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
A few questions about my room.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #1
Here for the gear
 

A few questions about my room.

Hey everyone,

I'm in the process of treating my bedroom studio and would appreciate some advice!

I'll start off with some info about my room etc.

Length: 18ft 9.5" (537 cm)
Width: 10ft 7.5" (324 cm)
Height: Vaulted Ceiling. 6ft (185 cm) along both short walls, 8ft (245 cm) in the middle.

Monitors: Adam A7X + Adam Sub 8.

What I've done so far:
Cloud above desk, 3ft 3.3" (100 cm) tall. 5ft 11" (180 cm) wide. 8.2" (21 cm) thick.

Panels at first reflection points on side walls, 3ft 3.3" (100 cm) tall (4ft 11"/150 cm including the legs) 2ft (61 cm) wide. 8.2" (21 cm) thick.

Superchunk Basstraps in both front corners, 31" (78 cm) face.

Everything has been made with 45kg/m3 Rockwool.

I also put 2 pieces of rockwool on my desk at the reflection points.
Also, no worries about the rockwool being exposed. I'm covering everything up tomorrow. Didn't have time for it anymore today.

All this info, plus a bunch more, can be found in the drawing I attached to the post. (Don't judge me for using Paint )

Now for the actual question(s)

If I compare the before and after measurement, there's quite an improvement already I think.
There's also some stuff to fix still, if my limited knowledge is correct.

I think my biggest problems right now are:

Peak between 30-45ish Hz
Dip at 87 Hz
Dip between 650-1.2kHz,
Peak between 1.2-2.4kHz
That high end roll off starting at 10kHz, not sure where that came from.

I will be adding basstraps to the back corners as well this week, which I suppose should help for that peak and dip in the low end (Only 1 corner fully, cause my bed is in the other corner).

Now, since I'm sitting almost exactly 25% into the room, could any of those peaks/dips be caused by that?
I've measured at a bunch of spots today between 25-40% but I surprisingly got the best response right here at my listening/mixing position.
Not that it would've mattered much tbh cause I can't really change my listening position unfortunately.

Is there anything else I should/could try? Or any tips/advice in general?
I've included the .mdat as well, for anyone who'd like check it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have another unrelated question, but I'll put it in here rather than making another thread for it.
I've tried out Sonarworks Reference 4 today and the result actually sounds much worse than without Sonarworks.

It completely kills the high end and makes everything sound really boxy.
As you can see in the screenshot, it makes some pretty big cuts at 1kHz and up, and some pretty big boosts in the low mids.
I've read that the Adam A7X are pretty bright so maybe it's just because I'm used to having boosted highs, but I'm not sure.
With Sonarworks enabled, everything just sounds muffled, like it's been put into a box or so, and when I disable it during the tracks, it just completely opens up.

Has anyone had a similar experience? Do I just need to get used to it?

Thanks in advance!
Attached Thumbnails
A few questions about my room.-room-setup.jpg   A few questions about my room.-room-sketch.jpg   A few questions about my room.-spl-before-treatment-l-r-full-spectrum-.jpg   A few questions about my room.-spl-l-r-full-spectrum.jpg   A few questions about my room.-spl-l-r-low-end.jpg  

A few questions about my room.-spl-left-full-spectrum.jpg   A few questions about my room.-spl-right-full-spectrum.jpg   A few questions about my room.-waterfall-before-treatment-l-r-low-end.jpg   A few questions about my room.-waterfall-l-r-low-end.jpg   A few questions about my room.-waterfall-l-r-full-spectrum.jpg  

A few questions about my room.-waterfall-left-full-spectrum.jpg   A few questions about my room.-waterfall-right-full-spectrum.jpg   A few questions about my room.-etc-left.jpg   A few questions about my room.-etc-right.jpg   A few questions about my room.-sonarworks-correction.png  

Attached Files
Old 4 weeks ago
  #2
Here for the gear
 

No one?
Old 4 weeks ago
  #3
What mic did you use for the measurements?

