The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Greatest studio designs Keyboard Synthesizers
Old 4 weeks ago
  #31
Lives for gear
 
Jason Foi's Avatar
 

Titanic v2.o in 3....2...1
Old 3 weeks ago
  #32
Dr. Hans explains well in this post why the resolution gets higher using wings then absorbtion in my videos:
Gearslutz - View Single Post - Is my room big enough for a diffusor?

The table in Dr Hans post shows that his little mix room retains the energy similar to Blackbird studios ambechoic concept.
Even My room falls quickly as Boggy uses absorbers at the bottom of the difusers.

Guys, one can not hide, the new ambechoic trend is here on permanent stay!

Why SMT's products would be connected to a cult, I have difficulty understanding because in Scandinavia it is well known in the industry that Well Known acousticans and speaker manufacturers use / recommend the wing modules.
Take a look in Genelecs new showroom for example!


Royal Music college of Stockholm, Sweden! I took my master degree in percussion there 10 years ago in the old house.*The new house is built 2016. I work there now. Acoustic engineer is yet another world famous man, Lennart Nilsson. over 21000m2. I think it is around 2000 wings installed.


Axwell & Ingrosso (ex Swdish House Mafia) could build what ever they wanted.
Here is a sneak peak (under construction)*from one of their 6 mix studios.


Can someone name the worlds greatest NE Non Environment (Non cult) Studio?

Last edited by Berndalen; 3 weeks ago at 11:36 PM.. Reason: added links
Old 3 weeks ago
  #33
Moderator
 
Northward's Avatar
Berndalen,

As I said before, my patience runs thin very quickly with the "SMT crowd". It's always the same type of posts, the same pseudo-science as if you were somehow asked to post that way. It's tiring.

Anyone who knows enough about acoustics engineering, basic physics of sound and psycho-acoustics can see in a second this is all based on a serious misunderstanding of the science: what "Ambechoic" actually is (the SMT rooms aren't), how diffusion actually works, the silly "forest response" idea that is a complete 180° misunderstanding of the Haas effect and of how the human auditory system functions. The list goes on and on. It's non-sense in and out, and targets the gullible.

That you feel the wings 'do something' - I believe you: you're adding something in the room. Adding any other type of diffusion or treatment will have an audible effect. And as I also mentioned to you in another thread, your tests are flawed. That you hold the results of said tests as some kind of golden reference for yourself is fine, but understand that to most of us it is meaningless at best.

I never heard of Lennart Nilsson before, and we work all over the place.

If you want some perspective on the current extent to which NE and FTB rooms are used, about 60-70% of the current US Billboard 100 has either been mixed or mastered in one of these rooms. We'll likely be nearing these numbers in Europe too by end of the year. That should tell you something. I'm opened to the fact that there are other ways to design and implement a design, but if I were you I'd ask myself some serious questions. It can't be that such a volume of professionals and companies with such a massive track record are making the wrong choice over and over again, somehow not contacting current owners to get their feedback on the rooms, and investing very large sums of money blindly.

In the video you linked to, the front wall of the studio is covered in what is probably claimed to be some kind of a diffusor but really is just a series of panels only good at adding basic narrow-bandwidth edge diffraction and located in an area where they are ineffective anyway due to how speakers dispersion works. At best they just disturb the response.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #34
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berndalen View Post
Guys, one can not hide, the new ambechoic trend is here on permanent stay!

Take a look in Genelecs new showroom for example!

Axwell & Ingrosso (ex Swdish House Mafia) could build what ever they wanted.

Can someone name the worlds greatest NE Non Environment (Non cult) Studio?
Trend? Here to stay? Where's here?

Do you have enough experience in the music industry to know who Sterling Sound is? They demand nothing less than the best, most accurate sounding rooms money can buy. This is why they just had Thomas do all their new rooms in the NJ and Nashville facilities.

There always have been and always will be high profile artists with rooms that look very cool, but acoustically are full of issues and design weaknesses. It's nothing new. As they say though, ignorance is bliss
Old 3 weeks ago
  #35
Gear Nut
 
thomlin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northward View Post

In the video you linked to, the front wall of the studio is covered in what is probably claimed to be some kind of a diffusor but really is just a series of panels only good at adding basic narrow-bandwidth edge diffraction and located in an area where they are ineffective anyway due to how speakers dispersion works. At best they just disturb the response.
There is no cult, only people. I really think you’re inappropriate as a moderator since you talking negative on subjects you haven’t tried. But you’re credibility in this subject would certainly grow if you could at least show one self experienced example. Hey, I would be happy if you just explained how the wings and varitunes work together (my feeling is that don’t even know what they look like, but I’m hopefully wrong)... Or maybe someone in your fanbase could start, since they are so eager to hook up everytime you mocking the idiots. And after trying, maybe backing up statements with measurements?

