[nyc_paramedic]

Second, also consider experimenting with long wall placement of the HT2's. It works beautifully here with my HT2-TL's in a similar (13x17) sized room. If this setup works well in your room it affords you a much wider sound stage. Think panoramic 16:9 versus 4:3.

Ok, if I do a long placement and bring the speakers farther away from the front wall as oneinthepipe suggested, I think I will be right against the back wall with the chair which is not optimal. I don't know if 12 feet is enough to work with. How far away from the rear wall is your seating position?

Yes, you will be right up against the back wall. And who can claim to have solid evidence and irrefutable proof that being up against the wall is not optimal?

If you care to PM with your details I'd be willing to send you a copy of the detailed long wall setup instructions that Audio Physic sent me many moons ago. Much more detailed than what Audio Physic has up on their site now.

[oneinthepipe]

Been researching treatments thanks to all the advice I am getting from you folks. Bass traps and absorption panels are my first priority. I still am learing about diffusers and where to place them. Maybe I won't need them at all?? I can't use tri-traps in the back of the room as there is an entry door and a bathroom door in each corner there. I can hang panels on the doors though. Guess that's my only option there.

Should I do bass traps along the whole back wall behind the listening seat?

For the front wall, panels behind speakers and tri traps in the corners?

The OC703 is 2" thick so do you just use multiple sheets to achieve 6" thickness?

Off to lurk in the Acoustics Circle!

OC703 comes in 1", 2" and 3" thickness.  You can use (3) sheets to make 6". 

Diffusion is more costly than absorption panels.

One of the differences between bass traps and broadband absorption panels is whether or not the panel reflects higher frequencies.  I would start with broadband absorption.  If you later decide that too much higher frequencies are being absorbed, you can place some kraft paper or poly sheets under the fabric on front of the panel.

If money weren't an issue, you would ideally install broadband absorption behind the listening position, bass traps straddling the tri-corners floor to ceiling or, if not possible, on the outsides of the back wall, and diffusion panels between the broadband panels and bass traps or the diffusion panels behind you and the absorption panels elsewhere.  In your small room, however, I think that you are going to want a lot of low end absorption.

[Nuance]

Second, also consider experimenting with long wall placement of the HT2's. It works beautifully here with my HT2-TL's in a similar (13x17) sized room. If this setup works well in your room it affords you a much wider sound stage. Think panoramic 16:9 versus 4:3.

Ok, if I do a long placement and bring the speakers farther away from the front wall as oneinthepipe suggested, I think I will be right against the back wall with the chair which is not optimal. I don't know if 12 feet is enough to work with. How far away from the rear wall is your seating position?

You're right, it's not optimal.  It will probably cause some major bass peaks which will smear the midrange.  Only listening sessions and measurements will tell, though.  Who knows - maybe it will sound great, but you won't know unless you try.  I am guessing it will cause some low frequency issues, though, as it always has in my experience in every room I've had my systems in. 

  In your small room, however, I think that you are going to want a lot of low end absorption.

Absolutely! 

[jazzcat1]

Seems the general consensus from here and elsewhere that low frequency absorption is a must. I was researching and for low frequencies, the OC705 is a better choice? And also a gap between panel and wall is preferred for low frequencies. Would it be one step better to to have a 2" panel then a 2" X 2" skeleton frame attached to the back perimeter then put on another panel then another 2" X 2" skeleton frame then attach to the wall? That would effectively give 2 separate air gaps 1 1/2" each.

Or am I trying to re-invent the wheel and should just make a 4" or 6" panel out of 705? 

[JP78]

Seems the general consensus from here and elsewhere that low frequency absorption is a must. I was researching and for low frequencies, the OC705 is a better choice? And also a gap between panel and wall is preferred for low frequencies. Would it be one step better to to have a 2" panel then a 2" X 2" skeleton frame attached to the back perimeter then put on another panel then another 2" X 2" skeleton frame then attach to the wall? That would effectively give 2 separate air gaps 1 1/2" each.

Or am I trying to re-invent the wheel and should just make a 4" or 6" panel out of 705? 

jazzcat, drop the guys at gik acoustics a line.  i think you may be splitting hairs worrying about too much.  especially given the excellent diagram, brian will be able to give you a no-nonsense analysis of your room and recommend a straightforward solution.

often i think audiophiles worry about the acoustics of the room being good for one speaker and bad for another...personal experience has led me to believe that a good room will make all speakers in it sound better, and a bad room will make them sound worse.  95% of treatment is universally beneficial regardless of the speakers.

from a quick look, i'm going to guess he's going to recommend a couple of the tri-traps and a few 242 panels.  the good part about gik is they work well, look great, and don't cost an arm and a leg.

enjoy!

[jazzcat1]

jazzcat, drop the guys at gik acoustics a line.  i think you may be splitting hairs worrying about too much.  especially given the excellent diagram, brian will be able to give you a no-nonsense analysis of your room and recommend a straightforward solution.

often i think audiophiles worry about the acoustics of the room being good for one speaker and bad for another...personal experience has led me to believe that a good room will make all speakers in it sound better, and a bad room will make them sound worse.  95% of treatment is universally beneficial regardless of the speakers.

from a quick look, i'm going to guess he's going to recommend a couple of the tri-traps and a few 242 panels.  the good part about gik is they work well, look great, and don't cost an arm and a leg.

enjoy!