Overall the measurements look way worse than the amount of treatment would suggest. Did the Sonarworks corrected response sound worse with your reference tracks or your mixes?
Old 4 weeks ago
  #4
Gear Addict
 
johannburkard's Avatar
I would agree with @ Hrodulf . For the amount of treatment, the frequency response is pretty messy. But your desk is also enormous. I don't think the tweeters are at ear height? Also, try flipping the speaker on its head and moving the speaker up so that the tweeter is higher than your ear.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #5
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hrodulf View Post
What mic did you use for the measurements?

Overall the measurements look way worse than the amount of treatment would suggest. Did the Sonarworks corrected response sound worse with your reference tracks or your mixes?
For the REW measurements I used the Minidsp Umik-1 and for the Sonarworks measurement I used the Sonarworks mic.

I thought my measurements didn't look too bad but I guess that's just my lack of knowledge then haha.
The Sonarworks corrected response sounds worse with both my own mixes and with reference tracks, but also in general when listening music.
I must say tho, it differs per track too. There are some tracks that sound better with Sonarworks enabled. When I disable it, the high frequencies sound harsh/piercing.



Quote:
Originally Posted by johannburkard View Post
I would agree with @ Hrodulf . For the amount of treatment, the frequency response is pretty messy. But your desk is also enormous. I don't think the tweeters are at ear height? Also, try flipping the speaker on its head and moving the speaker up so that the tweeter is higher than your ear.
Yeah it's a big desk but unfortunately I kinda need the space because it's also my work/everything else area besides music production.
I'm guessing the size of the desk could be causing some of the problems I have?
The tweeters are exactly at ear height. 3ft 8.5" from the floor.
What would be the reason for flipping the speakers upside down?

Thanks!
Old 3 weeks ago
  #6
Gear Addict
 
johannburkard's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aetherialdnb View Post
What would be the reason for flipping the speakers upside down?
It moves the woofer further away from the desk and that could shift some interferences. I know moving my speakers' tweeters a few cm higher up improved the impulse response.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #7
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by johannburkard View Post
It moves the woofer further away from the desk and that could shift some interferences. I know moving my speakers' tweeters a few cm higher up improved the impulse response.
That makes sense. I'll definitely try that out and measure again to see how much of a difference it makes.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #8
Lives for gear
Flipping the speakers upside down is mainly to be on-axis. Acoustic center ("axis point") should be at ear level.
Since that acoustic center is at mid-distance from woofer and tweeter (for 2-way speakers), flipping the speakers upside down won't change the low-end response that much. But mainly the upper frequencies (depends on speaker's design). You can see the difference in your freq. response and ETC.




Old 3 weeks ago
  #9
Here for the gear
 

I wasn't aware that the midpoint between the tweeter and woofer should be at ear height, rather than the tweeter itself, so I put the monitors 5 cm higher and it actually made a noticeable improvement.
I also redid the Sonarworks measurement after the change but it still sounds boxy and lacking low end.

If I'm to believe the REW measurement with Sonarworks enabled tho, the response is definitely better than without Sonarworks, so I suppose I just need to get used to the new sound.

1st screenshot: Before any adjustments
2nd screenshot: After putting the monitors 5 cm higher
3rd screenshot: Sonarworks enabled
Attached Thumbnails
A few questions about my room.-spl-l-r-full-spectrum.jpg   A few questions about my room.-before-sonarworks.jpg   A few questions about my room.-after-sonarworks.jpg  
Old 3 weeks ago
  #10
Lives for gear
If you want to check the upper frequencies. Left speaker only. And Right speaker only. No L+R measurements.

Best is to check with and without sub as well.

So
-Sub only
-Left Speaker only
-Left + Sub
-Right speaker only
-Right + sub

L+R measurements should be only used for checking bass frequencies.

