The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
MyRoom Acoustic Design
Old 14th February 2011
  #1
Lives for gear
 
avare's Avatar
 

MyRoom Acoustic Design

Thomas (Northward) has an execellent forum that he moderates about studio acoustics. A while ago Bogic Petrovic posted a link to the control room design concept that he and Zorica Davidovic developed MyRoom Design white paper. A fantastic development and much more public than Moulton and ZR Acoustics!

Andre
1
Share
Old 14th February 2011
  #2
Gear Nut
 

It looks really good! Im going start reading it tonight...

My question is how can you get around the racks and the surround speakers to actualy get to the workstation? It does not seam to have any room to walk by. :S

-Max
Old 14th February 2011
  #3
Lives for gear
 
PaulP's Avatar
 

Thanks Andre, that was an interesting read.

Nice place. A whole lot of work (and wood !) went into it. Sure get's the imagination going.

I'd like to know how thick the absorption is behind the diffusers. Can't be much more than 6" by the looks of things.

Max asks a good question, I tried to find a door hidden among the diffusers but can't see any. Do you really have to move a speaker to get in ? Trap door ?
Old 18th February 2011
  #4
Lives for gear
 
807Recordings's Avatar
 

Very Cool stuff and a great read.

I was not aware that you could place diffusors with absorbers. You learn something new every day.
Old 18th February 2011
  #5
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulP View Post
Max asks a good question, I tried to find a door hidden among the diffusers but can't see any. Do you really have to move a speaker to get in ? Trap door ?
Old 18th February 2011
  #6
Lives for gear
 
PaulP's Avatar
 

Maybe the room is used for stereo most of the time.
Old 18th February 2011
  #7
Gear Nut
 

I'm still holding on the idea of a possible hidden "Batcave" type door

But Yea and they probably keep the surrounds stored in another room... But still its a pain to move the speaker everytime you want to go to the bathroom or ....
Old 18th February 2011
  #8
Gear Head
 
Jeancab's Avatar
Very interesting link, thanks.

About the figures 8 & 11 and the AES limits, do you know what is the smoothing ?
Old 18th February 2011
  #9
Lives for gear
 
Hannes_F's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max 002 View Post
My question is how can you get around the racks and the surround speakers to actualy get to the workstation? It does not seam to have any room to walk by. :S
No problem since this is the studio of David Copperfield.
Old 18th February 2011
  #10
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hannes_F View Post
No problem since this is the studio of David Copperfield.
Well that explains everything! heh Haha

So whenever he teleports while recording, does it cause any sort of interference in the signal?
Old 19th February 2011
  #11
Lives for gear
 
avare's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulP View Post
Maybe the room is used for stereo most of the time.
Yes. The paper qualifies that the rooms are sub-optimum size to begin with.

Andre
Old 19th February 2011
  #12
Lives for gear
 
avare's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeancab View Post
Very interesting link, thanks.

About the figures 8 & 11 and the AES limits, do you know what is the smoothing ?
You are welcome. It is pleasure reading and replying to a post regarding the (amazing) acoustic achievement in such a small room.

I do not know. Looking at the graphs critically, I suspect one third octave as the coarsest. I counted the bumps in the bumpiest ares of the responses. I would not recommend this method for amateurs.

Smoothly,
Andre
Old 20th February 2011
  #13
Lives for gear
 
Hannes_F's Avatar
 

Seriously, this method seems to be a good possibility to get the best out of a small room. They could have tried to install a RFZ/LEDE room in the bigger of the two, but this would not work well for surround. Also, keyword here is try because it is not easy and the principles do not seem to be even fully disclosed as a whole anywhere. For the smaller room of the both an RFZ/LEDE approach would have been out of question right away.

In any case the elimination of direct reflections above 20 - 25 dB seems crucial.

Quote:
Originally Posted by avare
I do not know. Looking at the graphs critically, I suspect one third octave as the coarsest. I counted the bumps in the bumpiest ares of the responses. I would not recommend this method for amateurs.
You mean the smoothing, the bump counting or this sort of treatment?

With a number of modex absorbers plus the Jens Eklund Optiffusors it seems doable.
Old 20th February 2011
  #14
Lives for gear
 
PaulP's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hannes_F View Post
Also, keyword here is try because it is not easy and the principles do not seem to be even fully disclosed as a whole anywhere.
When you wander off the beaten path everything is an experiment. While the people involved in this project no doubt had a substantial amount of knowledge and experience, they still wouldn't have known how things would turn out until they finished the room.

