The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Voice recording in PVC blanket booth, how to improve?
Old 18th August 2019
  #1
Here for the gear
 

Voice recording in PVC blanket booth, how to improve?

I am recording voiceover with a CAD e100s and an audient id14. I recently made a booth out of PVC and moving blankets and put it in my closet since I don't have any other free space. The closet has lots of shelves and nooks which is why I made the blanket booth instead of treating the space directly (I don;t even know how I'd begin to do that). My gear is sitting on a desk which I covered with a towel to try and reduce reflections. I have done a lot of lurking and reading online but I am still hopelessly lost and I don't have the confidence to move forward with the next step for my particular voice and needs. I don't even know what the next step is. Feel free to facepalm at any time.


DIY fiberglass stuff is not really in the cards for me, since I am not comfortable working with those materials. There are lots of pre-made items for sale, but I don't trust myself to buy the right things.

Here is a sample recording. There is something off about it, but I can't say what or how to remedy it exactly.

https://soundcloud.com/user-852062828/accoustics

Thank you gearslutz community!
Old 18th August 2019
  #2
Gear Addict
 
Dan Popp's Avatar
ArthurMa, you're "hopelessly lost" because most of what you're seeing on UToob, etc. is bogus. The smaller the room, the higher and more noticeable the room modes (standing waves; resonance peaks) will be. Get out of the closet and into a bedroom.

I did a series of short podcasts on this because I really got tired of seeing ridiculous advice on the internet. Start with #1 . Good luck.

http://www.colorsaudio.com/podcast
Old 18th August 2019
  #3
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
you're "hopelessly lost" because most of what you're seeing on UToob, etc. is bogus.
+1!!!

Dan Popp is exactly right: It is impossible to do good vocal tracking (or any tracking for that matter!) in a closet sized space. The smaller a room is, the worse it sounds because there's less and less modal support for smaller and smaller rooms. A closet is the extreme case of "small room", and it's not going to give you usable sound. That "boxy" sound on the tracks is due to the room dimensions, and there is nothing at all that you can do to get rid of that: it's an inherent property of small dimensions.

Moving blankets, mattresses, PVC frames, "portable vocal booths", "reflection filters", and the like are all worthless.

The very best you could do is to treat the hell out of the closet, with abundant, thick, lightweight insulation all around (very thick: several inches), to totally kill the acoustic response of the room, making it dead. But "dead" is unpleasant to work in, and the underlying boxy sound will still be there, just a bit more muted. So forget the closet.

So yes, get out of the closet, into the room, and do your tracking there. The larger the room, the better. With some careful placement of DIY treatment, you can get do decent tracking in a bedroom-sized room with no problem.

- Stuart -
Old 18th August 2019
  #4
Here for the gear
 

Thanks to you guys for the feedback. I see a lot of pictures of people recording in large rooms with a 3 sided cubicle-like structure made out of accoustic panels around the mic/performer. Is that a good idea? It's impossible to know what to trust anymore (besides this place of course, I appreciate it very much), I will check out that podcast as well. Unfortunately there is noise from the street outside my window, which is another reason why I fled to the closet. I will have to experiment some more... or just call it quits and pay for studio time. Thanks again
Old 19th August 2019
  #5
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
I see a lot of pictures of people recording in large rooms with a 3 sided cubicle-like structure made out of accoustic panels around the mic/performer.
I see a lot of pictures of people "proving" that the Earth is flat too... but that doesn't make them right!

Here's an interesting article from Sound-on-Sound magazine a couple of years ago, where they tested a number of so-called portable vocal booths in a proper acoustic tests lab, and the tests were done by one of the world's most highly regarded acousticians. Here's what they reported: https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews...e-vocal-booths An interesting read...

Quote:
Unfortunately there is noise from the street outside my window,
If the window is an issue, then maybe fixing that would be a good solution to start with? It might be something as simple as lousy seals around the window, which a tube of caulk could fix, or it might be something a bit more complex, that could be solved with a second window sealed in place over the original one, or maybe a removable "plug" to close off the entire window when needed.

- Stuart -
Old 4 weeks ago
  #6
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundman2020 View Post
+1!!!

Dan Popp is exactly right: It is impossible to do good vocal tracking (or any tracking for that matter!) in a closet sized space. The smaller a room is, the worse it sounds because there's less and less modal support for smaller and smaller rooms. ...
- Stuart -
Soundman, you corroborate the gs myth that small volumes can't sound awesome.
Voice recording in PVC blanket booth, how to improve?
I would like to show the opposite of this statement.

Later his year the new solo album of Estonian accordeonist Tuulikki Bartosik till be released. The whole album was recorded in a small booth of 1.68m2. See attached picture.



Microphones:
Stereopair Thuresson CM402 (omni) Pan L 44% R 44%
Stereo pair Arthur Fisher RM5 incl. Thuresson + 48v plug (figure 8) Pan L 44% R 44%
Stereo pair SM8 (omni) Pan L 100% R 100% (XY on top of the booth)

What is so incredibly fascinating is that according to current studio recording norms, it should not work at all with three stereo microphone pairs inside a small space of 1.68m2!
The sound we got in the broadband nearfield diffusor booth presents the best accordion sound we have ever heard! The separation of sound layers is razor sharp and the broad-banded resolution of the accordion sound extends from the lowest bass tones of the free-bass accordion to the frequencies above the highest harmonics.
There is micro dynamics and a sensitivity in the sound that does not resemble anything we have heard before. The sound was so perfect that we didn't have to use a single plugin, no compressor, no EQ while mixing the album.

Tuulikki:
"The forest has been my favourite place to record for the last couple of years. I wanted to record my album during the quiet nights in the forest, but it turned out to be impossible due to the damp conditions. However, in this wing booth I could for the first time in my life hear the overtones of my instrument in a studio setting. I was able to incorporate the overtones into my music making, something I have only experienced in forests up to this point.
When I play on my instrument I normally try to shape the sound. In this recording booth room, everything falls into place automatically. I connect with my instrument and my inner self almost immediately.
I was able to relax completely and stop looking for a nuanced sound while playing, because I had access to the full capacity of my instrument and could hear just about every detail, just as if I were in the forest. Every small movement can generate a whole spectrum with multidimensional sounds. It feels incredible to be able to experience something like this and get to hear the full capacity of my custom made free-bass accordion from Pigini accordion factory!
I have only experienced this level of detail in my forests in Võrumaa, southern Estonia, before playing in the wing room in Petter Berndalens studio."

