View Single Post
Old 14th November 2019
  #46
The more info the better. But, I'd definitely like to see what the designer's philosophy is on "small" rooms. The more I research this the more I realize they truly require a different approach from traditional acoustic spaces.

This approach seems to fall into three categories:
  • A ton of broadband trapping, followed by targeting the remaining problem frequencies with tuned devices and perhaps additional diffusion. In other words, similar to what one would do in a larger room, but more of it. From what I gather, the results can range from very good to not bad but what did you expect in such a small room?
  • Very specialized designs i.e. MyRoom and others. These seem to provide "better" results but may cost more to implement and take up more space.
  • Those, like yourself, who set a minimum dimension and choose not to deal with smaller rooms. Which is great, because I'd rather not go down that road with someone if they're not comfortable with the job. Especially when they don't tell me...

I think it's important because, lets face it, the vast majority of people who come to this forum for advice are working with rooms on the smaller end of the spectrum.

This self deprecating point from DanDan a while back was telling:
Quote:
Many of us would like to know which would be the most effective way to approach small room treatment. Many are currently going with the 'safe bet' broadband approach. Perhaps that is just uncertainty, laziness even, fueled with lots of anecdotal successes using BB.
And maybe there's a thread on this somewhere in the ancient past, but it seems there should be a set of realistic expectations, based on room dimensions and budget, known by both parties before proceeding. Things like Noise Criteria, Room Response, RT60, IDTG, etc. that may be X but will never be Y -- and is that OK?