View Single Post
Old 27th October 2011
  #6
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAH View Post
I have tried to disprove some commonly spread myths at a local music board (not GS ) but got kinda attacked by local gurus who actually bring these myths to the masses and who claim I have not read P. Newell books without being able to give a quote or a page that refutes my points.
These in are (AFAIK at least) as follows :

1) 8" speakers are a horror in a small room due to standing waves - 5-6'' are preferred.
I propose 8" for rooms from 15 m2 and larger due to less constrained and deeper bass (the audeince there is a hip-hop crowd). My reasons are that 5-6'' will still excite midbass modes so one extra 40-60 Hz mode from 8" is not such a horror considering the horror that will most probably exist in the midbass range already form 5-6'' speakers.


size of the speaker has nothing to do with standing waves

except that larger diameters can supply lower freqs louder than small diameter speakers eg 36' subwoofer will woof more subs than a 2" speaker.


room shape and size will also affect the results
as will location of teh speakers

2) some room is required for bass to develope.

???? develop?
you can hear bass in headphones with minimal room being the space in your ear and the phone cup.

bass requires movement of air. more volume means more air needed to be moved.

My "busting myth" reasons - take any headphones - there is bass. It is a different matter that small rooms with massive rigid walls do not support enogh low modes. A local guru disputed this by:" read Newell and google Missing Fumdamental effect" for bass in headphones, which is obviously stupid since the bass fundamentals such low as 40-30 Hz can be and are measured in headphones.


3) foam pyramides\carpet\eggcraves are good to treat the room as general absorbers\ for early reflections.
My reasons - they are not good at least, and rather harmful.
They only absorb some (narrow) High\Mids ranges though leave low-mids and bass untouched - the room gets imbalanced more than it was before the "treatment" - a dull booming\nulling room will be what we will get as a result.

???? maybe. not an acoustic expert for treatment.
but my living room sounds great with rugs drapes furniture etc and bare walls ceiling on 3 surfaces.

4) One can evaluate different speakers in different rooms or in one room in different placements.

apples and oranges

My reason is that room\speaker in a given spot in a room is a system, and moving speakers a step in any direction in a room will yield a unique response highly affected by the room.
So one cannot say "speaker A (of a given size\design) has more bass than speaker B (of the same size\design as A) - I listened to A in a room X in the corner, and listened to B while standing in the middle of room Y.

5) rear-ported speakers cannot be placed relatively close to a wall.
My reasons - as long as some decent distance (like 4-8'') for free air travelling from the port is left between the wall and a port - it does not matter whether it is a rear-ported or a front-ported speaker in terms of time alignment\resonances\spectral balance since the wave length of the frequencies at which port works is well above 3 meters long.

???? never had a rear ported one

Then when a "guru" posted all I was talking was bull* and can be disproved for any point, I proposed him to do so where he shut up but then his proponents chimed in with no contrarguments.
Could you guys state whether I am right on wrong?
see comments inserted
i think i mostly agree with you