|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 23, 2024 10:38:55 GMT -6
There are times that a room just won't work. Period. But my take is to get the room as good as possible, choose your speakers well, and learn them room/speakers and get back to work. IMO, software room correction is like putting a band aid on a wound that won't heal. Best to get it dealt with and then learn to live with any disabilities that may occur.
I knew that my room with multiple windows and 8' tall side French doors (glass) would cause a problem, but Jeff Hedback really knocked it out of the park and got the room "right". It's essentially "flat" except for one little dip around 180Hz on the Left (glass door side) that I can easily work around. Actually, it's so right that at this point, really feel that I have no need of any correction....although that elusive "perfect" room still exists in my mind, and it's always a phantom that we decide to chase.....or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by andersmv on Feb 23, 2024 10:46:21 GMT -6
This isn't a complicated "what if". You try it and you either like it or you don't. I spent more money on speakers, mixed on those speakers for almost 2 years and got a good idea of what I was and wasn't hearing correctly as far as translation went. The two biggest issues were a lower midrange bump in my room (which meant things like bass guitars were always a bit too quiet, it was a common revision I got from clients consistently) and some slightly sibilant vocals that I wasn't catching. I tried room correction and it noticeably tackled those two problems, which made me feel good about giving it a try. It worked really well for me, my job's easier now. I still check my mixes in the car/phone/boombox, but rarely have to tweak anything. I don't know what to tell you, it just worked for me in this room. It's not some mystical process, it solved a few of my problems in a logical way. All the other rooms I've worked in in the past and all the other speakers, I've had to spend a lot more time "learning" them. That meant sometimes making some very specific mix choices that didn't really sound "right" to me in the room, but I knew would mean better translation in the long run and was the right choice. The room correction stuff has allowed me to trust my speakers a lot more, which is really nice. These aren't massive night and day differences and issues here, it's more "fine tuning" more than anything. I can still mix stuff just fine with the room correction stuff turned off, it's just easier and better with it on. I can't help that it worked out like that for me  , otherwise I would have turned it off and never touched it again. I can't say there's been any downsides to having the room correction stuff where it's made me work different and there have been compromises (sonically at least. There's DEFINITELY work flow downsides and a bit of a shift there). If you're happy with your monitoring setup and everything's translating perfectly, don't change anything and just keep on doing what you're doing. If you know there's some consistent issues you're having, I still say it's worth trying. This definitely isn't an area I feel strongly about where I try to pitch it to everyone as a life changing experience and "must have". It just seems like some people are grumpy about the whole idea and think it's going to do more harm than good. I ran into the same issues with a lot of the headphone correction stuff and "virtual rooms" for headphones. I gave all of that a good, honest go and was getting horrible results. I've got plenty of friends that are using it and swear by it, it didn't work for me though. |
|
|
|
Post by nicksteinborn on Feb 23, 2024 10:55:28 GMT -6
I made a Sonarworks curve 4 years ago and haven't touched it since. Sure, I could learn the 6db bumps at 200Hz, 1k, and 2k, but that 200Hz bump sounds like absolute turds and makes listening to music very unfun. I have a decent amount of treatment in here, but the bump still prevails. I'm ok with Sonarworks living on my control room insert in Cubase. I don't even think about it. It makes listening to music more fun AND my mixes seem to translate much better. Is it really all that different from the countless professional installs that have a White EQ on their mains?
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Feb 23, 2024 10:58:59 GMT -6
Well said andersmvYeah, for me it was just an "oh, that's easier to hear what's going on between that kick drum decay and the low, 335 rhythm track...nice, I think I'll stick to using this" kind of thing. Nothing life changing, just a welcome improvement. |
|
|
|
Post by dok on Feb 23, 2024 11:08:13 GMT -6
And aren't many of us sickos often quite inclined to spend a lot of money for a few percent improvement, over and over again? Heck, there are all kinds of deep discussions here about the vanishingly small differences between converters - how are you going to hear stuff like that if you don't have your monitoring as accurate as possible? At minimum I think everybody should have a reference to their listening position's frequency response, and these are a pretty simple way to do that with some helpful tools toward correction thrown in. You don't know what you don't know, you know?
