Gearslutz

Gearslutz (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/)
-   Studio Building / Acoustics (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/)
-   -   MyRoom Acoustic Design (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/581809-myroom-acoustic-design.html)

avare 14th February 2011 06:15 PM

MyRoom Acoustic Design
 
Thomas (Northward) has an execellent forum that he moderates about studio acoustics. A while ago Bogic Petrovic posted a link to the control room design concept that he and Zorica Davidovic developed MyRoom Design white paper. A fantastic development and much more public than Moulton and ZR Acoustics!

Andre

Max 002 14th February 2011 06:38 PM

It looks really good! Im going start reading it tonight...

My question is how can you get around the racks and the surround speakers to actualy get to the workstation? It does not seam to have any room to walk by. :S

-Max

PaulP 14th February 2011 11:14 PM

Thanks Andre, that was an interesting read.

Nice place. A whole lot of work (and wood !) went into it. Sure get's the imagination going.

I'd like to know how thick the absorption is behind the diffusers. Can't be much more than 6" by the looks of things.

Max asks a good question, I tried to find a door hidden among the diffusers but can't see any. Do you really have to move a speaker to get in ? Trap door ?

807Recordings 18th February 2011 06:05 PM

Very Cool stuff and a great read.

I was not aware that you could place diffusors with absorbers. You learn something new every day.

Max 002 18th February 2011 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaulP (Post 6335961)
Max asks a good question, I tried to find a door hidden among the diffusers but can't see any. Do you really have to move a speaker to get in ? Trap door ?

howdy

PaulP 18th February 2011 09:08 PM

Maybe the room is used for stereo most of the time.

Max 002 18th February 2011 09:40 PM

I'm still holding on the idea of a possible hidden "Batcave" type door diddlydoo

But Yea and they probably keep the surrounds stored in another room... But still its a pain to move the speaker everytime you want to go to the bathroom or ....

Jeancab 18th February 2011 10:05 PM

Very interesting link, thanks.

About the figures 8 & 11 and the AES limits, do you know what is the smoothing ?

Hannes_F 18th February 2011 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Max 002 (Post 6334904)
My question is how can you get around the racks and the surround speakers to actualy get to the workstation? It does not seam to have any room to walk by. :S

No problem since this is the studio of David Copperfield.

Max 002 18th February 2011 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hannes_F (Post 6351570)
No problem since this is the studio of David Copperfield.

Well that explains everything! heh Haha

So whenever he teleports while recording, does it cause any sort of interference in the signal? gooof

avare 19th February 2011 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaulP (Post 6351240)
Maybe the room is used for stereo most of the time.

Yes. The paper qualifies that the rooms are sub-optimum size to begin with.

Andre

avare 19th February 2011 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeancab (Post 6351450)
Very interesting link, thanks.

About the figures 8 & 11 and the AES limits, do you know what is the smoothing ?

You are welcome. It is pleasure reading and replying to a post regarding the (amazing) acoustic achievement in such a small room.

I do not know. Looking at the graphs critically, I suspect one third octave as the coarsest. I counted the bumps in the bumpiest ares of the responses. I would not recommend this method for amateurs. gooof

Smoothly,
Andre

Hannes_F 20th February 2011 10:51 AM

Seriously, this method seems to be a good possibility to get the best out of a small room. They could have tried to install a RFZ/LEDE room in the bigger of the two, but this would not work well for surround. Also, keyword here is try because it is not easy and the principles do not seem to be even fully disclosed as a whole anywhere. For the smaller room of the both an RFZ/LEDE approach would have been out of question right away.

In any case the elimination of direct reflections above 20 - 25 dB seems crucial.

Quote:

Originally Posted by avare
I do not know. Looking at the graphs critically, I suspect one third octave as the coarsest. I counted the bumps in the bumpiest ares of the responses. I would not recommend this method for amateurs. gooof

You mean the smoothing, the bump counting or this sort of treatment?

With a number of modex absorbers plus the Jens Eklund Optiffusors it seems doable.

PaulP 20th February 2011 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hannes_F (Post 6355902)
Also, keyword here is try because it is not easy and the principles do not seem to be even fully disclosed as a whole anywhere.

When you wander off the beaten path everything is an experiment. While the people involved in this project no doubt had a substantial amount of knowledge and experience, they still wouldn't have known how things would turn out until they finished the room.

In my opinion, they went to an awful lot of trouble for a room so small. Investing so much money (surely many thousands of dollars) in a bad room seems a bit ridiculous.