There are different methods for different people with different budgets and needs... is that so hard to accept?
Is there really no room for different concepts?

Apologies to the thread starter for using your thread, but this bullying going on is just utterly wrong and it should just stop.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #36
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by thomlin View Post
I really think you’re inappropriate as a moderator since you talking negative on subjects you haven’t tried.
Have you ever tried jumping from a 3 story building onto concrete? Do you need to try it in order to know that you'll land with enough force to be injured?

No?

That's physics for ya

Quote:
Is there really no room for different concepts?
There's always room for different concepts. There just typically isn't room for rewriting the laws of physics.

Audio frequencies = wavelengths. The dimensions & orientation of the reflective surfaces of any diffusor will physically dictate what effect they will have on the sound and what frequencies they will effectively diffuse. Some low profile grooves on a board are not going to do much. And for anyone who wants to ignore physics and believe otherwise, just give ZR Acoustics a shout. They'll set you up
Old 3 weeks ago
  #37
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bert stoltenborg View Post
What are the greatest sounding guitars?
I was wondering what are the greatest sounding guitars and who made them?
Dreadnoughts by Martin Guitar.
Attached Thumbnails
Greatest studio designs-20180319_184208.jpg  
Old 3 weeks ago
  #38
Gear Nut
 
thomlin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
Have you ever tried jumping from a 3 story building onto concrete? Do you need to try it in order to know that you'll land with enough force to be injured?

No?

That's physics for ya
If that's the best you can compare to... I've actually seen people handling that.
Otherwise I let the comment speak for itself...

Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
There's always room for different concepts. There just typically isn't room for rewriting the laws of physics.
Physics itself can't be changed, but how to use it can. It's called development or evolution. Not very familiar for you from what I can read.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
Audio frequencies = wavelengths. The dimensions & orientation of the reflective surfaces of any diffusor will physically dictate what effect they will have on the sound and what frequencies they will effectively diffuse. Some low profile grooves on a board are not going to do much. And for anyone who wants to ignore physics and believe otherwise, just give ZR Acoustics a shout. They'll set you up
We'll once again you prove my statement, you haven't got a clue what the wings look like and what they do. Find out and come back with real facts, not you're opinon based on nothing.

This will never end since one of us is using blinders, but what I'm after is to change your very negative approach to others that are in the same business as you. I see you took your business info away when you answered me, but still a fact. There is a big difference between statements and opinions and you don't seem to understand what it is.

Last edited by thomlin; 3 weeks ago at 12:16 PM..
Old 3 weeks ago
  #39
Gear Nut
 
thomlin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRealSPH3 View Post
Dreadnoughts by Martin Guitar.
yes, but not all of them, only mine
Old 3 weeks ago
  #40
Lives for gear
 
Mctwins's Avatar
 

Albert Einstein did change the physics
Old 3 weeks ago
  #41
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by thomlin View Post
If that's the best you can compare to... I've actually seen people handling that.
I asked if YOU have or needed to. I thought I was using an obvious example, but we can change that to "jump from 6 stories" if it helps get the point across? You're not going to escape the physics there.

Quote:
We'll once again you prove my statement, you haven't got a clue what the wings look like and what they do. Find out and come back with real facts, not you're opinon based on nothing.
This will never end since one of us is using blinders
You're using blinders? That makes a lot of sense. Take off the blinders and go back to what you quoted in your own post for a refresher on what YOU replied to (and what my comments were directed at). Also a good time to remind you I never mentioned wings in my previous posts. And yes, I know what they are. If you're going to get irate and aggressive here, at least take the time to read people's posts more carefully so you're not off base and just wasting both our time. That would be very courteous.

Quote:
I see you took your business info away when you answered me, but still a fact. There is a big difference between statements and opinions and you don't seem to understand what it is.
Mate, it's a web forum. Your sig will only display on one post listed on the page. I really don't think the blinders are working well for you my friend
Old 3 weeks ago
  #42
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mctwins View Post
Albert Einstein did change the physics
Einstein could not change the physic. He changed the understanding of the physic world.
Did you know with what?