In my opinion, they went to an awful lot of trouble for a room so small. Investing so much money (surely many thousands of dollars) in a bad room seems a bit ridiculous.
Old 20th February 2011
  #15
Lives for gear
 
Hannes_F's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulP View Post
In my opinion, they went to an awful lot of trouble for a room so small. Investing so much money (surely many thousands of dollars) in a bad room seems a bit ridiculous.
Now if you think that their room has 70 m³ and mine has 45 m³ ...

and I still think that I can make mine world class .. that is optimism heh
Old 20th February 2011
  #16
Lives for gear
 
avare's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hannes_F View Post
Also, keyword here is try because it is not easy and the principles do not seem to be even fully disclosed as a whole anywhere.
What do you see is missing? Sorry, I know that is terrible grammer, but I do no se anything missing.

Quote:
You mean the smoothing, the bump counting or this sort of treatment?
Yes. This is dangerous to do if you are not a professional. heh

Andre
Old 20th February 2011
  #17
Moderator
 
Northward's Avatar
I think Bogic will post more in a new thread once the PSW forum have fully migrated to the new platform, end of this month.

Should be interesting!
Old 20th February 2011
  #18
Lives for gear
 
Hannes_F's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by avare View Post
What do you see is missing? Sorry, I know that is terrible grammer, but I do no se anything missing.
If we are talking about a LEDE/RFZ room, is there any publication where all the information and specifications are published in one document?

I think I remember SAC writing anywhere that while many think they have a a LEDE/RFZ room there are only a handful of rooms that would really match the criteria to get approved, and all of those that are approved needed tweaking to get there.
Old 20th February 2011
  #19
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
while many think they have a a LEDE/RFZ room there are only a handful of rooms that would really match the criteria to get approved, and all of those that are approved needed tweaking to get there.

Could you please elaborate on this "criteria", or link me to it?

Also, WHO is doing this so called "approval", what is used to certify this "approval", and exactly WHAT is an approval in the first place?

Thank you.
Old 20th February 2011
  #20
Lives for gear
 
Hannes_F's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fitZ View Post
Also, WHO is doing this so called "approval"
As far as I know patents and trademarks are involved both in the LEDE principle (which was invented by Don Davis + Chips Davis / SydAudCon) and its further development RFZ-LEDE (which was introduced by Peter D'Antonio + John H. Konnert / RPGinc). As far as I know (again) They have the right to approve studios to be consistent with their design but I might be wrong here.

Quote:
, what is used to certify this "approval", and exactly WHAT is an approval in the first place?

Could you please elaborate on this "criteria", or link me to it?

Thank you.
If I knew that exactly I would not have written that the criteria are not fully disclosed.

I take it to be granted that you know what an ETC measurement is and how the general principles about the ITG, the termination are defined etc. but there seem to be more and undocumented features. But again, I might be wrong here. All I have is basically the comment of SAC and others that there are lots of not-really-working RFZ/LEDE rooms and few that do.
Old 21st February 2011
  #21
Old 21st February 2011
  #22
Lives for gear
 
johndykstra's Avatar
 

Fantastic John, thank you.

Question. What is the difference between phase grating and amplitude grating?
Old 21st February 2011
  #23
Gear Addict
 

John,

That's simple at most basic breakdown

Phase grating uses reflective surfaces & distance (thus time, thus phase) through varied well-depths.

Amplitude grating uses reflection & absorption (so the return energy is a combination of those amplitudes). Slats over an absorber are a simple example of amplitude grating. A more scientific example would be the RPG BAD panel (binary amplitude diffusor).
Old 21st February 2011
  #24
Lives for gear
 
johndykstra's Avatar
 

Got it. Thanks Jeffrey
Old 21st February 2011
  #25
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
As far as I know patents and trademarks are involved both in the LEDE principle (which was invented by Don Davis + Chips Davis / SydAudCon)
Yes, I understand that, and also understand that SydAudCon had a system in place to verify a given design met the criteria, and once "certified", a given studio could proudly wear the banner, "LEDE CERTIFIED".

And this is precisely why I've repeatedly asked ...in THIS day and age, WHAT "certifies" any given designers design, other than "his/her" promise, by contract or not, to meet an agreed to set of criteria. In other words, is there any INDUSTRY WIDE set of sonic criteria/parameters that ALL Studio designers attempt to meet by virtue of proof of performance..and then is there some kind of INDUSTRY WIDE compliance/approval mechanism in place that guarantees a given studio CR has met this criteria?

