Gearslutz.com - View Single Post - Is bigger better?
View Single Post
Old 17th June 2009   #27
Sky
Lives for gear
 
Sky's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 775

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouldy View Post
But as I said earlier, I do intend to treat the room, so will this still prove to be the case?
Dave
Here's a rough calculation I just tried:

1. Estimate RT60 for a 9 x 10 x 8 residential room with carpeted floor and a few windows on one long wall: 0.44 seconds.

Reverberation Time Calculator

2. Calculate room cutoff frequency using Cf = 20000*SQRT(T/V): 494 Hz

"Every studio has some frequency above which the modal frequencies are close enough together to merge into a statistical continuum... At frequencies higher than [this] cutoff frequency, various components of the signal will be treated more or less uniformly... At frequencies below cutoff, excessive spacing of modes exists with resulting uneven treatment of signal components."

small budget recording studio from scratch

This calculation suggests that you'll have smooth sailing above roughly 494 Hz, and you can try treating the room with bass traps and diffusers to smooth out many (i.e. 20) individual modes below 494 Hz. Lower frequencies would generate more harmonics (modes) below 494 Hz, which I think is why bigger speakers and subwoofers might be problematic. I never tried to aggressively treat my small room, but going to nearfields with higher cutoff definitely helped.

Ouch, my brain hurts and that's all I got. Perhaps some experts in the Studio Construction & Acoustics Forum can assist?

Sky
__________________
(Opinions are my own, etc.)
http://randomsparks.com/music/
Sky is online now   Reply With Quote