Below is a link to one of my tests, which was a step on the road to success with the small diffuser room used to record the entire accordion album of Tuulikki Bartosik.


Here an earlier test of cymbal sound in a friend's studio. We have built a small room in the room using the same broadband diffusors and soft material, whose density and broadband absorption are measured and tested in Soundflow. Microphone positioning is identical in both recordings


Although I may be one of the first to record with such good results in such a small room, I am not alone in having a small room that sounds good. Via the link below you can hear the guitar shop These Goto 11´s small cubic demo room. The dimensions are 2.7 * 2.7 * 2.7m and it sounds awesome even in the low end.
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2112187012356478

Finally, a few words from Swedish acoustician Lennart Nilsson (www.akustik.nu) who psychoacoustically explain spot on the background for this to work.
http://diffusor.com/PDF/Wings_and_early_reflections.pdf

Last edited by Berndalen; 4 weeks ago at 07:11 PM.. Reason: Removed a Company Name
Old 4 weeks ago
  #7
Gear Addict
 
Dan Popp's Avatar
From the picture it looks to me like this is not an airtight booth. If so, the bass is not contained, nor is any of the sound really contained in that space. It's cool, it's nice, but it bears no resemblance to the OP in his drywall closet with his PVC-and-flanking-blanket rig. It seems to me that what you've proven is that small spaces can sound nice if they're not really small spaces.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #8
Lives for gear
 
avare's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Popp View Post
From the picture it looks to me like this is not an airtight booth. If so, the bass is not contained, nor is any of the sound really contained in that space. It's cool, it's nice, but it bears no resemblance to the OP in his drywall closet with his PVC-and-flanking-blanket rig. It seems to me that what you've proven is that small spaces can sound nice if they're not really small spaces.
Usually I would just give a thumbs up but it is addressing so outrageous a post that it deserves its own +1!
Old 4 weeks ago
  #9
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Berndalen View Post
Soundman, you corroborate the gs myth that small volumes can't sound awesome.
Sorry, but it's not a myth: it's hard, solid, actual, irrefutable fact. It is plain old physics. The gospel truth, carved in stone. And your post has nothing at all to do with small rooms anyway! In fact, the photo shows an acoustically mostly transparent barrier set up in a much larger room, so it has zero bearing on what we are talking about. It's the larger room that is dominant here. Not the plastic strips.

Nice try.

PS. If you don't like what I said in that post, or the information in the link I provided, then please take it up with Professor Trevor Cox. If you don't know who he is, then you definitely have no credibility here talking about acoustics.

Quote:
I would like to show the opposite of this statement.
Well, you tried, but failed. Miserably. Your entire post demonstrates nothing of the sort, and in fact is just rather obvious shilling for two things at once: an extremely questionable acoustic "product", and an obscure album that apparently needs major promotion, I guess because it isn't selling too well... Did you get authorization from the forum moderators to advertise your products so blatantly? Normally they charge people for advertising here. Did you pay your advertising fee?

Quote:
Later his year my record company ... blah blah blah... The whole album was recorded in a small booth of 1.68m2. See attached picture.
It's not a booth. Sorry. It's an acoustically transparent arrangement of bits of plastic hanging on a frame, inside a much larger room. Very much larger. It bears no relationship at all to packing blankets in a solid closet. I have no idea why you would assume that they are in the least similar, acoustically. There is no acoustic similarity, not even vague association.

It would appear that you chose this thread as an excuse to post your advertising, hoping nobody would call you out. Well, here I am, calling you out. What you claim and show are totally irrelevant to what we are talking about here.

Quote:
What is so incredibly fascinating is that according to current studio recording norms, it should not work at all with three stereo microphone pairs inside a small space of 1.68m2!
Really? Why not? Why should this not work "according to current studio recording norms"? And what "norms" would those be? Careful with your answer, since many of the folks on GS are actual professional engineers, musicians, acousticians, and producers. So since you brought up these "norms", perhaps you could identify them for us? Just post a link to the norms you are referring to.

Also: what is so surprising about about getting decent tracks from several mics on an instrument inside an acoustic semi-barrier made from sheets of acrylic? People have been doing that for YEARS, very successfully. They normally call them "drum shields"... You can buy them at most music stores, in various forms. And they are just as acoustically transparent as your hanging plastic strips... Or probably less so, in fact...

Quote:
The sound we got in the broadband nearfield diffusor booth presents the best accordion sound we have ever heard!
What on earth is a "broadband nearfield diffusor"? There is no such thing. If you don't understand why such a concept is laughable, once again I'd suggest you talk to Prof. Cox. Or his friend, D'Antonio. They can tell you all about the real-world reasons why the contraption in the picture is not a diffusor, not a booth, and has nothing at all to do wit broadband.

Quote:
The separation of sound layers is razor sharp
What are "sound layers"? How do you define those? How do you detect those? How do you separate them?

Quote:
and the broad-banded resolution of the accordion sound extends from the lowest bass tones of the free-bass accordion to the frequencies above the highest harmonics.
Ummmm... what frequencies would those be? By definition, the "frequencies above the highest harmonics" don't exist! The highest harmonic for any fundamental is the last one that is audible, or that has any effect on the overall tone. If you go to the next highest one, it isn't even there! Very seldom does an instrument have useful/audible harmonics above the 7th or 8th, or so. Beyond that, there's nothing useful... So maybe you cold explain how a harmonic beyond the highest one is of any use at all? Or even audible?

Oh wait a sec, I think I get it: you are saying that your plastic strip booth affects things that can't actually be heard, and have no effect on the timbre of the instrument. That makes sense....

Quote:
The sound was so perfect that we didn't have to use a single plugin, no compressor, no EQ while mixing the album.
Yeah right. And I have a bridge in Brooklyn that I want to sell.... And if you didn't use any plugins, compression or EQ, then why did you bother mixing it at all? Why not just release the raw original tracks, untouched, if they are so great? Or just run all the tracks to a summing amp, and release the output of that?

Sorry, but what you are selling, I'm not buying. Because I understand the recording process, and acoustics, and studios.

Now, here's your big chance to embarrass me hugely, and prove me wrong: go set up your hanging-plastic strips "booth" inside a real solid closet, of the size the OP is talking about, and record a few accordion tracks in there (with the door closed), then post those tracks here. Of course, with no EQ, compression, or plugins! Since those are not needed, according to your marketing hype. Just post the original raw tracks, straight from the mics.