So far, it appears the only answer I've received is each designer "attempts" to satisfy his own interpretation of what the acoustic performance of a CR or Live room should be. Talk of so called existing "standards" doesn't mean diddly squat if there isn't some kind of INDUSTRY wide "agreement" of these criteria, and "approval" by virtue of some kind of Industry wide performance "evaluation" committee or something to that effect......no? And once tested, some kind of AES approval stamp..kind of like what SydAudCon tried to do virtue of their awarding a stamp of approval called LEDE Compliance. At least to my way of thinking.
Otherwise, this whole ball of wax is only supported by opinion. Mine.


Furthermore...exactly who/what guarantees/certifies any given ENGINEER, has the auditory tools that can precisely utilize a "certified" room in the first place.
heh

I submit...reputation is the only criteria a given engineer needs to land a job. Same with a studio designer. There are no "certifications" such as a STRUCTURAL ENGINEER is required to maintain.

Quote:
Thanks John..., but WHO certifies any given design meets these criteria, as the statement below implies that anyone can design/build a room that the designer/owner "claims" is an RFZ control room.

Quote:
All I have is basically the comment of SAC and others that there are lots of not-really-working RFZ/LEDE rooms and few that do.


Exactly what certifies the "few that do"...actually DO?

For the clients that pay good money for studio time in these "not-really-working RFZ/LEDE rooms..all I can say is ....CAVEAT EMPEROR! heh Had they had luxury of some kind of PROOF OF PERFORMANCE..it may or may not made a damn bit of difference to their bottom line when it comes to the selling of their product. However, I just hate it when someone tries to sell me something that's based on a lie... ie..."soundproofing foam" comes to mind at the moment. The only difference is..when you install "soundproofing foam"...and then hear a person talking in the next room..you KNOW you've been conned.

Not so with a "not-really-working RFZ/LEDE room. I'd submit...even the engineers who work in these rooms couldn't detect it..even with NON CERTIFIED GOLDEN EARS! Hmmm, reminds me of the Kings Clothing. Kinda like the "Hemholtz Formula" debacle a few years ago. How many acousticans/studio designers incorporated these devices based on a flawed formula..and THEN...NO ONE HEARD IT???????????



One final question. How does one measure the "performance of diffusers" in a given room...ie...the room in question here? All I've ever seen in that regard is a picture of RPG labs testing a "RPG diffuser"..but the testing lab is FILLED with POLYS in the first place??????????? WTF?

Ok, enough of my NON EXPERT curiosity. Carry on.
Old 21st February 2011
  #26
Lives for gear
 
Hannes_F's Avatar
 

fitZ, read my post #13.

That is why I said it would certainly be easier to build a room according to design principles that are well documentated (as it seems to be the case with the MyRoom Design) than if key elements are in the dark (for example Haas kicker yes or no for an RFZ/LEDE room, polys yes or no, etc.)

I am not saying the result is necessarily better under ideal conditions but certainly the success rate will be higher. How many ETC graphs of really existing projects have you seen in this forum that are beyond any criticism?

I am strictly speaking about DIY projects here. I don't want to deny any professional designer designer the ability to achieve about anything he/she wants with state of the art methods.
Old 22nd February 2011
  #27
Lives for gear
 
avare's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Northward View Post
I think Bogic will post more in a new thread once the PSW forum have fully migrated to the new platform, end of this month.

Should be interesting!
Thank you Thomas. I tried to link to the thread on the old software and could not get on to it.

FWIW the LAB forums are working fine on the new software.

Andre
Old 22nd February 2011
  #28
Lives for gear
 
avare's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hannes_F View Post
Also, keyword here is try because it is not easy and the principles do not seem to be even fully disclosed as a whole anywhere.
My choice of words in the first post may be contirbuting to the confusion. It would be more accurate to describe the MyRoom as an implementation strategy, as opposed to a design concept. The paper references AES TD1001 many times.

Andre
Old 2nd March 2011
  #29
Lives for gear
 
avare's Avatar
 

THE Thread

Thomas' REP AIM has comoleted its transition to the new software. Bogic has started a thread with some repetition form the old one for people who can not access the old thread for data. Questions about the MyRoom design can be addressed to the man himself!

"MyRoom" Acoustic Design. Enjoy!

Andre
Old 2nd March 2011
  #30
Lives for gear
 
johndykstra's Avatar
 

From what I can gather by visual and deductive (roughly 2' period, N13 with equal slat to slot ratio), It would seem the slat faces of the "air transparent" combo amplitude/phase gratings are approx 1". Would this imply that the diffusive return of such a device would only be composed of roughly 8k and up?
1
Share
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump