me.... |
The organ uses its set of pipes and there are tuning tubes and pipes for the chapels The important words are "tuning tubes and pipes for the chapels" It is why i called my Helmholtz-Fibonacci room tuner a "silent organ"... More powerful than most electronic upgrade.... Acoustic is key audiophile asset, not electronic design.... Any good electronic design will sound good in a controlled room... The differences between pieces of gear will exist even in this room but will be way less impactful than acoustical change... My second maxin in audio is now: ONE straw kill or ressuscitate a room.... The first maxim was: Dont upgrade before embedding everything right Deep salutations and thanks for the observation.... |
mahgister your Helmholtz devices, you are using them for bass EQ primarily? or ALL frequencies, Helmholtz devices rightfully understood and designed works on ALL frequencies... Yes we can use them for bass tightening purpose, but teaching that this is their main purpose like in some acoustical marketting advice is erroneous...They are a room tuner not only a potential bass device.... My Helmholtz tubes and pipes, distributed in series, i chose set of three with a ratio 1,6 between each three pipes with a straw of variable lenght determined by listenings experiments work on ALL frequencies scale directly or indirectly... i called that a " silent organ"....Someone more crafty than me like you are could make them beautiful by the way.... I use ordinary straw but someone could use anything less cheap and more esthetic...I use old plumber copper pipes or PVC tubes with a sheet of plastic for cover....It is homemade to say the least...But nevermind it work powerfully.... My goal was not esthetical anyway but Hi- Fi experience for the poor... 😁😊 I have 18 tubes and pipes with tube one 8 feet high.... My main set is 2 sets of three....Cutting only 1/2 inch or adding 1/2 inch from 6 straws will change the sound of your room MORE than changing an amplifier or on par with changing bad speakers set for a good one or the opposite...I guess someone could do a good job with 3 set of three the longer tube around 8 feet and the shorter one of the nine pipes for example around 6 inch with the ratio 1,6 between them .... Only one straw can destruct the room acoustic or transform it like the tightening of a string on a violin.... Acoustic is an empirical science and art because nothing could replace ears.... This summer i will use a mic. to optimize the speakers/room response tough... But advising peeople to use equalization to replace room acoustic is pure ignorance....Equalization work only for a precise test frequency in relation with a very precise spot it is a complementary tool not the main tool for tuning the room to MY ears and his particular structural properties... Nobody want to listen to a "perfect" sound but to the sound which will be pleasing for his ears specific abilities ....I apologize for my digression from your question.... I have many defects and i speak too much.... 😊 My best to you and best wishes for your health..... |
Jim Smith in his excellent book "Get Better Sound" talks about the room, and how spending lots of money on your hi-fi without treating the room (and setting up the speakers properly too), at least on a basic level, means you’ll never hear the full potential of your system. A modest system in a well set up room will often sound better than a more expensive system in a room that is untreated, especially if the room has inherent problems ( dimensions, ceiling height/shape, large/many windows, too live or too dead a floor etc). Right on the spot and my amazing experience after 2 years of listening experiments... The truth is most people has never take the journey themselves and they are completely unconscious of the poweful impact of acoustic in 2 way: Passive balanced materials treatment.... Active controls of the zone pressure of the room....The room can be activated, it is not only a set of passive walls waiting for the waves to be absorbed, reflected or diffused...The room is like a set of strings in a very tight compressive mechanism, a violin for example; because the waves cross the room 80 times a second in my room for example.... Zone pressure play a great part if we use them to balance the natural frequencies response of our room to compensate and balance well with our specific speakers...Helmholtz science... No gear can beat the room at ANY price....EVEN in near listening in a small room....Unbeknownst to most.... This is my experience.... Those who contradict have never experience by themselves how cutting few inches from a straw can improve or destroy a room... I did... The more important asset of an audio system is not the gear it is a dedicated room.....Most people upgrade gear trying to compensate for a bad room without even knowing it...They called their choices "tastes".... But in music only exist natural timbre perception first OR last, not taste first AND last.... It’s snake oil, voodoo science.
So why is accoustical panels gonna help? It is not voodoo science at all... But we must read a little about acoustic science, comic book will not help here.... But the problem is that company sells costly ready made esthetical easy solutions... But it is not so simple , buying costly materials is not the solution at least nor for me.... And each room has specific problem because of his geometry, topology and content, which no company can take the time to solve in details at low cost...I made all my materials treatment with useless and discarded materials and i never bought anything costly at all.... It takes time and listening experiments tough... But it worked... |
Even for near listening most room need not only passive acoustic treatment but more active controls...I know that by experience and experiments... i know that because i read many times that near listening can spare me acoustic treatment and it is false in my room and physics dont change with room....But many people have not experience this fact because the listening in a moderately big room is not the same experience than in a smaller one....Then near listening in s small room is NOT AT ALL near listening in a way bigger room....
Acoustic is more complex than what we read in audio thread...
A room is NOT a passive reflecting set of surfaces for the waves of sound to boucing off or be absorbed or being diffused... Like acoustical companies suggest to sell their materials... This is only half the story... A room can be activated and is a potential sets of different heterogeneous pressurized zones.... Helmholtz science...
Acoustic is more powerful than most upgrade...
No speakers at any price could shine in a bad room or even in an ordinary room.... |