Please do go ahead and show that what I said about closets is wrong, by doing the above. And document it, too, with an uncut video, recorded in a single pass... Until you do that, I'll stand by the original statement: Tiny booths, such as the OP describes will ALWAYS sound bad, no matter how much snake oil is used to anoint them. There is NOTHING that can be done to make such a minute room sound live and pleasant. Nothing. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Acoustic fact, not marketing hype.

- Stuart -
Old 4 weeks ago
  #10
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by avare View Post
Usually I would just give a thumbs up but it is addressing so outrageous a post that it deserves its own +1!
Absolutely! I'll add my own +1 to that, for sure! It's been a long time since I've seen such a load of posted on GS in a single post.

I'd only add that your use of "outrageous" is a vast understatement... I could find other words....
Old 4 weeks ago
  #11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundman2020 View Post
Sorry, but it's not a myth: it's hard, solid, actual, irrefutable fact. It is plain old physics. The gospel truth, carved in stone. And your post has nothing at all to do with small rooms anyway! In fact, the photo shows an acoustically mostly transparent barrier set up in a much larger room, so it has zero bearing on what we are talking about. It's the larger room that is dominant here. Not the plastic strips.
Soundman you have completely misunderstood what the transparent wall consists of. The Gobo modules (600mm wide) weigh over 50 kg per unit. For my booth I have 7 pcs. Together, they effectively block the sound against the larger room and form a 1.68m2 wide-band diffused bubble.
If it's not a small room, I don't know what to call it!

To prove this, I should asap get the diffuser bubble measured with etc curve so there is no doubt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundman2020 View Post
PS. If you don't like what I said in that post, or the information in the link I provided, then please take it up with Professor Trevor Cox. If you don't know who he is, then you definitely have no credibility here talking about acoustics.
Interesting that you mention this giant in acoustics. Lennart Nilsson (another giant with 40 years of experience) lectured a few years ago to 200 acoustics at EIAS about the psychoacoustic benefit of the early reflexes in small-room acoustics. Trevor Cox was also invited as a leading speaker. The organizer of the lectures also arranged a forest tour where the reverberation in the forest was measured. Here you can read about the diffuser theory supplemented by near field measurements of the modules you think are plastic stripes. The links also contain Lennart's fantastic forest measurement.

Is my room big enough for a diffusor?
Greatest studio designs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundman2020 View Post
Did you get authorization from the forum moderators to advertise your products so blatantly? Normally they charge people for advertising here. Did you pay your advertising fee?
I don't want to advertise anything here at all. I removed the record label name in the post. What I find interesting here is that getting a small space of 1.68m2 to sound very good.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundman2020 View Post
Why should this not work "according to current studio recording norms"? And what "norms" would those be? Careful with your answer, since many of the folks on GS are actual professional engineers, musicians, acousticians, and producers. So since you brought up these "norms", perhaps you could identify them for us? Just post a link to the norms you are referring to.
Well, as you know, there is no link to a set of norms. But the fact that I get so much criticism from you here may still indicate that my ideas go beyond current norms.

Setting up three stereo pairs inside a space of 1.68m2 and also having two of the stereo pairs about 20cm from the wall is something I have not heard anyone recommend. But in this case it works incredibly well. I would call that going outside the norms. Whether it was successful or not, everyone can decide when they listen to the audio files. I can send a sound sample to the person who sends me a PM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundman2020 View Post
They normally call them "drum shields"... You can buy them at most music stores, in various forms. And they are just as acoustically transparent as your hanging plastic strips... Or probably less so, in fact...
My booth has nothing at all to do with a "drum shield".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundman2020 View Post
What are "sound layers"? How do you define those? How do you detect those? How do you separate them?
Maybe ”sound layers” were a bad attempt to describe ”details” in other words?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundman2020 View Post
Ummmm... what frequencies would those be? By definition, the "frequencies above the highest harmonics" don't exist! The highest harmonic for any fundamental is the last one that is audible, or that has any effect on the overall tone. If you go to the next highest one, it isn't even there! Very seldom does an instrument have useful/audible harmonics above the 7th or 8th, or so. Beyond that, there's nothing useful... So maybe you cold explain how a harmonic beyond the highest one is of any use at all? Or even audible?
OK. My slightly more poetic way of describing "all frequencies" may not have worked so well.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundman2020 View Post
And if you didn't use any plugins, compression or EQ, then why did you bother mixing it at all? Why not just release the raw original tracks, untouched, if they are so great? Or just run all the tracks to a summing amp, and release the output of that?

Sorry, but what you are selling, I'm not buying. Because I understand the recording process, and acoustics, and studios.
If I only adjust the faders/volume between different microphones and do panning, choose which reverb to have and what volume I want on them. Also choose what changes I should not make. I think I mix the recording.

I am very interested in creating the sound I want at the time of recording. I would rather spend time on which microphone or preamp to use and microphone placement than shape the sound in retrospect with an EQ.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundman2020 View Post
Now, here's your big chance to embarrass me hugely, and prove me wrong: go set up your hanging-plastic strips "booth" inside a real solid closet, of the size the OP is talking about
As far as I can read, neither ArthurMa nor you have mentioned any dimensions at all. You just said "closet sized space"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundman2020 View Post
Please do go ahead and show that what I said about closets is wrong, by doing the above. And document it, too, with an uncut video, recorded in a single pass... Until you do that, I'll stand by the original statement: Tiny booths, such as the OP describes will ALWAYS sound bad, no matter how much snake oil is used to anoint them. There is NOTHING that can be done to make such a minute room sound live and pleasant. Nothing. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Acoustic fact, not marketing hype.

- Stuart -
One important thing to mention is that ArthurMa wrote this:

"I see a lot of pictures of people recording in large rooms with a 3 sided cubicle-like structure made out of accoustic panels around the mic/performer. Is that a good idea?"

As I understand it, he means diffusers.

My answer to this question is: Yes, I think it's a good idea with diffusers. You can even get a very small room to sound good with three walls of diffusers around the microphone / artist. Listen here. Here is a really padded room with three walls 120x120x120cm vs a diffused room with the same dimensions, whose walls weigh over 300kg. No plastic strips here.

Old 4 weeks ago
  #12
Gear Addict
 
Dan Popp's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berndalen View Post
One important thing to mention is that ArthurMa wrote this:

"I see a lot of pictures of people recording in large rooms with a 3 sided cubicle-like structure made out of accoustic panels around the mic/performer. Is that a good idea?"

As I understand it, he means diffusers.
No, he means something like this.