Mathematics.

So have you the same things?
Old 3 weeks ago
  #43
Lives for gear
 
Mctwins's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dinococcus View Post
Einstein could not change the physic. He changed the understanding of the physic world.
Did you know with what?

Mathematics.

So have you the same things?
No, I use the wings to expose what the slow processing brain miss to detect.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #44
Lives for gear
The I is You and not Me so we will stay on an opinion. We will not succeed to have a constructive dialog.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #45
Gear Nut
 
thomlin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
I asked if YOU have or needed to. I thought I was using an obvious example, but we can change that to "jump from 6 stories" if it helps get the point across? You're not going to escape the physics there.
I could put myself in an air bubble... I haven't changed the physics, but how to solve a problem. But your example is not only bad, it's also not nice using me to throw myself out from sixth floor into concrete...twice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
You're using blinders? That makes a lot of sense. Take off the blinders and go back to what you quoted in your own post for a refresher on what YOU replied to (and what my comments were directed at). Also a good time to remind you I never mentioned wings in my previous posts. And yes, I know what they are. If you're going to get irate and aggressive here, at least take the time to read people's posts more carefully so you're not off base and just wasting both our time. That would be very courteous.
If you know how the wings work, why did you mocking about the ad diffusors who is there for a reason?

Back to my subject, NW is inappropriate as moderator if he don't follow the forum rules himself. You're all affiliated with business connected to acoustics and NW uses his moderator status to disconnect and ban people not agree with him... in DanDans case with comments Dandan couldn't respond to.

Wing concept work and if I were you, who's putting a lot of effort to talk it down, maybe it's worth actually getting facts instead of statements to prove your point.
Otherwise I suggest you instead present all the good things you can contribute with.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #46
Lives for gear
Wing concept works but we wil not know how and will not see measurements.

I hate this word but in this case, you play as a troll. It's pitty because acoustic is also a business and make run away the client is a funny idea.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #47
Gear Nut
 
thomlin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinococcus View Post
Wing concept works but we wil not know how and will not see measurements.
A microphone and diagrams works for measuring I guess, but how it works is maybe/probably where most of the disagreement lays. (Psychoacoustics - Wikipedia)

Quote:
Originally Posted by dinococcus View Post
I hate this word but in this case, you play as a troll. It's pitty because acoustic is also a business
I think some will agree and others call it common sense to reflect.

But I'm open for suggestions how to lift up the subjects I relate to, in a more appropriate way:
(Mocking, Bullying, allowing and contributing for business affiliated members to
attack others etc. etc, with a moderator in the center)

Also other parts of GS have business affiliated people contributing everyday, both with passion and with a business related agenda. But nowhere else is the tone so harsh, uneven and limited between different concepts and its business affiliated people, as is in the acoustics forum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dinococcus View Post
and make run away the client is a funny idea.
Didn't get it, but maybe something like this ? (Four types of clients you should run away from - Steven Land)
Old 3 weeks ago
  #48
Quote:
Originally Posted by thomlin View Post

Back to my subject, NW is inappropriate as moderator if he don't follow the forum rules himself. You're all affiliated with business connected to acoustics and NW uses his moderator status to disconnect and ban people not agree with him... in DanDans case with comments Dandan couldn't respond to.
I´m sure NW is skilled in what he do within his company. Having famous and satisfied customers, Gearslutz Forum might think, really cool we could get this guy as moderator.

So far so good.

Though it gets very wrong when this one speaks bad about other recognized acoustics, just because they work in a different way than his own company does.

"I never heard of Lennart Nilsson before, and we work all over the place."

For god sake. I guess you have not heard about Ingemar Ohlsson either?

Those guys is two of the most respected acoustic engineers in Scandinavia and have together around 4000 references.

It is actually quite embarrassing that this circus can continue. Someone in the forum's management must step in here (behind the scenes) and put down the foot. This is not the way to go @ the world's largest pro audio forum.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #49
Moderator
 
Northward's Avatar
A google search for Lennart Nilsson gave me only 1 matching result, an article on a website. I've heard of Ingemar Ohlsson, he's done work mostly limited to within Sweden.

