[Danny Richie]

that was an educative video but I felt bad at the end to see how people are mocking other because they don't have the right room on their pics. not everyody is an expert, and we all start our audio journey somewhere regardless of our budget and social status.

The point wasn't to mock anyone. The point in showing those pictures illustrates that spending a LOT of money on a high end system isn't going to get you top level performance without spending some attention on the room acoustics. The room is an important factor. And some of those rooms had mega buck systems in them.

[Early B.]

The point wasn't to mock anyone. The point in showing those pictures illustrates that spending a LOT of money on a high end system isn't going to get you top level performance without spending some attention on the room acoustics. The room is an important factor. And some of those rooms had mega buck systems in them.

These setups indicate that some people aren't primarily motivated to get good sound. These expensive systems are visually impressive, and that's what matters most to them.

[Captainhemo]

The  ironic part is that if they did some  room treatment, the systems would be that much more impressive ....

jay

[poseidonsvoice]

These setups indicate that some people aren't primarily motivated to get good sound. These expensive systems are visually impressive, and that's what matters most to them.

Or...they are truly ignorant. There is a tremendous amount of that imho. There is also the other issue of 'WAF' which I can't understand in some cases when you look at the monumental amount of $$ spent on the gear. How did the 'WAF' get to be SO powerful? 

Best,
Anand.

[Jaytor]

And there are clearly ways to create acoustic treatments that are totally invisible if money is not a factor.

[WC]

I thought that many of the pictures of gear looked fairly impressive. Not really sure how they sound...

[Zitoun]

@Zitoun - the track you posted doesn't seem to have much really low bass. This is mostly mid-bass which would probably be fine without the subs.

Here's a track (Terje Isungset - Fading Sun) that has really low bass that you will barely hear without the subs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dONSkfbxnao

And here's an example of a track (Jennifer Warnes - Way Down Deep), that will sound ok without the subs, but the subs really add to the power of the performance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_alN-IzNFM

You'll find a lot of jazz with double bass, and electronic music that will really leverage the subs, but a lot of music that sounds like it has a lot of bass really doesn't go that low.

Regarding the Tech Talk video that maty mentioned - I think he was trying to convey that room acoustics are at least as important as the quality of the gear, so doing some treatment in your room can often make a bigger difference in how much you enjoy your system than anything else. With OB speakers, a lot of the sound you will be hearing is reflected off the front wall, so you need to pay some attention to this.
- Jay

Thanks Jay, really helpful, that's great stuff.
Question though on low frequencies, how can you measure if you have frequencies below 40/30 hz in a track without having a sub?
That will be great to be able to scan few tracks to know before auditioning.

Thanks,

[Zitoun]

The point wasn't to mock anyone. The point in showing those pictures illustrates that spending a LOT of money on a high end system isn't going to get you top level performance without spending some attention on the room acoustics. The room is an important factor. And some of those rooms had mega buck systems in them.

Hey Danny, I didn't mean that was something intentional.
I know for a fact that a lot of people have poor room for many reasons:
- They live in expensive cities to find job, and nowadays housing in many cities is out of reach
- They can't have a dedicated lone wolf room
- They rent and can't do a lot of modifications
- They don't want to mess around with their wife/husband
- They are not aware because their audio shop makes more profit on selling hardware than services like acoustic counseling.
- They don't have the time required to read/learn about laws of physic, acoustic, sound reproduction, diffusion, absorption etc... they'd rather work, spend time with their family or on other hobbies.
- They see more interest in buying gears they can resell than acoustic treatments.
- They are very rich and want gear to impress their friends, boss, colleagues the same way they do with their car.
- The sound quality with great gear and poor acoustic is already good enough for them, they don't care about saving money with acoustic, and would rather keep their decoration.

I understand your point and it was a very interesting video, but IMHO the public who will be doing DIY acoustic won't necessarily be the same than the one buying hundred K systems, they have different goals, and that's fine.

I would have been a lot more interested to learn how to improve a room based on one of this picture as a case study .
The reason is simple, I won't invest in acoustic until I will have better speakers, because I will have to change it anyway if I move to dipole or any different technology. Hence I will probably be proud of my new system and take a picture with bare walls to post on Facebook (I hope you won't publish it on YouTube ), then it will take several months to get a good balance between Wife Acceptance Criteria and good sound, and not investing much in a rented place.

I hope that will give you a better understanding of what I meant from someone new in this community interested to learn, and open minded about others choices, and setup.
Hopefully that will maybe inspire you for other videos.

Cheers.