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/8e/3b/9c/8...g-booth-vo.jpg

Inside a closet.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #13
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Soundman you have completely misunderstood what the transparent wall consists of.
I have not misunderstood anything. It's just that I recognize acoustic snake oil when I see it... The "wall" is not a wall, since it has large air gaps in many places, and consists of shaped acrylic (or other plastic) strips sticking up vertically from some type of box down at floor level, with slats that make it looks somewhat like a phase grating, but it clearly isn't. That's what it consists of.

Quote:
The Gobo modules (600mm wide) weigh over 50 kg per unit.
The weight is irrelevant. A 1000 kg concrete block with plastic strips sticking up would still sound about the same, and still provide no isolation or useful acoustics for the room around it, nor for the partially enclosed space within it.

Quote:
Together, they effectively block the sound against the larger room and form a 1.68m2 wide-band diffused bubble.
No they don't. They block very, very little. Because blocking a lot with thin plastic strips that have large open areas between them, would be acoustically impossible.

Now, since you made the claim that this is an effective isolation booth, and that it blocks sound getting to and from the room, the onus is on you to prove that your claim is true, rather than more "poetry".

Since you like making videos, here's one you can make for us to prove your claim. Get two identical good quality sound level meters. Film yourself placing a good full-range speaker inside the "booth", placing one meter inside the booth, one outside, and playing contemporary bass-heavy music at a level of around 100 dBC SPL. Take lots of care with your camera work to show the actual levels on the sound level meters. The sound level meter outside the booth should be about a meter or so away from the booth, out in the actual room. Make sure to film clear shots with both meters visible at the same time, while the camera is moving around. Post the video here. Let's see just how well the plastic strips "block the sound". (Set both meters to "C" and "Slow", of course).

Quote:
If it's not a small room, I don't know what to call it!
It's not a small room, because it isn't a room at all! I would call it an arrangement of thin plastic strips partly surrounding a musician, inside a much larger room. It is not a room. It is not sealed. It has no hard, rigid, massive boundaries. It does not stop sound getting in or out. Thus, it is not a room. The dominant acoustic response is that of the actual room in which this contraption sits, not of the plastic trips.

Quote:
To prove this, I should asap get the diffuser bubble measured with etc curve so there is no doubt.
That would be nice. But how do you plan to measure that? Post the video of how you make the measurement, taking care to show the location and orientation of the acoustic test mic, the location and orientation of the speaker, and the calibration procedure. Do make sure that it is a good full-range speaker, of course. And post the actual MDAT file itself, not just a picture of a graph.

Quote:
Here you can read about the diffuser theory
I'm well aware of diffuser theory, thanks. I use that very same theory practically every day to design diffusers for my clients. Also, you might want to read a bit more of those threads to which you posted links, as the claims made in those posts are pretty thoroughly debunked and shown to be wildly incorrect, by some of the best experts around. The account name making the claims is obviously that of a paid shill for the product, the poster appears to know very little (if anything) about acoustics (least of all diffusers!), and thus his claims can basically be ignored.

Quote:
lectured a few years ago to 200 acoustics at EIAS about the psychoacoustic benefit of the early reflexes in small-room acoustics.
Nice attempt to mis-apply irrelevant research! I'm well aware of how early reflections work in both small and large rooms, and I'm well aware of psycho-acoustic effects, thanks. Now maybe you could explain how your microphones were able to capture psycho-acoustic effects... Before you answer, you should probably look up the definition of "psycho-acoustic"...

Quote:
What I find interesting here is that getting a small space of 1.68m2 to sound very good.
I repeat: you did not do that. It is NOT a small space: it is a very large space, that contains a contraption made from plastic strips that have very little effect on the acoustics of the large room, or of the region they surround. Thus, what the mics pic up is mostly the acoustic response of the large room. Because it is impossible to make a small room sound like a large one. The laws of physics prevent that from happening. I don't care how the plastic strips behave, what they are made of, or what angles and curves they use, it is impossible for them to create the low-end modal support that is necessary for attaining a large-room sound. It cannot happen, no matter how much snake oil and pixie dust are used in making the plastic.

Quote:
Well, as you know, there is no link to a set of norms. But the fact that I get so much criticism from you here may still indicate that my ideas go beyond current norms.
Huh? Say what? Let me get this straight: first you say that there are no such norms, then you say that your ideas go beyond those norms that you just admitted don't exist?

The reason your claims (not you personally, but your claims) get so much criticism here, on all the threads where you try to promote them, is not because they "go beyond the norms", but rather because they would have to break the laws of physics in order to be true. What you claim is impossible, thus the claims are criticized and debunked, every time you try to bring them up again.

Quote:
Setting up three stereo pairs inside a space of 1.68m2 and also having two of the stereo pairs about 20cm from the wall is something I have not heard anyone recommend.
Once again, the room is a LOT larger than 1.68m2, and there is no wall. There's only a few thin plastic strips, which must follow the laws of physics, just like all other materials in the universe do. A few thin plastic strips do not constitute a wall or even any type of acoustic barrier that "blocks the sound against the larger room". If you tell me how thin the plastic strips are, I can predict what part of the spectrum they might effect, and how much they would actually block. But you don't need to do that, as we'll be able to see that in real life when you post the video with the two sound level meters...

Quote:
Whether it was successful or not, everyone can decide when they listen to the audio files
Sorry, but that isn't true. Listening to an audio clip says very little about how it was recorded. Years ago, I got hired to record the music class at a local high school, and make their self-written, self-performed songs into a CD, as part of their final year grade. Some of the songs on the CD sounded half decent, but nothing at all like the original tracks! I had to use quite a few mixing tricks to make the original tracks sound reasonably good. Any mix engineer knows how to do that, and more. Your audio clips prove nothing.

Quote:
My booth has nothing at all to do with a "drum shield".
Actually, it does. It's rather similar, both in theory and in practice. Except that the drum shield does a better job of isolating, of course. A good acrylic enclosure for drums might be able to reduce the levels by perhaps 15 dB, and maybe even 20 dB or more, if it is well enclosed and uses unusually thick acrylic panels. Your thin plastic strips don't get such good results. (Which we will be able to see in the video with the two sound level meters, when you post it).

Quote:
OK. My slightly more poetic way of describing "all frequencies" may not have worked so well.
Hmmmm... OK, then let's take that claim and get some proof. Leaving aside your poetry, you say that your "booth" affects "all frequencies". I'll be generous and assume that you mean the frequencies in the audio spectrum, usually stated as covering 20 Hz to 20 kHz. You seem to be claiming that your thin plastic strips are able to effectively block the entire audio spectrum, such that no sound gets from one side to the other. I'll be even more generous, and relax the "no sound at all" condition, and use levels that are more common for typical vocal booths. So it seems you are claiming that your plastic strip booth can achieve TL of around 50 dB across the spectrum from 20 Hz to 20 kHz, and I'll even allow a Mass Law slope on that claim, with the TL normalized to 1 Khz, since your plastic strips are basically governed by mass law anyway. That seems entirely reasonable.