4000 references though? That's 50 design projects a year (almost 1 a week) for 40 years in a row for each of them. That's a very enthusiastic number for guys that only work within Scandinavia, whose total population isn't a lot more than the greater Los Angeles area. The whole population of Sweden fits within the greater Paris or the state of NY. Your numbers don't make any sense. For us to have enough volume of work we have to cater services to both the EU 27 and USA+Canada. It's the case for all pro-designers. They have to work over a very large geographical area.

I agree with dinococcus, this conversation isn't going anywhere.

Mod hat on: The role of moderation in this particular context is to ensure that the user-generated content posted maintains a certain signal to noise ratio - to protect readers who are looking for relevant information from posters that might be abusive, spread disinformation or misinformation, advertise/sell something for a company all that under the disguise of a pseudo-informative post.

A moderator who is trained on the subject being discussed can spot misinformation, attempts to deceit and frauds a lot faster than a moderator who is not well versed in the subject.

Though it's to be expected that users which are being reprimanded for such behaviours complain about moderation being unfair and biased - if you have a problem with moderation, feel free to contact the forum management about it.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #50
Gear Nut
 
thomlin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northward View Post
A google search for Lennart Nilsson gave me only 1 matching result, an article on a website. I've heard of Ingemar Ohlsson, he's done work mostly limited to within Sweden.

4000 references though? That's 50 design projects a year (almost 1 a week) for 40 years in a row for each of them. That's a very enthusiastic number for guys that only work within Scandinavia, whose total population isn't a lot more than the greater Los Angeles area. The whole population of Sweden fits within the greater Paris or the state of NY. Your numbers don't make any sense. For us to have enough volume of work we have to cater services to both the EU 27 and USA+Canada. It's the case for all pro-designers. They have to work over a very large geographical area.

I agree with dinococcus, this conversation isn't going anywhere.

Mod hat on: The role of moderation in this particular context is to ensure that the user-generated content posted maintains a certain signal to noise ratio - to protect readers who are looking for relevant information from posters that might be abusive, spread disinformation or misinformation, advertise/sell something for a company all that under the disguise of a pseudo-informative post.

A moderator who is trained on the subject being discussed can spot misinformation, attempts to deceit and frauds a lot faster than a moderator who is not well versed in the subject.

Though it's to be expected that users which are being reprimanded for such behaviours complain about moderation being unfair and biased - if you have a problem with moderation, feel free to contact the forum management about it.
For real?, once again you present your opinon ”a trained eye”, as a fact. And accuse of fraud with ”a trained eye” and moderator skills, as proof.

It’s hillarious and you’re funny when you describe users of a concept as it was the Hawala network of acoustics.

I thought more than this was needed to accuse anyone for fraud... like facts, proofs, measurements.

Just for the records so you and your followers don’t misunderstand. There is no clan, no secret network of sheeps, parrots, frauders and everything else I’ve been called. I’m only a paying user of a working concept.
I have measurements proofing it and so far I haven’t seen better in a small control room with a huge console in the middle. Period!

Close your trained eye, look another way or whatever and let this acoustic concept be a part of the forum. Share opinions and don’t present them as facts.
To relate to NMS statement about laws of physics, you use and tame them and so are I, in different ways and with different aimings and results... but don’t accuse me to be a fraud. It’s not right and not correct.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #51
Lives for gear
Thomlin, you quote the Akademiska Hus. Akademiska Hus is not a music studio but a set of classroom
Lennart Nilsson | Akustikmiljo

As I learned, acoustically speaking it is not the same thing between spoken voice and music reproduction (Frequency range, spl..).


Have you exemple about studio, homecinema, room where there are music production ?

Last edited by dinococcus; 3 weeks ago at 08:52 PM.. Reason: replace music production by reproduction
Old 3 weeks ago
  #52
Gear Nut
 
thomlin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northward View Post
I've heard of Ingemar Ohlsson
I Don’t know if Ingemar heard of you, but here’s some info just to show that just because you have an opinion doesn’t mean its right... it’s just an impression based on your experience.

info Below is actually related to the thread.
Since you seem to missed before, some is repeated.