[poseidonsvoice]

Hey Danny, I didn't mean that was something intentional.
I know for a fact that a lot of people have poor room for many reasons:
- They live in expensive cities to find job, and nowadays housing in many cities is out of reach
- They can't have a dedicated lone wolf room
- They rent and can't do a lot of modifications
- They don't want to mess around with their wife/husband
- They are not aware because their audio shop makes more profit on selling hardware than services like acoustic counseling.
- They don't have the time required to read/learn about laws of physic, acoustic, sound reproduction, diffusion, absorption etc... they'd rather work, spend time with their family or on other hobbies.
- They see more interest in buying gears they can resell than acoustic treatments.
- They are very rich and want gear to impress their friends, boss, colleagues the same way they do with their car.
- The sound quality with great gear and poor acoustic is already good enough for them, they don't care about saving money with acoustic, and would rather keep their decoration.

I understand your point and it was a very interesting video, but IMHO the public who will be doing DIY acoustic won't necessarily be the same than the one buying hundred K systems, they have different goals, and that's fine.

I would have been a lot more interested to learn how to improve a room based on one of this picture as a case study .
The reason is simple, I won't invest in acoustic until I will have better speakers, because I will have to change it anyway if I move to dipole or any different technology. Hence I will probably be proud of my new system and take a picture with bare walls to post on Facebook (I hope you won't publish it on YouTube ), then it will take several months to get a good balance between Wife Acceptance Criteria and good sound, and not investing much in a rented place.

I hope that will give you a better understanding of what I meant from someone new in this community interested to learn, and open minded about others choices, and setup.
Hopefully that will maybe inspire you for other videos.

Cheers.

Zitoun,

Thank you so much for that perspective. It’s important for individuals to realize to not have the chase of having the “best” system consume you and your other pleasures in life.

Best,
Anand.

[jtwrace]

Why doesn't Danny promote the use of REW? 

[poseidonsvoice]

Why doesn't Danny promote the use of REW?

https://youtu.be/6W1W_K2nKx4

Start at 4:00 and watch till 4:30.

It confirms to me that Danny does not understand the primary use and application of Room EQ Wizard. Unfortunately REW is named as it is but if Danny plays with it (it is free!) he’ll see it’s a powerful room measurement tool. It is also routinely upgraded for other uses by the software designer, John Mulcahy, again, for free.

Best,
Anand.

[jtwrace]

https://youtu.be/6W1W_K2nKx4

Start at 4:00 and watch till 4:30.

It confirms to me that Danny does not understand the primary use and application of Room EQ Wizard. Unfortunately REW is named as it is but if Danny plays with it (it is free!) he’ll see it’s a powerful room measurement tool. It is also routinely upgraded for other uses by the software designer, John Mulcahy, again, for free.

Best,
Anand.

OMG.   

[Jaytor]

I'm not sure what you guys are griping about re REW. Danny was using REW as an example of software that can be used from room equalization, not saying that it is is only use. He has demonstrated using REW for measurement purposes on numerous occasions, but it can also be used to create a convolution filter or multiple equalization filters to correct for room and speaker response.

The problem is that any kind of room EQ is not effective at all at higher frequencies, at least as far as correcting room issues, and is way less effective than room treatments at lower frequencies. The best use of room EQ (the process, not the program) is to compensate for room modes at low bass frequencies, but even this is best done after treatments since it's difficult to adjust for nulls by more than a few db, and the high Q of the filters required will cause other issues.

[Jaytor]

It's also worth noting that, for the must part, the optimal treatments for a room are a function of the room, not the audio system, so changing speakers is not going to have a big impact on the ideal treatments.

Exceptions are:

The position of the treatments at first reflection points are determined based on speaker and listener position, which might change from one speaker to another, but this doesn't affect the desirability of treatment at the first reflection point

If the speakers have limited low frequency response, this may reduce (but not eliminate) the requirement for bass traps in the corners.

Dipole speakers reflect a lot more energy off the front wall so this increases the need to make sure this wall has good acoustic properties. Moderate absorption with good diffusion is generally the best approach, but this will often also work well for non-dipole speakers.

I'm not suggesting that people should forget about buying nice gear if they don't want to invest in room treatments, but I think a lot of people just don't know any better. I've seen some well treated rooms that you would never know by looking that they were treated at all. It's quite possible to add treatments that are very tastefully done, particularly if you're willing to invest some money. And some of the systems Danny showed probably have >$20k invested in cables. Spending $5k, $10k, or $20k on acoustic treatments would likely provide a much more significant improvement in sound quality than spending the same amount in better cables (above, let's say, $5k in cables as a baseline).

[poseidonsvoice]

I'm not sure what you guys are griping about re REW. Danny was using REW as an example of software that can be used from room equalization, not saying that it is is only use. He has demonstrated using REW for measurement purposes on numerous occasions, but it can also be used to create a convolution filter or multiple equalization filters to correct for room and speaker response.