So please post your lab test results, showing that this claim is true: TL 50 dB, 20 Hz to 20 kHz, mass law slope. I imagine that you did actually have your contraption tested in an independent acoustic test laboratory, following the real "norms" that actually do exist for such tests, right? Because that's the only way that you'd be able to validly make such a claim. So please do post the lab test report here, and we'll be able to judge how accurately you presented that reality, or how "poetically" you embellished it.

Quote:
If I only adjust the faders/volume between different microphones and do panning, choose which reverb to have and what volume I want on them. Also choose what changes I should not make. I think I mix the recording.
You added reverb? So you did use plugins then! Yet originally you claimed to have not used any. Since reverb also undeniably changes the EQ and the dynamics of the signal, you did, in fact, use everything that you initially said you didn't use....

Quote:
I am very interested in creating the sound I want at the time of recording. I would rather spend time on which microphone or preamp to use and microphone placement than shape the sound in retrospect with an EQ.
And yet, you admit to using reverb . . .

Quote:
As far as I can read, neither ArthurMa nor you have mentioned any dimensions at all. You just said "closet sized space"
How big is your closet at your house? Maybe you could use that.... In any event, you keep on insisting that your "booth" is 1.68 m2, so it seems appropriate that you should find a closet with an area of about 1.68 m2, and do the video tests in that. With REW, and with the accordion.

Quote:
"I see a lot of pictures of people recording in large rooms with a 3 sided cubicle-like structure made out of accoustic panels around the mic/performer. Is that a good idea?" As I understand it, he means diffusers.
You understand incorrectly, as Dan Popp pointed out. The OP is clearly talking about absorbers, since that is what he tried in his closet, with unsatisfactory results. In any case, as everyone knows, it would be a really bad idea to have diffusers so close to an instrument or mic, so it's clear he's not referring to diffusers.

Quote:
My answer to this question is: Yes, I think it's a good idea with diffusers.
No, it's not. Since you seem to agree with Prof. Cox and his work on diffusers, maybe you can explain why you don't agree with his advice about the necessary distance required in front of a diffuser, in order for the gross anomalies to smooth out to a usable diffuse field? What evidence do you have that his research is wrong, and that you are right?

And since you seem to be an expert on this subject, maybe you could give us a definition of what a diffuse field actually is, in acoustic terms? Then explain how your plastic strips are able to form such a diffuse field in a region that measures 1.68 m2. Feel free to get as technical as you want in your explanation: many folks here are professional acousticians and studio designers, so we can handle the math and the theory. For example, what is the Schroeder frequency for your booth? Please show how you calculated that, and the actual test results that confirm your calculation is valid. Also, do you think it would be more appropriate to apply the Sabine or Eyring equations to your room?

Quote:
You can even get a very small room to sound good with three walls of diffusers around the microphone / artist.
Actually, no you can't. That's acoustically impossible, because small rooms do not have a diffuse field, and having instruments or mics extremely close to diffusers is pointless anyway, since there is no diffusion close up. And it is technically impossible to have a diffuse field in a small room. In addition, tiny rooms also have no modal support in the low end, and the smaller the room is, the worse it gets. A lack of modal support implies major frequency response issues which cannot be corrected by any amount of acoustic treatment.

Quote:
Here is a really padded room with three walls 120x120x120cm vs a diffused room with the same dimensions, whose walls weigh over 300kg. No plastic strips here.
I think you must have posted the wrong video, because I'm seeing plenty of plastic strips in it.. (see below). Please post the correct video: the one that you mentioned, of the diffuse room measuring 120x120x120cm with no plastic strips.

In any event, the video proves nothing at all, in either case, since you do not disclose how big the actual room is! You only show the small region inside the larger room. Clearly, the camera is much further away than 1.2m from the padded area inside the large room, and the camera is moving around the plastic strip booth on the OUTSIDE, looking in, from quite a distance.... If you would disclose the actual dimensions of the rooms, that would be more honest, and would reveal the truth about the acoustic response.... which is that of the larger room, not that of the booth.

The truth is that you cannot make a tiny room sound like a large one. A closet can never sound like a properly designed tracking room. Period. You can wish and hope all you want, and even wax poetic about the supposed virtues of frequencies beyond the highest one, but it isn't going to happen. A tiny closet is ALWAYS going to sound like a tiny closet; dull, boxy, unpleasant, oppressive. Because the laws of physics dictate that it must behave like that, and no amount if unicorn hair or magical incantations will change that. Closets always sound lousy, unless you treat the hell out of them with porous abortion, to make them completely dead, acoustically. And nobody likes working in a dead space.

Also, how about disclosing your relationship to the manufacturer of this contraption? And why is it that you promote his product in practically every single post that you make here on GS? Many people would consider that to be "spam"...

- Stuart -
Attached Thumbnails
Voice recording in PVC blanket booth, how to improve?-plastic-strip-booth.jpg  
Old 4 weeks ago
  #14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundman2020 View Post
I...snake oil...bla bla
- Stuart -
Interesting yet very boring with this aggressive forum style to downplay other people. After all, it is sadly enough often like this in certain situations on the internet. An old classic is the discussions about how different cables sound different and whether it is measurable or not...

Its obvious you have no clue how the module/wall are designed/work. The four (two have double acrylic layers) V shaped parts keep the sound effective inside the bubble, so for the last time, there are no vertical strips that let the sound pass trough the construction!
(The acrylic material itself holds the weight of over 350kg in my booth)
Instead the sound are forced sideways in the V shaped long delay channels with different length with the result of a 5ms long impulse respons from a single module.

And yes Stuart. I do know that the low bass slip through and how one treat the low end in a large recording room.
And that the bass can´t be treated in a too small space.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArthurMa View Post
I am recording voiceover...
But in my vocal booth video, listen how it sounds! Don´t you think it sounds better in the diffused booth?
The vocal mic does not pickup anything from outside the booth. The vocal sound would have been the same with solid walls outside my diffusors.

Here is some reading for those interested.
Greatest studio designs

Measurment of a flat wall compared with a wall with 3 modules.
Measuring microphone 1m from the wall/modules.

Flat wall


A wall with 3 modules next to each other. In total 180cm width


By the way, I do not use reverb plugins. I´m using Bricasti M7.