I will email GIK tonight after I take some pics I can send. I don't have a 90* angle where walls meets ceiling. Sheetrock goes up at a 45* angle from the wall for about 2 feet then flattens out. That may actually be a good thing as far as treatments go. I'll send all I can to Brian. Their product seems to be reasonably priced and I could always make additional panels if needed.

[Nuance]

Another vote for Gik.  Their products are fantastic and people seem to love Brian (never spoke with him, so I cannot comment).  I used to have two pairs of their absorption panels before we moved into a place that was too small for them.  I highly recommend them.

As far as the bass, the thicker the better.  Unless you put an EQ in your system anything under 100Hz is going to be extremely hard to tame, even with treatments...hence the thicket the better statement. 

[jazzcat1]

Well, about 2,000 staples later I used all the material I had. 703 for absorption and 705 for bass traps. It was interesting how each time I brought a pair of finished panels in the room and leaned them against the wall how that empty room sounded better and better. Echoes are very subdued now with them just sitting on the floor

The Tri-Traps I got from GIK really look good in the front corners.

[oneinthepipe]

That looks like a listening room!!!

Don't forget to put a few of those on the ceiling. 

[audiotom]

the mintute I saw your room schematic - I too was thinking like nyc paramedic to go long wall

you get less sidewall reflection / constraint
your head near the back wall actually lowers the backwall first arrival smear to near inperceptable
you could use a diffuser behind your couch if you like

I use the cardas nearfield setup in a 27 by 14.5 room
with my ht3's - they are nearly 3 feet into the room
long wall - 8 feet each side
I wish I had 5 more feet in depth but it sounds great

my den is 18 by 19 with home theatre 5.1
salk v3's and monster center up front

check the room for slap echo
clap your hands loud and listen for an echo
try with and without the panels
they probably will tame it if your room was lively before

enjoy and welcome to the club

[jazzcat1]

nyc paramedic sent me an article on long wall placement. I can go either way and will probably mess with that this weekend using my home theater fronts, which aren't too shabby in their own right. The only issue I have is there will be a 5 foot square window right at the first reflection point. On short wall placement the window is behind the equipment rack.

When the room was empty the slap echo was quite noticeable (that is an understatement!) but now it is pretty non-existant. Just talking in there is totally different than conversation outside that room. Night and day difference.

[jazzcat1]

Ok, getting there! Got the player, pre and amp in place, been using my HT speakers to check out acoustics. Had to make some $1.89 speaker stands for them 

[oneinthepipe]

jazzcat1:

Yes, yes, yes.  That is going to work out very well.  Your HT2-TL will sing in that room.

Does the panel behind the rack effect the sound very much?  I wonder if the rack doesn't reflect much of the sound that the panel would absorb.

[jazzcat1]

jazzcat1:

Yes, yes, yes.  That is going to work out very well.  Your HT2-TL will sing in that room.

Does the panel behind the rack effect the sound very much?  I wonder if the rack doesn't reflect much of the sound that the panel would absorb.

I hope they will sing! The MTM speakers there now lack any real bass. That panel behind the rack is a spare. I just put it there to get it out of the way for now. It's not doing much at all, acoustically speaking.

[vintagebob]

Nice setup jazzcat!  I love the fish eye pictures.  ; )

[Nuance]

Now we're talking baby!  That looks great, jazzcat. 

I can't wait till your speakers get installed in that room.  You did a great job buddy.

[oneinthepipe]

That panel behind the rack is a spare. I just put it there to get it out of the way for now. It's not doing much at all, acoustically speaking.

I think that you would hear some benefit if the spare panel was placed on the ceiling between and forward of the speakers.  Otherwise, the spare panel might be helpful on the wall behind your listening position because you probably are still getting reflections from the space between the two other panels.

[Nuance]

^ great advice. 

[avahifi]

I will repeat once more my solution from turning a mid size (20 x 16) family room with all the acoustics of a Jr. High lunch room into a very quiet and useful space for listening to music.

I covered all the walls with acoustic wallpaper ($700).  The stuff is made of fabric about 1/4' thick and goes on like normal wallpaper.  Available in a variety of textures and colors and patterns from wallpaper stores.  Then I did the ceiling in the lowest cost 1" thick Sonex foam tiles (another $700).

Oh yes, thick carpet over a heavy pad on a concrete floor finished the job.

Now the room is quiet, dead, and you can hear what the system is doing without much in the way of nasty early reflections.  It works, it is easy, does not cost all that much, and has a high wife factor.

Regards,

Frank Van Alstine

Anyone else ever try this, or is it too simple.  I have done it to two different listening rooms now with excellent results in both cases.

[oneinthepipe]

I knew about your room treatments, Frank, but I tried a different approach because my room is smaller, and based upon my understanding, thicker treatments are needed to absorb low frequencies.  I have (22) absorption panels, and (14) are 6" thick OC 703.  Even with the absorption, I have a bump @ 45hz.  I think that I will install an additional (12) 6" thick panels once I find a way to sneak them into the house and install them without my wife noticing.