”Ingemar Olsson designed Axwell&Ingrossos 6 control rooms. Genelecs statement after visiting the main mix room : “Studio 1 acoustics ,atmosphere and attention to detail make it one of the best mix studios I have experienced!”
Patrick Lundin Sales manager Genelec”

YouTube

Audio Data Lab - Reference Projects List

Heard of Google ( ;
Old 3 weeks ago
  #53
Lives for gear
Usual Acoustic Consultation Projects
Atriums
Auditoriums
Hotels
Residential environments
Religious centres
Restaurants & Cafés
Shopping malls
Workplace environments

i do not read reference about music reproduction, studio.

edit: Sorry i do not see the page reference list
Old 3 weeks ago
  #54
Gear Nut
 
thomlin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinococcus View Post

edit: Sorry i do not see the page reference list
See it?

Here’s a photo with Ingemar and another Happy studio owner
Attached Thumbnails
Greatest studio designs-c2ebbd74-b467-4285-9c97-b78edc71ee3e.jpg  
Old 3 weeks ago
  #55
Lives for gear
In the link below, we can see beautiful photos of zr-acoustics in studio with happy users

"The revolutionary design paradigm responsible for creating this unique experience is ZR Acoustics®. From U2 , Cher, Kanye West and Universal Music Group to LinkedIn, Yahoo Music and Microsoft, ZR quantum acoustic technology lives everywhere the highest level of performance in audio and acoustics are required".

Delta H Design | ZR Acoustics

"Zero Reflection Technology is powered by Quantum Acoustics™, controlling air at the molecular level, rendering walls, ceilings, and all hard surfaces inaudible."

The Wings as others concepts can not compete with product controlling air at molecular level.

If ZR did as you, scream to a conspiracy.

U2 unknown no ?


why do you believe and not ZR?

Last edited by dinococcus; 3 weeks ago at 09:58 PM..
Old 3 weeks ago
  #56
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinococcus View Post
In the link below, we can see beautiful photos of zr-acoustics in studio with happy users

"The revolutionary design paradigm responsible for creating this unique experience is ZR Acoustics®. From U2 , Cher, Kanye West and Universal Music Group to LinkedIn, Yahoo Music and Microsoft, ZR quantum acoustic technology lives everywhere the highest level of performance in audio and acoustics are required".

Delta H Design | ZR Acoustics

"Zero Reflection Technology is powered by Quantum Acoustics™, controlling air at the molecular level, rendering walls, ceilings, and all hard surfaces inaudible."

The Wings as others concepts can not compete with product controlling air at molecular level.

If ZR did as you, scream to a conspiracy.

U2 unknown no ?


why do you believe and not ZR?
Aha. You are trying to put SMT and ZR in the same basket.
Apples and Pears.

As far as I have heard, ZR do not reveal any sort of results from measuring their projects.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northward View Post
A google search for Lennart Nilsson gave me only 1 matching result, an article on a website. I've heard of Ingemar Ohlsson, he's done work mostly limited to within Sweden.

4000 references though? That's 50 design projects a year (almost 1 a week) for 40 years in a row for each of them. That's a very enthusiastic number for guys that only work within Scandinavia, whose total population isn't a lot more than the greater Los Angeles area. The whole population of Sweden fits within the greater Paris or the state of NY. Your numbers don't make any sense. For us to have enough volume of work we have to cater services to both the EU 27 and USA+Canada. It's the case for all pro-designers. They have to work over a very large geographical area.
1 matching result. Ha ha ha!

A google search of you gave me this:

"Since 2001, Northward has designed or consulted for 150+ clients on 4 continents".

...it is something like 1 project every 6 weeks.

I also saw you on Pensados Place. Hard to tell your age from that video. But you can not be so much older then around 40 years old. Same as me

You know. Lennart Nilsson started to work with acoustics before you and I were born In the 70´s. Something like 20 years before Google... And he is still producing. A LOT. I think Lennart has something like 10-15 people working for him, full-time.

It does not cast any sort of shadow over your work. But young man. Don´t **** with the old guys.

I´ll help you google and put together a reference list for you tomorrow.

To be continued...
Old 3 weeks ago
  #58
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berndalen View Post
Aha. You are trying to put SMT and ZR in the same basket.
Apples and Pears.

As far as I have heard, ZR do not reveal any sort of results from measuring their projects.
I show that you use the same argument as ZR based on BLA BLA.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #59
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by thomlin View Post
Here’s a photo with Ingemar and another Happy studio owner
Man.. I cringe whenever I see a rear wall full of diffusers that close to the engineer. Are you trying to listen to the music, or the room?
If the face of the diffusors will be closer than 10' from the engineer, I usually don't recommend it to clients.