Actually, I joined Gearslutz about a year ago to get some feedback on different prototypes of a mic I´m developing:
Join our K67 microphone development!

Then there have been a bit of posting in the quite extreme and legendary thread "Greatest studio designs".

And finally some questions about a cloud, where I got incorrect answers.

Thats kind of it.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #15
Gear Addict
 
Dan Popp's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berndalen View Post
And yes Stuart. I do know that the low bass slip through and how one treat the low end in a large recording room.
And that the bass can´t be treated in a too small space.
So your small room is not a room (what the "low bass slip through" into is the room), and your solution will be of no help to the OP, with his flanking blankets draped over PVC pipe in a closet.

If it were possible to employ your system inside the OP's closet, it would still sound like a closet - at least in the bass, by your admission - because your system does not contain sound like a room does.

The OP was frustrated because his small room sounds bad; you came in telling him that small rooms don't have to sound bad; now you admit that "bass can't be treated in a too small space," which effectively means that too-small rooms must sound bad.

You have neither transcended the laws of physics nor helped the OP. Congratulations.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #16
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Popp View Post
So your small room is not a room (what the "low bass slip through" into is the room), and your solution will be of no help to the OP, with his flanking blankets draped over PVC pipe in a closet.

If it were possible to employ your system inside the OP's closet, it would still sound like a closet - at least in the bass, by your admission - because your system does not contain sound like a room does.

The OP was frustrated because his small room sounds bad; you came in telling him that small rooms don't have to sound bad; now you admit that "bass can't be treated in a too small space," which effectively means that too-small rooms must sound bad.

You have neither transcended the laws of physics nor helped the OP. Congratulations.
+1!

Exactly. Very well said, and spot on.


- Stuart -
Old 4 weeks ago
  #17
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Interesting yet very boring with this aggressive forum style to downplay other people
I'm not "downplaying" people: Rather, I'm "downplaying" ludicrous claims about a product, since they are impossible. It's not boring at all: in fact, discussing crazy claims made about acoustic contraptions is an important part of this forum: it helps to warn people who are just starting out with their attempts to treat their rooms, to be very, very wary of amazing product claims. It helps to protect newcomers from being scammed, so they can avoid spending their money on silly stuff that does nothing but costs a lot of money.

Quote:
An old classic is the discussions about how different cables sound different and whether it is measurable or not...
Interesting that you would bring that up: I was actually going to mention that as a clear and obvious example of a very common audiophile scam. I'm really glad that Ethan did those careful laboratory tests, to prove that there is no difference at all between then US$ 5,000 cables, and the US$ 5 cables. Ethan is pretty good at exposing scams: it's a pity he doesn't seem to be around lately.

Quote:
Its obvious you have no clue how the module/wall are designed/work.
Nice try, but I can see perfectly from the videos and photos and other sources of information, exactly how they are made. Which is why I absolutely do understand how they work, and why they will not (and cannot) do what you claim that they do.

Quote:
The four (two have double acrylic layers) V shaped parts keep the sound effective inside the bubble,
Yes, the construction is obvious from the videos and photos. Now if you could just explain what you mean be "keep the sound effective". How do you define that in terms of frequency response, decay times, phase rotation, etc?

Quote:
there are no vertical strips that let the sound pass trough the construction!
Yes there are: that is also abundantly clear from the videos and photos, and you just confirmed it yourself: you said that there are V-shaped acrylic layers, and the video clearly shows that they stand up vertically from some sort of box. You call them layers, I call the strips. same thing. They are, therefore, vertical plastic strips (acrylic is a type of plastic).

There are also very large gaps between the adjacent modules (at least one centimeter), plus there is no back on the "booth"! It is completely open to the room at the rear, as well as through the gaps between the "modules", and I'm guessing that it is also open to the room at the top: there is no ceiling apparent in the video or photos. After all, the plastic strips are only 120cm long, so they cannot get all the way to the ceiling!

Quote:
(The acrylic material itself holds the weight of over 350kg in my booth)
Once again, weight is irrelevant: Surface density matters, which is why I asked you to state how thick the acrylic is, but so far you have refused. The total mass is not a factor: the surface density is what matters here. So I'll ask again: How thick is the acrylic? I'm certain it is just 6mm. Is that correct? If you don't know, then get out a ruler and measure it...

Quote:
Instead the sound are forced sideways in the V shaped long delay channels with different length
Perhaps some very high frequencies are, but I would assume that those are the frequencies you mentioned before, that are "beyond the highest harmonic".

It's clear that this contraption can do nothing at all to affect any part of the low end of the spectrum, nor the mid range, and at best causes massive phasing issues in part of the high end. That's about it. But it does not block out the room sound, which is what you claimed originally (your claim was: " they effectively block the sound against the larger room"), it is not a diffuser, and it is not broadband. Since it has no effect on the low end, it also has no ability to improve the boxy sound of a closet or other small room. Because it is precisely the lack of modal support in the low end that causes the boxy sound in the first place! This is not hard to understand. A few vertical plastic strips cannot create the missing modal support, because that is a direct function of the dimensions of the room! And since it is the modal response that defines the overall frequency response for any room, these plastic strips do nothing at all useful for the boxy sound of a closet. Nothing. Zilch. Zip.

I'll repeat that in simple bullet-points, to make it even easier for you to understand, since you seem to be having a difficult time grasping the fundamentals of small-room acoustics:

- Modal support in the low end defines the overall response of the room.
- Modal support in the low end is determined by the dimensions of the room.
- A small room has no low end modal support, because the dimensions are too short.
- A small room has no diffuse field, so true diffusion is not possible in a small room.
- Thus a small room sounds "boxy" and "small", no matter what you do to it.
- The boxy sound is a fundamental physical characteristic of a small room.
- The lack of a diffuse field is a fundamental physical characteristic of a small room.
- Thin plastic strips do not change the modal response of the room.
- Thin plastic strips do not create a diffuse field in the room, because that is impossible.
- Thus, the boxy sound cannot be improved by adding thin plastic strips.
- Thus, this contraption does not do what you claimed it does, and is useless for the OP.

That's about as simple as I can put it. We don't know just how thin the acrylic strips are, since you won't tell us, but I'm betting they are very thin. From what I have been able to find out, they are ordinary 6mm acrylic plastic strips! In other words, exactly the same as cheap drum shields: 6mm acrylic strips... Prove me wrong...

