|
|
Post by plinker on Oct 20, 2023 12:03:59 GMT -6
If you've shot your room, please show us the results, and some context: room specs, treatment, etc. Here's mine: - a shitty 10'x20' built-in basement room. Sheetrock is 1/2" on cheap, metal studs - desk/monitors face the length of the room, with montors 8" from back wall - monitors are Pelonis Model 42 (bought from RGO classifieds from a stratboy ). Best monitor decision I've made. - These are point-source, active, Tannoy drivers, externally bi-amp'd.
- The drivers are small, so the amp has a built-in low cut at 70 Hz. This is a definite plus in my crappy room -- the sheetrock just vibrates with anything below that. I use my HD600 to check the bottom octave.
- I've treated the listening area 10'x10' (front/sides) with home-made, nested, acoustic corner panels and double-layers Producer's Choice acoustic blankets. They rock!
- the back area (10'x10') walls are lined with junk...err...diffusers 
I'm pretty happy with the results of this sweep. The lines represent the room response of the left and right speakers.
Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by doubledog on Nov 26, 2023 14:24:08 GMT -6
what did you use for the sweep? REW or something else? I've got a bunch of REW results, but without knowing how it was setup, sometimes the graphs can look way better than it is...
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Nov 27, 2023 7:18:28 GMT -6
what did you use for the sweep? REW or something else? I've got a bunch of REW results, but without knowing how it was setup, sometimes the graphs can look way better than it is... Need to know, plinker! |
|
|
|
Post by plinker on Nov 27, 2023 8:31:11 GMT -6
what did you use for the sweep? REW or something else? I've got a bunch of REW results, but without knowing how it was setup, sometimes the graphs can look way better than it is... The sweep graph was done using Sonarworks. I love that system! I've used REW a long time ago. Sonarworks takes many samples from multiple points in the room. It's quite comprehensive. |
|
|
|
Post by doubledog on Dec 7, 2023 14:35:04 GMT -6
meant to post this earlier but every time I went to my studio I had something else on my mind and forgot to grab these... only to find out I had them on a USB stick the whole time.  this was done with REW. 2 different sets of monitors - Dynaudio BM6A mkii and then Fluid FX80. 1/12 smoothing (I think less resolution smoothing makes everything look better?). it's been a couple years - that's all I remember right now! oh, and my studio is 19'x25' with 10 ft ceiling base that are vaulted in the center (to 15') . 2x layers of 5/8" sheetrock (overlapping seams) on 2x6 joists (standalone building) . I had drums (with lots of snare drums) and guitars, and other stuff probably ringing in the room at the time lol.  |
|
|
|
Post by plinker on Dec 8, 2023 18:16:06 GMT -6
meant to post this earlier but every time I went to my studio I had something else on my mind and forgot to grab these... only to find out I had them on a USB stick the whole time. this was done with REW. 2 different sets of monitors - Dynaudio BM6A mkii and then Fluid FX80. 1/12 smoothing (I think less resolution smoothing makes everything look better?). it's been a couple years - that's all I remember right now! oh, and my studio is 19'x25' with 10 ft ceiling base that are vaulted in the center (to 15') . 2x layers of 5/8" sheetrock (overlapping seams) on 2x6 joists (standalone building) . I had drums (with lots of snare drums) and guitars, and other stuff probably ringing in the room at the time lol. View AttachmentThanks for sharing. Both speakers have a similar curve to them. Isn't it funny how, ultimately, the room dictates the speaker response?? We all want gear to be the magic elixir, but the room owns our asses with respect to transduction -- and it's a bitch!  BTW, my last pair of near fields were BM6 passives. I loved the sound of them, but my room simply couldn't handle the additional bass frequencies. If I ever move, I'll surely investigate the Dynaudio sound again. They remind me of my Senn HD600 cans...mellow, but precise (if that makes sense). |
|
|
|
Post by tim on Dec 17, 2023 20:06:23 GMT -6
KH420’s in room with very little acoustic treatment. Room is asymmetric and those dips are SBIR. I’ll probably spend some time doing more treatment in the new year. Despite the dips it actually sounds pretty good.  |
|
|
|
Post by linas on Jan 25, 2024 11:28:15 GMT -6
i.imgur.com/m4EqRYE.jpegMy old room in my parents house. No real treatment, wooden construction, glass wool, symmetry... Sounded very warm & pretty
|
|
|
|
Post by doubledog on Jan 26, 2024 9:25:10 GMT -6
difficult to understand a graph with no context. What did you use and how was this measured? What does the Y axis show here? and you did not measure below 50hz?
|
|
|
|
Post by linas on Jan 26, 2024 12:15:29 GMT -6
My friend is a top acoustician. He told me what to do and asked me to measure RT60 (REW). He said that this graph looks respectable and you cannot expect significantly more in a home environment. Of course, I could have built boxes in the corners to fix the bottom end but it would have been expensive, time consuming, etc. (I don't live in that place anymore anyway....)
|
|
|
|
Post by plinker on Jan 26, 2024 13:38:26 GMT -6
Thanks for posting. What does the Y-axis represent?
|
|
|
|
Post by doubledog on Jan 26, 2024 14:46:49 GMT -6
RT-60 is a time reference so I would expect seconds or milliseconds. 200ms sounds like wall to wall carpet lol. But I just ran an RT-60 test (on my phone) while sitting in an untreated home office (for lack of better words) and with a loud hand clap was seeing RT of 1.27 to 3.62 seconds depending on the frequency of course. So I'm thinking maybe the scale is seconds, but missing the decimal point?
