Oh boy, I'm seeing so much misinformation it's not even funny. I love hearing testimonial from people who have never shot their room with a 'correction unit', tracked and mixed with it, yet they bash it. Makes a whole lotta sense if you ask me.
Yes, treating your room is ideal. Over time I've added a total of 3-2x4-4" bass panels behind my desk, 1 at each corner by the ground and 1 directly behind my desk where my subwoofer is located. These are true fiberglass panels that I constructed, not foam...said to be the best for bass treatment of all the materials that can be easily purchased by a consumer, not a contractor or someone with a special license. So anyway, above those in the corners I also have more 2x4 panels reaching the ceiling. These are 2" panels. I have 2-2x4-2" panels above me, 2 to the left framed by wood as well as 2 to the right. All panels above and to my left and right are angled in a specific way should the material I chose to cover the fiberglass want to reflect anything at all, so as to not have it hit my ears in a way that allows me to hear any weird reflections or phasing issues. My room is as right as it can be for not doing a buildout. The material I used was this: ATS Acoustics Rigid Fiberglass Board
If I had it to do again, I'd go with these and very well may swap them out over time, but they're of course more expensive. These actually have a better bass frequency coefficient and actually wipe the floor with Owens Corning: Roxul Rockboard 80
When I completed my room, I paid someone to come in and shoot it and tell me what was up. He gave me a graph that I have somewhere that tells where my room actually still has buildup. What he stated, in a general sense, (obviously he was trying to sell me on his services) what that in order to get much better, I'd have to do a buildout, which I'm not doing. This was a long conversation that eventually ended up at this conclusion although he spend some time(very professional and not pushy I must say, but it was still obvious) trying to get me to spend some more money with him to have him do 'something' else that he deemed would be helpful. At this time I had already shot my room with my KRK Ergo
. When I hit the focus button(again we measured), and those larger, general bumps that he measured, basically went away. Were they perfect, no, but the fact of the matter is that I would need to spend upwards of about $20k to get it even a little better. Whats worse is that if I ever move anything if I do a buildout, things change. i can move amps or my desk inches as this would change the reflection scheme in the room. With the Ergo
, I can simply reshoot the room, which takes all of 20 minutes to do right.
These myths about the mic that comes with units and these units forcing you to always be in one spot of the room so that moving your head inches changes everything is all nonsense, otherwise, these units wouldn't have you shooting multiple points in the room. I shot about 8 different locations from just to the left and right of my keyboard location, right in front of my face, above my head in case someone is standing behind me, then I have a few feet to the left and right of me where people like to stand, then a few feet back left, center, right and then in the back of the room. My Ergo
has logged 98% room recognition. KRK claims anything above 90% recognition will provide a positive improvement in your mixes and their translation.
I wholeheartedly support the Ergo
system added to any room, even if you think it's already perfect and did spend $20k all the way to over $100k on your room, which we all know is possible. At the end of the day, my mixes do translate better with then without and I don't feel the need for anything more to get my mixes better. I feel like I'm at a place where I can hear deep into my mixes and what I'm refining and perfecting are my own skills as well as developing my own aesthetic for what I like, without the room being part of the equation. Well, maybe, but in a positive way.
Best wishes everyone, gotta go mix now...