Quote:
with the result of a 5ms long impulse respons from a single module.
Say what? That doesn't even make sense, acoustically! If your plastic strip booth has an internal Impulse Response of 5ms, then it must be about the driest booth on the planet! Most vocal booths have an IR at least twenty times longer than that! A room with an IR of 5ms is deathly dry.

You are spouting technical terms without understanding them. But what you forget is that many of the posters on this forum are professional acousticians and studio designers, who understand the terms very, very well. So you just end up looking ignorant when you say things like your contraption produces a room with a 5ms impulse response.

On the other hand, if you just typed that wrong and in fact you attempted to say that the path through the plastic channels delays the signal by 5ms, than that isn't true either, because the path length clearly is not 171.5 cm (67.5"), which is what would be needed to create a 5ms delay... and even if that were the case, you would end up with phase cancellation and comb filtering, centered at intervals of 200 Hz, all the way up the spectrum... That would produce a rather strange sound!

But that isn't possible either, because the LONGEST path length in that contraption is less than half of that: it can't be longer, because the entire thing is only about 600mm wide, and 250mm deep... Thus, the MAXIMUM delay you could get is maybe 2 or 2.5 ms. Certainly not 5. And way, way short of the 300 ms or so that would be needed... Maybe if you lined up 120 such contraptions in a long line, so that the exit from each one feeds into the next one, then you might get a useful delay. In fact, lining up fifteen of them like that would get you a delay beyond the Haas time, so perhaps interesting...

And on the other, OTHER hand, if you intended to say that the plastic strips increase the IR by 5 ms, that isn't true either! See if you can figure out why that is...

Quote:
And yes Stuart. I do know that the low bass slip through and how one treat the low end in a large recording room. And that the bass can´t be treated in a too small space.
Well, thank you for finally admitting that your device is useless, and does not do what you claimed it does! Thank you for confirming what I've been saying all along: this contraption does nothing at all to change the modal response of a closet, and therefore cannot remove the boxy sound. In the case shown in the video, it is the modal response of the much larger room around the "bubble" of plastic strips that is dominant, and that is what is heard on the video, and in the accordion tracks. It is NOT the acoustic response of the plastic strip bubble that you are hearing! It IS the acoustic response of the surrounding room. At best, the plastic strip bubble booth creates some comb filtering and phasing issues in the high end, and also perhaps reflects some of the high end, but that's it.

It does not do what you originally claim it does: "the gs myth that small volumes can't sound awesome. ... I would like to show the opposite of this statement". That was your initial response here, on a thread where the original poster starts by saying that: "I recently made a booth out of PVC and moving blankets and put it in my closet". The thread is about closets. The acoustic experts here pointed out that it is impossible to make a closet sound good. You then butted in saying that what they said is wrong, and your contraption will, in fact, make a closet sound good. But now you have admitted that it won't, and you have recognized that in fact it cannot do that, because it does nothing to change the modal support of the closet, and it is the modal support that drives the overall acoustic response of any room, including closets.

So I'll accept your apology for implying that I am a liar, any time you give it.

The original statement stands: it is impossible to remove the "boxy" sound of a closet or other small room. There is NOTHING that can be done to fix that, except perhaps to completely damp it to the extreme with abundant thick porous absorption, to "kill" the room completely. That still doesn't fix the underlying problem, but reduces it enough to perhaps make it usable for non-professional work. But it is unpleasant to work in an acoustically dead environment: most people feel unconformable after a few minutes, and just want to get out. And a few plastic strips standing up vertically on top of a wooden box most certainly won't do anything useful here.

You made the claim, you have been proven wrong, and you have now admitted that you are wrong, because you admitted that the plastic strip bubble booth does not affect the low end (nor the mids either!), and therefore cannot solve the OPs problem, and does not "prove me wrong", as you originally claimed.

Quote:
As far as I can read, neither ArthurMa nor you have mentioned any dimensions at all. You just said "closet sized space"
So you didn't even bother listening to the audio clip he carefully created, demonstrating the small, dull, boxy sound of his closet? He clearly states the dimensions in there. So you claimed that your plastic strip bubble booth can improve the sound of his closet, but you don't even know what it sounds like in there? So how could you know if your plastic strips could make that sound better, if you don't even know how bad it sounds at present? Based on the recording, a bunch of thin angled plastic strips is not going to do anything to get rid of the dry, dull, boxy sound. Because that's a product of the closet dimensions, not the things you put inside it...

Quote:
But in my vocal booth video, listen how it sounds! Don´t you think it sounds better in the diffused booth?
Irrelevant. You refuse to say what the dimensions of the actual rooms are, meaning the larger rooms where you set up these "booths".

Quote:
The vocal mic does not pickup anything from outside the booth.
Of course it does! You can clearly hear the overall acoustic signature of the large room surrounding the plastic strip bubble! The reason why the mic didn't pick up any ambient noise, is because there wasn't any!

But instead of making claims like this, you can actually demonstrate it clearly and unequivocally, by doing what I said yesterday: set up two identical sound level meters, set to "C" and "Slow", one inside the plastic strip bubble booth, and the other outside in the actual room, then play various loud sounds either inside the booth, or outside it, with both of the meters visible on camera, while you film it. This is very easy to do, so I'm not sure why you don't want to do that. We know you have the plastic strip bubble booth, and we know you have a camera, and a speaker to play music, so all you need is a couple of sound level meters. Then you can prove that we are wrong, and that the plastic strip bubble booth does, in fact, isolate just like a normal studio vocal booth, with TL of around 50 or so.

Quote:
The vocal sound would have been the same with solid walls outside my diffusors.
hehehe! Ummm... no it would not. If you would put that plastic strip bubble booth inside a closet with solid, rigid walls around it, the sound would have been drastically different. It would have shown the same boxy, dull, dry, ugly sound as all such small rooms have. And they have that sound because of the laws of physics, not the laws of wishful thinking, nor the laws of snake oil.

Quote:
Here is some reading for those interested.
And you provide yet ANOTHER link to the exact same post by the shill for the manufacturer? The same guy who says Northward is "startlingly incorrect"? Yeah right. I think we'll all take the shill's hype over Northward's intelligent comments... for sure... Yup.. It seems you don't realize who Northward is....

And why does that shill for the product then link directly back to your own posts about the plastic strip bubble booth? It certainly seems that you two are trying to promote each other, going round and round in a circle of quoting each other and linking to each others quotes, in and endless loop... and all of those quotes and links turn out to be about the plastic strip bubble booth...! Taa daa!!! You seem to spend a lot of time patting each other on the back, while dissing some of the most highly regarded studio designers and acousticians around! Why is that? And how come he keeps posting your videos, and you keep posting his diagrams? It almost seems like the two of you are working together... Maybe even for the same company....