Hannes_F 20th February 2011 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaulP (Post 6356349)
In my opinion, they went to an awful lot of trouble for a room so small. Investing so much money (surely many thousands of dollars) in a bad room seems a bit ridiculous.

Now if you think that their room has 70 m³ and mine has 45 m³ ... hidz

and I still think that I can make mine world class .. that is optimism heh

avare 20th February 2011 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hannes_F (Post 6355902)
Also, keyword here is try because it is not easy and the principles do not seem to be even fully disclosed as a whole anywhere.

What do you see is missing? Sorry, I know that is terrible grammer, but I do no se anything missing.

Quote:

You mean the smoothing, the bump counting or this sort of treatment?
Yes. This is dangerous to do if you are not a professional. heh

Andre

Northward 20th February 2011 07:33 PM

I think Bogic will post more in a new thread once the PSW forum have fully migrated to the new platform, end of this month.

Should be interesting!

Hannes_F 20th February 2011 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avare (Post 6356999)
What do you see is missing? Sorry, I know that is terrible grammer, but I do no se anything missing.

If we are talking about a LEDE/RFZ room, is there any publication where all the information and specifications are published in one document?

I think I remember SAC writing anywhere that while many think they have a a LEDE/RFZ room there are only a handful of rooms that would really match the criteria to get approved, and all of those that are approved needed tweaking to get there.

fitZ 20th February 2011 08:15 PM

Quote:

while many think they have a a LEDE/RFZ room there are only a handful of rooms that would really match the criteria to get approved, and all of those that are approved needed tweaking to get there.

Could you please elaborate on this "criteria", or link me to it?

Also, WHO is doing this so called "approval", what is used to certify this "approval", and exactly WHAT is an approval in the first place?confoosed

Thank you.

Hannes_F 20th February 2011 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fitZ (Post 6357177)
Also, WHO is doing this so called "approval"

As far as I know patents and trademarks are involved both in the LEDE principle (which was invented by Don Davis + Chips Davis / SydAudCon) and its further development RFZ-LEDE (which was introduced by Peter D'Antonio + John H. Konnert / RPGinc). As far as I know (again) They have the right to approve studios to be consistent with their design but I might be wrong here.

Quote:

, what is used to certify this "approval", and exactly WHAT is an approval in the first place?confoosed

Could you please elaborate on this "criteria", or link me to it?

Thank you.
If I knew that exactly I would not have written that the criteria are not fully disclosed.

I take it to be granted that you know what an ETC measurement is and how the general principles about the ITG, the termination are defined etc. but there seem to be more and undocumented features. But again, I might be wrong here. All I have is basically the comment of SAC and others that there are lots of not-really-working RFZ/LEDE rooms and few that do.

jhbrandt 21st February 2011 08:13 AM

RFZ
 
RPG's "Technical Bulletin on the Application of Diffusion in Critical Listening Rooms" gives a pretty good outline for RFZ control rooms - as does the AES publication "The RFZ/RPG Approach to Control Room Monitoring".

Cheers,
John

johndykstra 21st February 2011 05:27 PM

Fantastic John, thank you.

Question. What is the difference between phase grating and amplitude grating?

Jeffrey Hedback 21st February 2011 05:40 PM

John,

That's simple at most basic breakdown

Phase grating uses reflective surfaces & distance (thus time, thus phase) through varied well-depths.

Amplitude grating uses reflection & absorption (so the return energy is a combination of those amplitudes). Slats over an absorber are a simple example of amplitude grating. A more scientific example would be the RPG BAD panel (binary amplitude diffusor).

johndykstra 21st February 2011 05:45 PM

Got it. Thanks Jeffrey

fitZ 21st February 2011 06:14 PM

Quote:

As far as I know patents and trademarks are involved both in the LEDE principle (which was invented by Don Davis + Chips Davis / SydAudCon)
Yes, I understand that, and also understand that SydAudCon had a system in place to verify a given design met the criteria, and once "certified", a given studio could proudly wear the banner, "LEDE CERTIFIED".

And this is precisely why I've repeatedly asked ...in THIS day and age, WHAT "certifies" any given designers design, other than "his/her" promise, by contract or not, to meet an agreed to set of criteria. In other words, is there any INDUSTRY WIDE set of sonic criteria/parameters that ALL Studio designers attempt to meet by virtue of proof of performance..and then is there some kind of INDUSTRY WIDE compliance/approval mechanism in place that guarantees a given studio CR has met this criteria?