They clearly were forced to make the best of a room that was poor in size. I know Northward's work enough to know he won't even accept such clients, as the size is below the minimum requirement for his rooms, and he doesn't allow them to be compromised in such a way.

No disrespect to Cosmos Mastering, but they are quite small in comparison to Northward's client Sterling Sound (#1 mastering agency in the world with facilities in NY, NJ, Nashville) where he just designed ALL of their new rooms.
They hired Northward because he's the best in the business.
If you're not familiar with Sterling, here's a link to their discography of 16,548 releases.

Also, I have no "business affiliation" gains or conflict of interest whatsoever relating to Northward. There are no shortage of people who have an extremely high regard for the work he does. You simply won't find anyone who has a higher technical standard in studio design. His rooms are on another level compared to Ingemar's.. both visually and technically speaking:
Attached Thumbnails
Greatest studio designs-10298465_10152102456458372_1605950433855999039_o.jpg   Greatest studio designs-11061231_10152815235623372_1734248014469311352_o.jpg   Greatest studio designs-35682314_10155554833543372_591128963267428352_o.jpg   Greatest studio designs-48429618_10155952097188372_8240911994610253824_o.jpg   Greatest studio designs-15775010_10154160256783372_4125900237903779690_o.jpg  

Greatest studio designs-47576757_10155913325083372_211556435299926016_o.jpg   Greatest studio designs-soap-sound-studio-rear.jpg  

Last edited by nms; 3 weeks ago at 02:49 PM..
Old 3 weeks ago
  #60
Moderator
 
Northward's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berndalen View Post
A google search of you gave me this:

"Since 2001, Northward has designed or consulted for 150+ clients on 4 continents".

...it is something like 1 project every 6 weeks.
Yes, that's about right. 2 full time engineers, spending an average of 12 weeks on each project - processing about 4 full designs a year each. Earlier in the career the studio design projects were smaller and less complex so much faster to process. Work for industry or test labs is also usually faster than 12 weeks to process. We're now a bit over 200 projects I think, but as projects got bigger and more complex in time, design time extended.

Now back to something a bit meaningful: I've selected a couple of small extract from an article about the SMT products in Resolution magazine to try and show you why what they claim is very questionable once you look into it, even just staying at the surface:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Extract from the SMT article in Resolution magazine (2017)
One interesting property is the Precedence effect. Its a “second chance”, that adds to the direct sound, is normally 30-50 ms long. This property is shaped to help humans to better hear predators stalking them, for example where vision is limited, as in a forest.
As I stated before in another thread the Haas effect, or precedence effect, is not a "second chance" at hearing anything. Its role is quite the opposite: to prevent confusion, so it actually removes/fuses information within an integration time of ca. 50ms without affecting localization so we can have a higher level of certainty as to the exact location of a specific sonic event. While doing that it does not affect the perception of new, different events. The addition of reverberation can extend the suppression time past 100ms: it is only extended to further reduce chances of confusion. The less added information/noise to the original stimuli, the better and faster information is processed. Not the opposite. Hence the variation of the integration is correlated to the "clarity index" of the environment. The more difficult and reverberant the environment, the more the suppression will extend in time. And vice-versa.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Extract from the SMT article in Resolution magazine (2017)
The dense broadband low reflection sound field found in a common forest helps our Ear/Brain combination to minimize masking effects and extend the Precedence effect in time. One example of how this works, is a so called “Forest Acoustics Test”.
Masking is what happens when a sound source/event is masked by another if one produces high levels and the other is faint.

Masked Threshold is the level of a test sound (stimuli) necessary for it to be audible in the presence of a masker (masking sound). There can be partial masking where a masker will only reduce the apparent level of a test sound, but does not mask it fully.

When both sources are emitting at the same time, it is called simultaneous masking.

Masking also happens when masker and test sound aren't simultaneous: pre-stimulus masking (pre-masking) and post-stimulus masking (post-masking).

Post masking decays in time over a period of 100 to 200ms: the masked threshold is lowering as a function of time (as time goes we hear previously fainter masked sounds again). It also varies with the duration of the masker. A short masker will mean a shorter recovery time, a long masker a longer recovery time. Short temporal gaps <200ms in a masker are bridged by post-masking. In essence, it behaves the same as a continuous masker.

