Mastering studio design

[Duffster]

Got the almost done for my mastering studio and I was hoping some one could take a look to see if there are any problems. I posted it in my studio build thread.
thanks

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/showt...55#post1163255

[Duffster]

bump

[inlinenl]

I'm planning myself also a rebuild ... I watched you're design ...... no problems "I think" just build it and work in it ....

good basic design ... let it be checked and adapted to the situation when it's ready ....

but the 3d design looks a bit steril ... but I know you guys have a nice vibe !!!

p.s. you need some sexy speakers ....

good luck .. have fun

wim

www.inlinemastering.com

[Duffster]

bump

[Anderson]

I see two things which IMHO can be problematic:

1- shape of the ceiling is not optimum and requires a few changes. I fear a pressure point in the inverting part. Would need dimensions to say more about that.

2- Absorption behind speakers (and on top), in my school of thinking, that's a no-no. It influences the imaging (loss of depth and dimension) and disturbs the energy build up in the front of the room. Bass traps are needed, but not everywhere. They need to be at the right place, of the right size and work at the right frequencies. Speaker distance from the front wall must be properly calculated as well.

For Mastering studios, using only "broadband traps" just won't make it. You need an overall more balanced treatment. So use strictly membrane type if you can. I see lots of Skyline diffusors at the back, which is very good. Make sure they are deep enough though. Under 27 cms for the deepest wells is giving limited results.

I'd like to see some skylines in the ceiling over the sweet spot at least.

[critical]

does this do not apply absorption on the ceiling and behind the speaker rule apply to a room for mixing also.
Or is it different when setting up a mastering room.

thanks

[Anderson]

Originally Posted by critical

does this do not apply absorption on the ceiling and behind the speaker rule apply to a room for mixing also.
Or is it different when setting up a mastering room.

thanks

No, the same *rule* applies. If you generalize a lot, you could say: Front of room = energy build up / Back of room = calculated diffusion and absorption. With an overall well designed FTB rejection.

The geometry of the room is very important, i.e. the way you diffract waves to clean up the sweet spot of early reflections.

BUT, it's difficult without the proper knowledge to determine the shape and total surface of the front (energy build up) zone. Too big and the room responds too much. Too small and the room loses lots of definition.

If you DIY, how do you know you've got it more or less right? Well, the first thing clients notice is that even when the room is finished but still empty, and RT is managed, when you talk you have this immediate impression of very high precision/accuracy in your voice and your interlocutor's voice. A bit as if you were speaking in a high-end mic+pre with headphones on. It's dry (NOT dead) and precise, yet natural.

[critical]

Thanks for the help.

[DirkB]

Originally Posted by Anderson

I
2- Absorption behind speakers (and on top), in my school of thinking, that's a no-no. It influences the imaging (loss of depth and dimension) and disturbs the energy build up in the front of the room. Bass traps are needed, but not everywhere. .

Although I know Anderson has studied acoustics and does this as a professional, I want to comment on this statement. Look for example to a lot of the Francis Manzella designs, where broadband trapping, both behind the speakers as on the first reflexion points, is a common strategy.

Basically, there are several acoustic strategies how to "tackle" a room. If your not comfortable with figuring out something that could work yourself, better to hire a real professional.
In any event, I would always hire a professional at the end (if you have done it yourself) to measure the room and do the final, calculated, adjustments.

Good luck,
Dirk

[Anderson]

Originally Posted by DirkB

Although I know Anderson has studied acoustics and does this as a professional, I want to comment on this statement. Look for example to a lot of the Francis Manzella designs, where broadband trapping, both behind the speakers as on the first reflexion points, is a common strategy.

Basically, there are several acoustic strategies how to "tackle" a room. If your not comfortable with figuring out something that could work yourself, better to hire a real professional.
In any event, I would always hire a professional at the end (if you have done it yourself) to measure the room and do the final, calculated, adjustments.

Good luck,
Dirk

I believe it is also the case for Roger Quested Designs. Most of the rooms he does are highly absorptive!

There are indeed different schools of thinking / not one way of doing things, which is good, maintains a healthy debate.

It's all about where and what we believe is the best compromise (a good room is all about making the right compromise). And that depends sometimes on taste, most of the time on hard maths.

There is much to be said about that but that's a whole other (long) Thread.

[Duffster]

Originally Posted by DirkB

Basically, there are several acoustic strategies how to "tackle" a room. If your not comfortable with figuring out something that could work yourself, better to hire a real professional.
In any event, I would always hire a professional at the end (if you have done it yourself) to measure the room and do the final, calculated, adjustments.

Good luck,
Dirk

This is an actual design done by a professional. It is not the final, just the start and I wanted to get a jump start on the rest of the process so I asked him to give me the preliminary design just to get some other opinions.