For now, forget about Sonarworks and focus on bass treatment.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #11
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aetherialdnb View Post
I also redid the Sonarworks measurement after the change but it still sounds boxy and lacking low end... so I suppose I just need to get used to the new sound.
Does Sonarworks allow you to customise the target curve? If so, try tilting it to increase the low end / decrease the highs.

Despite this topic being a 'can of worms' here on Gearslutz (!), it's common to use a target curve such as that suggested by Bruel & Kjaer (or similar) when using DSP EQ.

Here's what I like to use in my own room - a tilt of approximately 5-6dB between the lows and highs (frequency response shown at 1:1 smoothing):

A few questions about my room.-freq-response.jpg
Attached Thumbnails
A few questions about my room.-freq-response.jpg  
Old 3 weeks ago
  #12
Old 3 weeks ago
  #13
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JayPee View Post
Haha! A classic Jens "one-linker", to a thread with another Jens one-linker! Love it

As I said, any talk of house curves is a can of worms, as those threads prove. But many people do use the B&K curve or similar variants. And that includes some of the well-respected people on this forum.

Truly 'flat', with no rise in the lows and/or roll-off in the highs just sounds thin and fatiguing. And the problem with some DSP softwares is that they force the highs to remain consistently flat to 20kHz, which is always going to lead to an unnatural-sounding result.

Even the people who disregard the B&K curve in those threads - Jens, Thomas et al - talk of sometimes boosting the lows by +3dB (or more) and allowing the highs to roll off naturally... which of course results in a downwards 'curve' across the frequency range.

"You say potatoes. I say potatas" Ether way, we're talking about the same thing: nobody likes a truly 'flat' frequency response.

Personally, I like a downwards tilt of around 5-6dB from lows to highs. But as always, YMMV.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #14
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol303 View Post
[...] many people do use the B&K curve or similar variants. And that includes some of the well-respected people on this forum
Who?

The Titanic, room curves and other GS style OT wanderings
Old 3 weeks ago
  #15
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JayPee View Post
Who?
This is such a touchy subject that I don’t think it’s fair to name names. I’d feel like I was involving them in a ‘bun fight’ not of their choosing.

If you’re especially interested I can send a PM.

Besides that, I assume you took my point about nobody really aiming for a truly flat response in practice? The team at Northwood, for instance - who are rightly respected here - state that some studios request a rise in the low end (as mentioned in the infamous Titanic thread you linked to). And that ain’t flat
Old 3 weeks ago
  #16
Lives for gear
 
Jens Eklund's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol303 View Post
Despite this topic being a 'can of worms' here on Gearslutz (!), it's common to use a target curve such as that suggested by Bruel & Kjaer (or similar) when using DSP EQ.
Here's one of the cans: The Titanic, room curves and other GS style OT wanderings

The B&K curve is normally not recomended for critical listening rooms since we want a flat direct sound (in the upper range at least). How the steady state response ends up looking depends on how the room is treated. If lots of thin porous absorption, you might end up with something that resembles the B&K curve, but why use this as the target ...
Old 3 weeks ago
  #17
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jens Eklund View Post
The B&K curve is normally not recomended for critical listening rooms since we want a flat direct sound (in the upper range at least). How the steady state response ends up looking depends on how the room is treated. If lots of thin porous absorption, you might end up with something that resembles the B&K curve, but why use this as the target ...
Thanks for joining in here Jens. I certainly don’t want to re-open that particular can of worms! Best leave them wriggling

The point I’m trying to make (perhaps badly) is this: nobody seems to like a truly ‘flat’ frequency response in control rooms. In the infamous Titanic thread, yourself, Thomas and others all mention that clients often desire a lift in the low end (anywhere from 3-6dB it seems) and allow the highs to roll of naturally. Which obviously results in a downward tilt from lows to highs.

This particular thread is about the OP’s use of DSP (Sonarworks software) and his perception of the result sounding “boxy and lacking low end” when setting the target curve to ‘flat’. And I believe this is a common mistake that people make when using DSP… the software is capable of creating a ruler-flat response (under the right circumstances), but in practice it’s a fool’s errand: because what the vast majority of studio designers and engineers seem to prefer is a downwards curve.