The problem is that any kind of room EQ is not effective at all at higher frequencies, at least as far as correcting room issues, and is way less effective than room treatments at lower frequencies. The best use of room EQ (the process, not the program) is to compensate for room modes at low bass frequencies, but even this is best done after treatments since it's difficult to adjust for nulls by more than a few db, and the high Q of the filters required will cause other issues.

Jaytor,

I am not the one you need to lecture to. Just look at my previous posts/threads. I was only answering Jason’s query.

Anybody who reads my posts (and understands them) will see that I use REW primarily below 300Hz as a very necessary tool and for above 300Hz (only one speaker at a time) to serve as a “check” but not for EQ implementations.

The fact is, MOST if not all of Danny’s customers would be better served by learning how to use REW as a room measurement tool since a great majority have subs and one cannot integrate low frequency sources with the room and main speakers without a room measurement piece of software.

So don’t bark at me by saying “I’m not sure what you guys are griping about...”

Best,
Anand.

[Zitoun]

Jaytor,

I am not the one you need to lecture to. Just look at my previous posts/threads. I was only answering Jason’s query.

Anybody who reads my posts (and understands them) will see that I use REW primarily below 300Hz as a very necessary tool and for above 300Hz (only one speaker at a time) to serve as a “check” but not for EQ implementations.

The fact is, MOST if not all of Danny’s customers would be better served by learning how to use REW as a room measurement tool since a great majority have subs and one cannot integrate low frequency sources with the room and main speakers without a room measurement piece of software.

So don’t bark at me by saying “I’m not sure what you guys are griping about...”

Best,
Anand.

Agreed, that should be the first place to start, any good ressources on how to use REW ?
Is this their website ?
https://www.roomeqwizard.com/

Can you predict behavior of sub or OB with this tool?
Thanks,

[poseidonsvoice]

Agreed, that should be the first place to start, any good ressources on how to use REW ?
Is this their website ?
https://www.roomeqwizard.com/

Can you predict behavior of sub or OB with this tool?
Thanks,

Zitoun,

It is a measurement tool. So below 300Hz, you can comfortably use it to integrate sealed, ported, open baffle, horn subs, etc....or put another way, integrate monopole, dipole or cardiod based low frequency transducers into a room and with your mains.

It doesn't predict behaviors. It give you real time data so it is far more powerful from that perspective. The only way to know is to use it. 

AV Nirvana is the best forum and website to discuss these details, I encourage you to look into it.

https://www.avnirvana.com/forums/official-rew-room-eq-wizard-support-forum.10/

Best,
Anand.

[HAL]

Agreed, that should be the first place to start, any good ressources on how to use REW ?
Is this their website ?
https://www.roomeqwizard.com/

Can you predict behavior of sub or OB with this tool?
Thanks,

The latest REW has updated room modeling with ported and sealed subs for 200Hz and below.  A simple start to see speaker positions in a user defined rectangular room model.  Looks to be a room modal model and the speakers are movable and surface reflection coefficients are inputs.

Just click the Room Sim button.

[poseidonsvoice]

The latest REW has updated room modeling with ported and sealed subs for 200Hz and below.  A simple start to see speaker positions in a user defined rectangular room model.  Looks to be a room modal model and the speakers are movable and surface reflection coefficients are inputs.

Just click the Room Sim button.

HAL,

That room simulation model in REW has been out for over a year now, but the problem it has is that it assumes a room with very low leakage and also assumes one has a room that is a simple shape, ie rectangles or a variation on rectangles, the worst being a square from a modal standpoint. It's very cool indeed and I did play with it even to see how well it could predict things in my room which is very much rectangular and quite sealed as well. John Mulcahy has also been very open to improvements to the model. For a free program, it's pretty nice and the accuracy is not too bad even in custom rooms like my own. My colleague who has a rectangularish room but with 20 foot ceilings didn't find it to be as useful as just using the mic and making real world measurements.

I've talked to Nyal Mellor of Acoustic Frontiers quite extensively about boundary element software solutions and he does provide a service with his own software but it can get expensive. That being said, I can see it as a feasible solution for folks who do not want the diy approach:

http://www.acousticfrontiers.com/services/design/low-frequency-optimization/

Best,
Anand.

[HAL]

Anand,
Yes, he posted that last week he had updated the room modeling in the latest beta release.  After that you can do measurements and see what you have.  Very useful and on my systems for use.

Other programs like CARA 2.2+ have more involved modeling capabilities for complex rooms.  Been around a long time and uses ray tracing models.  Good video that gets you going as it is complex.