[PaulP]

Originally Posted by Lupo

It's not about prophets or religion.

Andreas, I really don't want to be a pain in your neck, but your behaviour
is that of one who has lived a religious experience. I know you're excited
about finding a new way at looking at things, and discovering a new tool,
but you don't have to get down on your knees and kiss the feet of the
person who opened your eyes. Especially when that person is very disruptive
and unhelpful, and treats everyone like trash.

It's all quite annoying .

More so since I was also guilty of the same behaviour.

Anyway, you were saying...

It's a measurement tool that works for determining actual real world events. I use multimeters, SPL meter, oscilloscope, crosstalk, freq response and THD measurements, observe sweeps in spectrum editors to watch for aliasing in digital, think waterfalls are excellent for low end observations in a room and I use ETC's for checking the level of individual reflections. I've done it in my room and I'll do it in a shoebox if needed. The waterfall does not give the same detail as it's weighted towards frequency discrimination, not time discrimination.

This is a better picture and shows the ETC in it's place, that of tracking down
reflections, which is only a small part of treating a room. This thread is not
about the ETC, though you-know-who turned it into that, as is his habit.

The waterfall was never supposed to do the job of the ETC and no one has said it should.

About the lower frequencies, you said (I've moved your comment) :

It's not part of the ETC ordeal, it's a different subject. If you want to discuss low end treatment, I'll participate if I can contribute anything. My knowledge regarding the issue is highly limited. That's why you wont find me contributing much if anything at all in the umpty threads on the subject.

The thing is we're interested in treating our rooms. That means all the
frequencies. Mumblesound was/is interested in a particular band fairly far
down the range. The ETC may or may not be useful here, but if we sidetrack
the discussion to talk about it, we should do so in the proper context, that
it is only a small part of the picture. I've been objecting to the ETC being
promoted as the only tool necessary and worthy of our consideration, regardless
of context. I'll continue to do so to protect any new innocents who come along.

But since we have ended up talking about the ETC...

Some diffusers on the rear wall: ...

More diffusers on the same rear wall:...

Good ! The only way that makes sense to me (and probably a few others around
here) to discuss the ETC is to provide examples of both graphs and the
methodology used in acquiring and interpreting them. Real world examples.
How about your room since you've made yourself spokesman for the subject ?
(I promise I'll be exposing the testing and treatment of my room once I start).

These pics are NOT made to be easily grasped examples. It's a response to the "pics or it didn't happen" insinuation.

That was the intention, we've had enough of dogma.

Don't see that it would be different to work on a truly small room. There would still be modal issues and there would still be reflections. We use the treatment we choose and we use the measurement tools appropriate to determine the effect of using the treatment. That's it. No magic trick.

Except that it still hasn't been done by anyone. Those few brave souls who
did post the test results for their small rooms were completely ignored.

If this is once again read as the deluded ramblings of a religious follower, please give me a word and I'll drop it. I'm not doing this to convince anyone of a belief.

I don't want you to drop it, I just want you to come back down to earth .
I really enjoy reading your posts, all of them. You inject a lot of knowledge,
experience and energy into the discussions we have here.

Paul P