Now, the angle of the curve is of course the subject of fierce debate (cue Titanic). Some like it shallow, some like it steep (B&K). But it is a curve nonetheless. It’s not strictly flat (the goal being I assume for the direct sound to be "honest" or "untainted" by the room or use of EQ, if I understand you correctly, which still implies a natural roll-off in the highs).

My own experience is of running a very small home studio, where DSP is absolutely necessary (there’s quite literally insufficient space in my room to install the amount/depth of treatment needed to get an equivalent result without using DSP). And my own weapon of choice is Dirac Live, specifically because it allows custom EQ curves to be drawn manually, avoiding the forced-flat approach of Sonarworks - and the problems that brings, as noted by the OP.

Hope that clarifies what I’m trying to get at here. And let’s leave the worms in the can
Old 3 weeks ago
  #18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aetherialdnb View Post
I also redid the Sonarworks measurement after the change but it still sounds boxy and lacking low end.

If I'm to believe the REW measurement with Sonarworks enabled tho, the response is definitely better than without Sonarworks, so I suppose I just need to get used to the new sound.
Trust your ears. If it sounds boxy, it is boxy. IF you can't get used to this boxiness that's supposed to be there, you'll try to get rid of something that shouldn't be gotten rid of.

Another thing you can try is elevating the monitors even more, then tilting downward to compensate. Also, is the cloud covering your head, e.g. you can't see the ceiling when you look up?
Old 3 weeks ago
  #19
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aural Endeavors View Post
Trust your ears. If it sounds boxy, it is boxy. IF you can't get used to this boxiness that's supposed to be there, you'll try to get rid of something that shouldn't be gotten rid of.

Another thing you can try is elevating the monitors even more, then tilting downward to compensate. Also, is the cloud covering your head, e.g. you can't see the ceiling when you look up?
I've done some comparisons between my monitors and my HD650's and they actually sound quite similar when I have Sonarworks enabled. This makes me think I've just gotten used to the brightness of the Adam A7X plus my subwoofer being too loud (I've always listened/produced with a loud sub because I produce Drum and Bass, but I should probably get used to less bass if I want to improve my mixes)

I will follow JayPee's advice though and focus on finishing the treatment before bothering with Sonarworks, although this was more of a try-out thing anyways.

I'll definitely try that out and see if there will be any improvements.
The cloud isn't covering my head, it stops about 10-15 cm in front of it.

I will do the left/right/with sub/without sub etc measurement either tonight or tomorrow and post the results. I haven't had time for it yet.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #20
Lives for gear
 
akebrake's Avatar
 

Check Sample Rate!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aetherialdnb View Post
...
I will do the left/right/with sub/without sub etc measurement either tonight or tomorrow and post the results. I haven't had time for it yet.
AFAIK Umik-1 is built for 48kHz sample rate. You have used 44.1 ...

Best
Old 3 weeks ago
  #21
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by akebrake View Post
AFAIK Umik-1 is built for 48kHz sample rate. You have used 44.1 ...

Best
I didn't know that, thank you! I'll run my measurements at 48kHz from now on.
I suppose I used 44.1 because that's what I use in Ableton as well.
I guess I need to set my audio interface to 48 as well then?

I must admit, I'm quite new to acoustics etc. I've been producing/mixing on some $100 Logitech PC speakers in a very small (2Mx2Mx1.80M or so) bed room until about 3 months ago, when I finally moved into a new place and got the A7X's because I'm starting to get more well known, with releases on pretty big labels etc. So I really want/need to step up my mixing game now that it's getting more serious.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #22
Gear Addict
 
johannburkard's Avatar
I don't think this has been said here yet but seeing you experimented with Sonarworks and got a flatter frequency response from it: The frequency response is only part of the game. The impulse response I would say is probably at least as important, more specifically, removing things that reflect but shouldn't.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #23
Lives for gear
 
akebrake's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aetherialdnb View Post
I didn't know that, thank you!
You're welcome

Quote:
I'll run my measurements at 48kHz from now on.