Quote:
Measurment of a flat wall compared with a wall with 3 modules. Measuring microphone 1m from the wall/modules.
Post the actual impulse response files for each of those. Not just pictures of graphs. The real IR files, in WAV format. Then we can analyze them ourselves, properly.

But in any case, the two contrived waterfalls you posted show that there is basically no effect at all below about 1 kHz, and the only place that gets some change is above about 4 kHz... which is, as you said "beyond the highest harmonics"....

Quote:
By the way, I do not use reverb plugins. I´m using Bricasti M7.
Ummmm.... and your point is? That's a REVERB unit! IT makes no difference if it is a plugin or a physical hardware box, because the both do the same thing. It changes the EQ, balance, and dynamics of the signal. Period. Yet you originally claimed that you did no such thing! You claimed that the tracks were mixed entirely without EQ, compression, or effects, yet you now admit to using a device that affects the EQ and compression, and in fact ADDS a simulated acoustic response effect! Sigh!

Quote:
Actually, I joined Gearslutz about a year ago to get some feedback on ....
And somehow you managed to morph that into actively promoting a plastic strip bubble booth in practically every post.... Hmmmm...

Quote:
And finally some questions about a cloud, where I got incorrect answers.
What thread would that be? Do you have a link? And why were the answers incorrect? I think I can guess, but let's see for sure...


- Stuart -

Last edited by Soundman2020; 4 weeks ago at 06:28 PM..
Old 4 weeks ago
  #18
Lives for gear
 
Starlight's Avatar
 

I am guessing that ArthurMa will not be looking to buy 350kg of acrylic panels.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #19
Moderator
 
Northward's Avatar
Ah! I see my friends at SMT are back! It has been a while...

The Acoustics twilight zone team.

Stuart, grab a drink and a sandwich. It may take you a while to talk some sense to any of those guys.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #20
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Northward View Post
Ah! I see my friends at SMT are back! It has been a while...

The Acoustics twilight zone team.

Stuart, grab a drink and a sandwich. It may take you a while to talk some sense to any of those guys.
+1!

For sure! But I think I'll need more than just a drink and a sandwich, though... This could take a while...

I'm just really interested to see if they can actually come up with some real, valid acoustic data from their strange devices, or if their entire acoustic testing department consists of a tag team of three guys and an unknown acoustician who has "designed a thousand rooms" (!), all patting each other on the back and reposting the same old graphs and videos over and over...

Thomas, I'm wondering how many of your clients have installed these things in their studios, to "improve" the sound! To be very honest, the only place I've ever seen these things, is here on GS and in the videos they post... I can't see any reputable studio even letting them in the front door...


- Stuart -

(PS. One thousand studios over a period of 50 years = 20 studios per year. About two studios per month, on average. One every two weeks. They must be amazing studios! )
Old 4 weeks ago
  #21
Here for the gear
 

Thanks for all the information to everyone in this thread. I did a bunch more reading and it seems like I gotta buy some bass traps among other things. But I'm going to be stuck in the closet for a while longer and have to make due until then.

I don't know if this is related, but I noticed a weird thing in my recordings that started happening, it sounds like I'm talking through a fan underwater, it's absolutely dreadful. There is no way that could be from the recording environment right? I mean... this is just freaky. It looks like my problems just keep stacking up. :(

Anyway if you want to hear more of my stupid voice, here it is

https://soundcloud.com/user-852062828/oh-god
Old 4 weeks ago
  #22
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArthurMa View Post
Thanks for all the information to everyone in this thread. I did a bunch more reading and it seems like I gotta buy some bass traps among other things. But I'm going to be stuck in the closet for a while longer and have to make due until then.

I don't know if this is related, but I noticed a weird thing in my recordings that started happening, it sounds like I'm talking through a fan underwater, it's absolutely dreadful. There is no way that could be from the recording environment right? I mean... this is just freaky. It looks like my problems just keep stacking up. :(

Anyway if you want to hear more of my stupid voice, here it is

https://soundcloud.com/user-852062828/oh-god
Thanks ArthurMa!

Wow, that was a weird tone here and there in your takes. What is your peaklevel when you record? I have experiences something similar once, maybe it was the mic capsule for me back then.

I missed the first seconds in your first recording when you stated the room measures.

I´m renovating a closet in my house at the moment which have the measures:
Height 242cm
Length 263cm
Width 102 cm

Quite similar to yours right?

What do GS guys say?
Would it be helpful if I arrange a measuring of my empty room?
Maybe It could detect some problem freq that can be of help for ArthurMa?!
Old 4 weeks ago
  #23
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Would it be helpful if I arrange a measuring of my empty room?
Sure! Here's how to do that, validly: How to calibrate and use REW to test and tune your room acoustics

Now, since your closet is not a control room, you won't use the typical control room layout: Instead, set up the speaker on a tall stand (to get the acoustic axis roughly at ear height), fairly close to one of the short walls (maybe 50cm away), with the acoustic measurement mic on a stand fairly close to the other short wall (maybe 50cm away), and with the mic pointing nearly vertically upwards, at an angle of maybe 60-70°. Don't put the centered on short walls: Offset them slightly from the center, so that they are not exactly in the modal nulls and peaks.

Here's the important part of those instructions: Get out of the room and close the door while the measurement process runs! Very important. The door MUST be closed in order to measure just that room, and your body CANNOT be in the room, because it has an effect on the measurement.

So do one test like that in the untreated empty room, post the MDAT, then do another identical test after you install the "treatment" (whatever it happens to be). It's VERY important that the second test must be done with the speaker and mic in the exact same locations (accurate to 1cm or 1/4"), and without changing any setup on the measuring equipment: Keep all controls on exactly the same settings. And, of course, once again the closet door MUST be closed for the test and you MUST be outside the closet. The test conditions have to be identical, in order to validly compare the "before" and "after" test data. Post that second MDAT too.

It would be very interesting to see that.

- Stuart -
Old 3 weeks ago
  #24
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Berndalen View Post
Thanks ArthurMa!

Wow, that was a weird tone here and there in your takes. What is your peaklevel when you record?
The peak level is typically 5

I don't think my biggest problems are acoustically, related because I am having this warbly sound happen in multiple rooms. You can hear the distortion ore clearly in this clip

https://soundcloud.com/user-852062828/seared-breath


I am beginning to think the problem is digital. Can anybody identify the problem sound? It is ruining my life :(
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
Forum Jump
Forum Jump