Anyway, so while that is an interesting bit of data to have, it's more useful for measuring how "live" your room is. If you are recording there, that might be a good or bad thing depending on what you are going for. But for mixing the REW frequency sweeps are probably more useful (and that's what some of the others have posted here)
|
|
|
|
Post by dok on Feb 21, 2024 23:24:11 GMT -6
Here's my listening position before applying SoundID Reference/Sonarworks:  And here it is after:  Brought that big node at 84Hz down a few dB to a more acceptable range and filled out that weird gully between 10-20kHz. I think I could drop that 84Hz down a bit more with a ceiling cloud but this is a bedroom in a rental with popcorn ceilings. So just about +/- 5dB overall, which I've read is just about as good as one can expect for a room that isn't purpose-built. And it's 12x14 anyway. I should have included an example without the subwoofer, which wasn't pretty. Subs are good.  Another kind of interesting thing - I recently got a nice 32" LG Ergo display that uses this nifty stand that clamps on to the desk and can swivel and swing around. I realized that I could actually engineer a mount for it that would allow me to put it back behind the front plane of my studio monitors so it was interfering less! It took me two days and several trips to the hardware store but looks and feels great. And I measured (this is without SoundID). Before:  After:  Noticeably cleaned up some decay right above 1k, and some slight improvements across the board down to about 300Hz. I didn't keep the spectrograph screenshots but there was also a bit less comb filtering. Interestingly, half a percent less THD across the board as well. Now, the question is was it worth it and can I hear the difference? I think so, and I know that I can measure it. And I'll also point out that this is a field where people spend thousands of extra dollars for ~5% improvements all the time, so why not? Ah shit, I think I just talked myself into putting up that ceiling cloud... |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Feb 21, 2024 23:41:41 GMT -6
Here is my room as told by Sonarworks  Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 26, 2024 3:23:31 GMT -6
RT-60 is a time reference so I would expect seconds or milliseconds. 200ms sounds like wall to wall carpet lol. But I just ran an RT-60 test (on my phone) while sitting in an untreated home office (for lack of better words) and with a loud hand clap was seeing RT of 1.27 to 3.62 seconds depending on the frequency of course. So I'm thinking maybe the scale is seconds, but missing the decimal point? Anyway, so while that is an interesting bit of data to have, it's more useful for measuring how "live" your room is. If you are recording there, that might be a good or bad thing depending on what you are going for. But for mixing the REW frequency sweeps are probably more useful (and that's what some of the others have posted here) rt60 is more revealing with a proper waterfall graph as then you can see how the room is affecting hold and times of all frequencies, the larger the rt above 60 the more the problem, a proper waterfall should really validate your listening experience in the room: more clear areas should be at 60 or lower , less clear 60 and above. dok it becomes a game of inches, but each improvement benefits you every time you turn on your monitors: go for it . ragan looking good, have you done a lot of treatment, other than your desk made from was it wood from your grandad's cottage ? , that adds all the good ambiance right there:) |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Feb 26, 2024 10:02:24 GMT -6
RT-60 is a time reference so I would expect seconds or milliseconds. 200ms sounds like wall to wall carpet lol. But I just ran an RT-60 test (on my phone) while sitting in an untreated home office (for lack of better words) and with a loud hand clap was seeing RT of 1.27 to 3.62 seconds depending on the frequency of course. So I'm thinking maybe the scale is seconds, but missing the decimal point? Anyway, so while that is an interesting bit of data to have, it's more useful for measuring how "live" your room is. If you are recording there, that might be a good or bad thing depending on what you are going for. But for mixing the REW frequency sweeps are probably more useful (and that's what some of the others have posted here) rt60 is more revealing with a proper waterfall graph as then you can see how the room is affecting hold and times of all frequencies, the larger the rt above 60 the more the problem, a proper waterfall should really validate your listening experience in the room: more clear areas should be at 60 or lower , less clear 60 and above. dok it becomes a game of inches, but each improvement benefits you every time you turn on your monitors: go for it . ragan looking good, have you done a lot of treatment, other than your desk made from was it wood from your grandad's cottage ? , that adds all the good ambiance right there:) Yeah I’ve got absorption all over the place. All corners, wall behind monitors, above mix position, above drums, on walls. It’s dead. |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 26, 2024 10:06:23 GMT -6
Curve looked very good !
A little peak and trough above 100, like 6 db , is your visual monitor behind the front plane of your 48’s or maybe the low ceiling ? Just curious what you may have done there?
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Feb 26, 2024 10:32:29 GMT -6
Yeah the iMac is several inches behind the front plane of the LYD48s. They're both more or less against the wall behind them, but the Dyns are deeper.
|
|