Sure, "get the room as good as possible", but without gathering data you're just fumbling around in the dark. These tools can help with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shadowk on Feb 23, 2024 11:35:57 GMT -6
Nah, I’ve worked for decades to get the hybrid setup of my dreams. It’s the whole talent thing that worries me the most, with the setup and room I’ve got there could never be any excuses.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 23, 2024 12:08:00 GMT -6
I know folks love room calibrators but I just see them as gimmicks. You either trust your room and learn it or you don't. I feel like these things are just placebos for performance anxiety. You should try it |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 23, 2024 12:15:07 GMT -6
I just can't mix something to sound "incorrect" in my room so it sounds good other places. I mean, WTF? I spent years doing that - trips to the car, driving around, playing it here and there. Maybe some people have less of a hard time doing this than I do - but for instance - I have a huge bloom at like 30 to 50Hz and it dips twice at 70 and 100 ish. So if I were mixing without any correction, the result in this room would be a mongongous kick and missing bass. That just seems so ludicrous to continue fighting that when there's something that will correct it. I mix and it translates great everywhere.
People said this before and I didn't believe them - but I do now. The Trinnov is the most essential purchase I've made for my studio. It is the foundation everything else is built on. I want to be excited about a mix - that's when I know it's done. I have a hard time getting excited when it doesn't sound right on purpose.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 23, 2024 12:16:08 GMT -6
And aren't many of us sickos often quite inclined to spend a lot of money for a few percent improvement, over and over again? Heck, there are all kinds of deep discussions here about the vanishingly small differences between converters - how are you going to hear stuff like that if you don't have your monitoring as accurate as possible? At minimum I think everybody should have a reference to their listening position's frequency response, and these are a pretty simple way to do that with some helpful tools toward correction thrown in. You don't know what you don't know, you know? Sure, "get the room as good as possible", but without gathering data you're just fumbling around in the dark. These tools can help with that. Yeah - what's the point in any of this gear if you can't hear it correctly? |
|
|
|
Post by Shadowk on Feb 23, 2024 12:41:26 GMT -6
I just can't mix something to sound "incorrect" in my room so it sounds good other places. I mean, WTF? I spent years doing that - trips to the car, driving around, playing it here and there. Maybe some people have less of a hard time doing this than I do - but for instance - I have a huge bloom at like 30 to 50Hz and it dips twice at 70 and 100 ish. So if I were mixing without any correction, the result in this room would be a mongongous kick and missing bass. That just seems so ludicrous to continue fighting that when there's something that will correct it. I mix and it translates great everywhere. People said this before and I didn't believe them - but I do now. The Trinnov is the most essential purchase I've made for my studio. It is the foundation everything else is built on. I want to be excited about a mix - that's when I know it's done. I have a hard time getting excited when it doesn't sound right on purpose. You’re not helping John.. Poor bank account you’ll be fine one day. |
|
|
|
Post by jaba on Feb 23, 2024 12:49:46 GMT -6
And aren't many of us sickos often quite inclined to spend a lot of money for a few percent improvement, over and over again? Heck, there are all kinds of deep discussions here about the vanishingly small differences between converters - how are you going to hear stuff like that if you don't have your monitoring as accurate as possible? At minimum I think everybody should have a reference to their listening position's frequency response, and these are a pretty simple way to do that with some helpful tools toward correction thrown in. You don't know what you don't know, you know? Sure, "get the room as good as possible", but without gathering data you're just fumbling around in the dark. These tools can help with that. I like this point. My room at home is far from ideal but I've managed to get it into a good place. Things generally translate now that I've learned its quirks. I've never tried room correction but I'll likely try it out. I was always skeptical of those "room modelers" for headphones but I can't lie, the free one from Acustica is great for figuring out things below 50Hz for me. Essential? No. But while it's the only thing I use it for, it undeniably helps those low octaves translate for me. I doubt I'll be spending $3k+ on it but at this point it sound like I'd be foolish not to demo something like ARC. Not sure if the new Studio option would be better than their software option so time to do a bit of research. Will be following this thread for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Feb 23, 2024 13:14:03 GMT -6
I would demo Arc against something purely software like Sonarworks if I was considering it (Arc).