I suppose I used 44.1 because that's what I use in Ableton as well.
I guess I need to set my audio interface to 48 as well then?
All units that "speak digital" to each other need to use the same sample rate.

Will be interesting to see what happens to your next measurements.

Best
Old 3 weeks ago
  #24
Here for the gear
 

Allright I've had the time to do some new measurements today.
I set everything to 48kHz this time and measured everything separately again, like in the first post.

The measurements look pretty different compared to the last ones I posted so I guess that's caused by changing to 48kHz.

The dip at 87Hz that almost disappeared when I put my monitors 5 cm higher last time has come back now that I've changed the sample rate.
The peak around 35Hz has also become narrower again, compared to the last measurement.

Nothing has been changed in the room between any of the measurements in this thread so far, besides the monitor height.

I'd love to hear your thoughts!
Attached Thumbnails
A few questions about my room.-spl-l-r-sub.jpg   A few questions about my room.-spl-l-r-sub-full-spectrum.jpg   A few questions about my room.-spl-l-r-no-sub.jpg   A few questions about my room.-spl-l-sub.jpg   A few questions about my room.-spl-l-sub-full-spectrum.jpg  

A few questions about my room.-spl-l-no-sub-low-end.jpg   A few questions about my room.-spl-l-no-sub-full-spectrum.jpg   A few questions about my room.-spl-r-sub-low-end.jpg   A few questions about my room.-spl-r-sub-full-spectrum.jpg   A few questions about my room.-spl-r-no-sub-low-end.jpg  

A few questions about my room.-spl-r-no-sub-full-spectrum.jpg   A few questions about my room.-spl-sub-only.jpg   A few questions about my room.-waterfall-l-r-sub-low-end.jpg   A few questions about my room.-waterfall-l-r-sub-full-spectrum.jpg   A few questions about my room.-waterfall-l-r-no-sub.jpg  

A few questions about my room.-waterfall-l-sub-low-end.jpg   A few questions about my room.-waterfall-l-sub-full-spectrum.jpg   A few questions about my room.-waterfall-l-no-sub.jpg   A few questions about my room.-waterfall-r-sub-low-end.jpg   A few questions about my room.-waterfall-r-sub-full-spectrum.jpg  

A few questions about my room.-waterfall-r-no-sub.jpg   A few questions about my room.-waterfall-sub-only.jpg   A few questions about my room.-etc-l-sub.jpg   A few questions about my room.-etc-l-no-sub.jpg   A few questions about my room.-etc-r-sub.jpg  

A few questions about my room.-etc-r-no-sub.jpg   A few questions about my room.-etc-sub-only.jpg  
Attached Files
File Type: mdat Aetherial measurement may 28.mdat (12.48 MB, 19 views)
Old 3 weeks ago
  #25
Lives for gear
Focus on that room mode (35 Hz)
Old 3 weeks ago
  #26
Gear Addict
 
johannburkard's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aetherialdnb View Post
The dip at 87Hz that almost disappeared when I put my monitors 5 cm higher last time has come back now that I've changed the sample rate.
Nice to hear it did something.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #27
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JayPee View Post
Focus on that room mode (35 Hz)
That one does seem like the biggest problem, together with the 87 Hz dip.
Do you think a Helmholtz resonator would be a good option for the 35 Hz problem? Or am I saying something ridiculous here haha.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #28
Lives for gear
I'd say it is your best option.
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
Coreywilliams / Studio Building / Acoustics
7
Matthew Hulsey / So Much Gear, So Little Time
0
Snoozr / Bass traps, acoustic panels, foam etc
2
bassistmarty / Studio Building / Acoustics
2
hollywood_steve / Geekslutz Forum
3

Forum Jump
Forum Jump