Pre-masking happens because the hearing process is not instantaneous but requires a build up in time of around 20ms to be integrated, varying with spectral content, duration and intensity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Extract from the book "Psycho-acoustics, Facts and models" by H. Fastl and E. Zwicker:
It has not been possible so far to decide conclusively whether pre-masking depends on the duration of the masker. The dependence of pre-masking on the level of the masker can be characterized in such a way that pre-masking lasts 20ms in any condition. This means that the threshold remains unchanged until (d)t reaches a negative value of 20ms. After that, threshold rises and reaches the level found in simultaneous masking near the time at which the masker is switched on.
So any masker that would mask the test sound in a simultaneous event will also create pre-masking, no matter its duration.

The build-up/integration is faster for loud sounds than for faint sounds, which explains why pre-masking effect exists in the first place: a louder sound will be integrated faster by the auditory system than a faint sound and hence it will mask it, even if the faint sound happened earlier in time.

Temporal masking is the product of simultanous, pre and post-masking. Their respective effect depends on the spectrum and intensity of the masker. The transmission of information in music or speech implies a strong temporal structure of the sound: a mix of loud and faint noises of various duration and intensities which is therefore prone to a lot of "natural masking" and is integral to how we listen and experience music.

Further masking in daily environments occurs among other things because of reverberation and noise floor within spaces. But as hinted at in the previous paragraph it also happens, albeit to a lesser extent, in free field conditions because it is an inherent characteristic of our auditory system: it cannot be altered.

Leaving aside the variations due to the spectral content of a given stimuli, the masked threshold will vary based on whether it is a single event, a repeated event and if repeated, the rate at which the repetition happens. There is also a strong dependence on duration of the stimuli. If the stimuli is >200ms, it behaves as a long lasting sound. If the stimuli is <200ms both threshold in quiet (in the absence of a masking sound) and masked threshold (in the presence of a masker) increase (it's gets harder to hear it) as duration decreases at a rate of +/-10dB per decade.

Long story short, the hearing system fully integrates sound intensity over a period of 200ms. Thresholds are therefore independent of repetition rates for repetition rates slower than 5Hz (over 200ms), but decreases for higher repetion rates until the stimuli reaches steady state (it's easier to hear a repeating stimuli if modualtion rate is >5Hz due to integration).

All the above is not an opinion, this is a quick summary based on the work of well known scientists specialized in the field of psycho-acoustics.

What does this mean in the case of the SMT wing concept?

Contrary to what is claimed in the article, "dense broadband low reflection sound field found in a common forest" do not help our Ear/Brain combination to minimize masking effects compared to an environment without such properties (free field), but in fact increases masking effect by reducing sensitivity to low level events and overall clarity. The dense, temporally diffused and low level broadband reflections certainly do not act as a repeating stimuli either. It acts purely as background noise and hence as a masker.

The lengthening of the Haas/precedence effect does not contribute to a better perception of the quality of sound either as there is no such thing as a "second chance": what the brain wants is to remove reflections within the integration time so as to reduce localization uncertainty. It is not interested in the intrinsic audiophile qualities of a given event - it leaves that to your conscious self. It will shorten the Haas integration time as the clarity index of a given space improves, not the opposite, allowing a better and faster integration of information.

Though, being apparently a form of delay line / temporal diffusion the 'Wings' likely reduce the strength of ER and hence probably help a bit with clarity as it reduces masked threshold level by reducing ER level - which are a strong masker. But seeing the published ETCs, the rooms remain very long in decay time. Which suggests that the overall effect on masking is probably fairly limited.

And here's the catch: a basic absorptive or geometrical RFZ in a home studio, and generally speaking RFZ, NE or FTB room designs are going to be many, many times more efficient at that than the wings – and over a much larger bandwidth. Basically completely avoiding adding any secondary maskers (room reflections) to the direct speaker signal. Greatly enhancing the perception of detail within the recording.

Here's one of the many reasons I state what I state when I see the constant, total jibberish that surrounds these products.

Hope this helps clear up the conversation.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Joshcbf / Studio building / acoustics
18
bcslaam / Studio building / acoustics
6
beasone / Studio building / acoustics
18
nbarts / So much gear, so little time
0
woods / So much gear, so little time
1

Forum Jump
Forum Jump