I haven't watched any of the Arc stuff, but why do I need to stick their hardware in my monitoring chain in order to run their DSP when I already have a native OS perfectly capable of running DSP (like Sonarworks does)?
|
|
|
|
Post by Shadowk on Feb 23, 2024 13:17:49 GMT -6
I would demo Arc against something purely software like Sonarworks if I was considering it (Arc). I haven't watched any of the Arc stuff, but why do I need to stick their hardware in my monitoring chain in order to run their DSP when I already have a native OS perfectly capable of running DSP (like Sonarworks does)? There is a software version.. |
|
|
|
Post by jaba on Feb 23, 2024 13:26:32 GMT -6
I would demo Arc against something purely software like Sonarworks if I was considering it (Arc). I haven't watched any of the Arc stuff, but why do I need to stick their hardware in my monitoring chain in order to run their DSP when I already have a native OS perfectly capable of running DSP (like Sonarworks does)? There is a software version.. So what's the benefit of the hardware? Software DAW only? CPU hog? |
|
|
|
Post by nicksteinborn on Feb 23, 2024 13:32:28 GMT -6
I feel like this is partially designed for Apollo users and the like. People have been begging for some sort of Sonarworks integration into console for years. I have to use an eq doing kinda the curve of Sonarworks on anything on I'm monitoring through console so something like this is piquing my interest. My next move is either this, an outboard EQ, or monitors with their own correction/ability to load a curve so I can not have to worry about loading up an eq just to monitor properly. And I can always monitor through Cubase, but the whole point of the Apollo's near zero latency monitoring is so I can still track something with a higher buffer if I need to.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shadowk on Feb 23, 2024 13:36:08 GMT -6
There is a software version.. So what's the benefit of the hardware? Software DAW only? CPU hog? Unlike sonarworks there is no systemwide version so as I said it’s a major downside of arc and for me personally latency or cpu is always a potential factor. I generally prefer HW or speaker inbuilt if possible.. It’s certainly not perfect compared to Trinnov but as Svart said we’ve adapted to crap over decades and we even used NS-10’s to make hit songs on. Whilst I love a bit of extra conformity to balance the playing field there is a limit to its usefulness. As DR bill said sort out the room first and I see room correction as icing on the cake. It’s not a solve all solution for shitty everything. |
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Feb 23, 2024 14:02:47 GMT -6
So what's the benefit of the hardware? Software DAW only? CPU hog? Unlike sonarworks there is no systemwide version so as I said it’s a major downside of arc and for me personally latency or cpu is always a potential factor. I generally prefer HW or speaker inbuilt if possible.. Totally - I do see the hardware option as a bonus. I'd rather not have my computer having to do the corrections if possible. Just seems cleaner to me if there's a dedicated box for this kind of "always on" process. Though I wish it had digital I/O so I could hear my own converters instead of theirs. [...] As DR bill said sort out the room first and I see room correction as icing on the cake. It’s not a solve all solution for shitty everything. True, but I don't hear anyone on this thread saying "room treatment is overrated! Just get Sonarworks/ARC/Trinnov/Dirac!"
I think the gold standard would be to run one of these programs and it says, "nothing needs to be fixed," but that's just not reality for the vast majority of folks here. I'd love to be able to build a dedicated room/studio, but that's not a possibility for me, at least not right now.
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Feb 23, 2024 14:08:29 GMT -6
For context, here's what Sonarworks thinks of my room  It's nothing super drastic to correct, and when I engage SW with the correction curve, it just objectively sounds clearer/better. |
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Feb 23, 2024 14:22:25 GMT -6
I know folks love room calibrators but I just see them as gimmicks. You either trust your room and learn it or you don't. I feel like these things are just placebos for performance anxiety. +1 I had my room sorted out by GIK acoustics, Cubase 13 directly feeds my Avocet AES and the Avocet directly feeds my ATC 25's. I want it that way, I like it that way. I get the results I want that way! But each to their own of course - whatever works - works. |
|
|
|
Post by mcirish on Feb 23, 2024 15:30:09 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by maldenfilms on Feb 23, 2024 16:11:28 GMT -6
I just can't mix something to sound "incorrect" in my room so it sounds good other places. I mean, WTF? I spent years doing that - trips to the car, driving around, playing it here and there. Maybe some people have less of a hard time doing this than I do - but for instance - I have a huge bloom at like 30 to 50Hz and it dips twice at 70 and 100 ish. So if I were mixing without any correction, the result in this room would be a mongongous kick and missing bass. That just seems so ludicrous to continue fighting that when there's something that will correct it. I mix and it translates great everywhere. People said this before and I didn't believe them - but I do now. The Trinnov is the most essential purchase I've made for my studio. It is the foundation everything else is built on. I want to be excited about a mix - that's when I know it's done. I have a hard time getting excited when it doesn't sound right on purpose. This x 1000. Trinnov is the most important thing I've ever bought for my studio. I wish it was the first thing I got (well, after treatment and monitors). The customer service is incredible too. Anton remote'd in to my system to optimize the advanced settings even further, and in doing so he commented that my room was already measuring pretty great before Trinnov. But when you disengage the correction, it's stunning how different it sounds. There's so much phase stuff going on and it all instantly snaps into focus as soon as you turn it on. I could never work without it now. And FWIW, Sonarworks and Dirac didn't come close to doing the same thing. It's not cheap, but if you can afford it, a Nova will be a much smarter purchase than a similarly priced piece of outboard gear. |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 23, 2024 16:25:26 GMT -6
Your brain and personalized ears - with their years of damage - have to learn ANYthing if you are going to be successful and translate well. JBL's vs. Genelec's. Treated room vs. Trinnov. Headphones vs. Earbuds. Desktop speakers vs. Mains. It's all a conditioning and internal calibration. And that personalized calibration is absolutely required. It comes with intense listening, recalibrating, and ultimately experience. Thats how guys in rooms with HORRIBLY bad tuning can turn out awesome mixes. It's why I can send someone in to a perfected Trinnov room, and their mix will sound like $***.
It's all about training your brain. And no matter what you use, you have to train your brain. Some situations demand more training than others though.... LOL. THEN, you add in the calibration of your clients brains (or lack thereof) and their monitoring systems.
It's complicated....
No magic box or room tuning fixes EVERYthing automatically. You've got to get your ears and brain involved in whatever environment you end up using.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bat Lanyard on Feb 23, 2024 16:29:12 GMT -6
Sold some stuff lately that I didn't employ in my new setup and decided to order a Trinnov Nova bundle. Damn this place and Johnkenn. I might set it up to A/B between its monitoring and the SH Equinox but I've got some shipping time to think that over. Initial plan is to run it into the Equinox which is fantastic. At the end of my room build, which was my only choice in this house and had challenging dimensions, two of the approaches were two opposing small subs in the corners or Sonarworks. The dimensions give me a large bump at 40-ish so to control the bass put out by MM27's those were suggested by Jeff Hedback (he did an amazing job designing this room). That bass boost is pleasing for listening but not ideal for mixing so that's my approach. One key thing I do like about Sonarworks is the correction mix knob. I run at about 62% most of the time. I'm looking forward to hearing the Trinnov though. |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 23, 2024 16:47:50 GMT -6
There is a software version.. So what's the benefit of the hardware? Software DAW only? CPU hog? One benefit is convenience, not having to load and disable the plug in, can’t say whether this Mike is better then the SW’s one or if one or the other does room correction better. But, it’s processing must be trying to do something different in terms of soundstage as the Arc, takes the same 7 sweetspot positions but at three different depths. Would be interesting to compare Arc measurements and correction profile vs SW, can’t say which is more accurate. Although you could use same Mike each time Arc vs SW and then do the REW white voice sweep also in stereo to anslyze any differences? |
|
|
|
Post by andersmv on Feb 23, 2024 17:13:50 GMT -6
I've got one of these headed my way. I'll compare with Sonarworks and give some general impressions, planning on doing a video about it if it ends up working out well. Might as well stop talking about this and just try it... |
|
, otherwise I would have turned it off and never touched it again. I can't say there's been any downsides to having the room correction stuff where it's made me work different and there have been compromises (sonically at least. There's DEFINITELY work flow downsides and a bit of a shift there). 