So far, it appears the only answer I've received is each designer "attempts" to satisfy his own interpretation of what the acoustic performance of a CR or Live room should be. Talk of so called existing "standards" doesn't mean diddly squat if there isn't some kind of INDUSTRY wide "agreement" of these criteria, and "approval" by virtue of some kind of Industry wide performance "evaluation" committee or something to that effect......no? And once tested, some kind of AES approval stamp..kind of like what SydAudCon tried to do virtue of their awarding a stamp of approval called LEDE Compliance. At least to my way of thinking. confoosed
Otherwise, this whole ball of wax is only supported by opinion. Mine.


Furthermore...exactly who/what guarantees/certifies any given ENGINEER, has the auditory tools that can precisely utilize a "certified" room in the first place.
heh

I submit...reputation is the only criteria a given engineer needs to land a job. Same with a studio designer. There are no "certifications" such as a STRUCTURAL ENGINEER is required to maintain.

Quote:

RPG's "Technical Bulletin on the Application of Diffusion in Critical Listening Rooms" gives a pretty good outline for RFZ control rooms - as does the AES publication "The RFZ/RPG Approach to Control Room Monitoring".

Cheers,
John
Thanks John..., but WHO certifies any given design meets these criteria, as the statement below implies that anyone can design/build a room that the designer/owner "claims" is an RFZ control room.

Quote:

All I have is basically the comment of SAC and others that there are lots of not-really-working RFZ/LEDE rooms and few that do.
:facepalm:

Exactly what certifies the "few that do"...actually DO?confoosed

For the clients that pay good money for studio time in these "not-really-working RFZ/LEDE rooms..all I can say is ....CAVEAT EMPEROR! heh Had they had luxury of some kind of PROOF OF PERFORMANCE..it may or may not made a damn bit of difference to their bottom line when it comes to the selling of their product. However, I just hate it when someone tries to sell me something that's based on a lie... ie..."soundproofing foam" comes to mind at the moment. shiee The only difference is..when you install "soundproofing foam"...and then hear a person talking in the next room..you KNOW you've been conned.

Not so with a "not-really-working RFZ/LEDE room. I'd submit...even the engineers who work in these rooms couldn't detect it..even with NON CERTIFIED GOLDEN EARS! Hmmm, reminds me of the Kings Clothing. Kinda like the "Hemholtz Formula" debacle a few years ago. How many acousticans/studio designers incorporated these devices based on a flawed formula..and THEN...NO ONE HEARD IT???????????:facepalm:



One final question. How does one measure the "performance of diffusers" in a given room...ie...the room in question here? All I've ever seen in that regard is a picture of RPG labs testing a "RPG diffuser"..but the testing lab is FILLED with POLYS in the first place???????????confoosedshiee:facepalm: WTF?

Ok, enough of my NON EXPERT curiosity. Carry on.

Hannes_F 21st February 2011 07:05 PM

fitZ, read my post #13.

That is why I said it would certainly be easier to build a room according to design principles that are well documentated (as it seems to be the case with the MyRoom Design) than if key elements are in the dark (for example Haas kicker yes or no for an RFZ/LEDE room, polys yes or no, etc.)

I am not saying the result is necessarily better under ideal conditions but certainly the success rate will be higher. How many ETC graphs of really existing projects have you seen in this forum that are beyond any criticism?

I am strictly speaking about DIY projects here. I don't want to deny any professional designer designer the ability to achieve about anything he/she wants with state of the art methods.

avare 22nd February 2011 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northward (Post 6357020)
I think Bogic will post more in a new thread once the PSW forum have fully migrated to the new platform, end of this month.

Should be interesting!

Thank you Thomas. I tried to link to the thread on the old software and could not get on to it.

FWIW the LAB forums are working fine on the new software.

Andre

avare 22nd February 2011 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hannes_F (Post 6355902)
Also, keyword here is try because it is not easy and the principles do not seem to be even fully disclosed as a whole anywhere.

My choice of words in the first post may be contirbuting to the confusion. It would be more accurate to describe the MyRoom as an implementation strategy, as opposed to a design concept. The paper references AES TD1001 many times.

Andre

avare 2nd March 2011 06:20 PM

THE Thread
 
Thomas' REP AIM has comoleted its transition to the new software. Bogic has started a thread with some repetition form the old one for people who can not access the old thread for data. Questions about the MyRoom design can be addressed to the man himself!

"MyRoom" Acoustic Design. Enjoy!

Andre

johndykstra 2nd March 2011 06:39 PM

From what I can gather by visual and deductive (roughly 2' period, N13 with equal slat to slot ratio), It would seem the slat faces of the "air transparent" combo amplitude/phase gratings are approx 1". Would this imply that the diffusive return of such a device would only be composed of roughly 8k and up?