If Audiophiles care about sound, then why so few threads on acoustics


... and so many on cables?

I am sure there are 10 if not 50 times more posts on cables too?

I would hope that as audiophiles we could agree that acoustics are far more important than cables. A cable may (or should) make a fraction of a db change. Acoustics can make several db changes (or more).  A cable may have some impact on clarity or soundstage (and many can rightfully debate that). Acoustics absolutely will have an impact on soundstage.

So what is the reason? 
  • Is it because acoustics are "hard", i.e. you really have to put some thought into it? 
  • Are acoustics not sexy enough? 
  • Is it because they are often unattractive?
  • Is it because they carry much in the way of bragging rights (at least with many audiophiles)?
  • Do they not provide enough "retail therapy"?
  • Most audiophile really don't understand much about acoustics and can't contribute?
  • The difference between those who understand acoustics and those that don't is substantial for people are fearful of wading into discussions?

Interested in people's thoughts. People will drop thousands on a cable, $10K on an amp, or turntable, but I don't see anywhere near that spend on acoustics in most cases.
heaudio123

Showing 2 responses by audiokinesis

"... why so few threads on acoustics?"

Room acoustics can be a fairly complex subject... and imo if we’re talking about home audio, the speaker’s radiation characteristics and setup also come into play - in other words, it’s not just about the room.

" Unless you are sitting nearfield, there can be more energy in reflections than directed.... guess what reflected energy does to timing? "

The first part of that statement I agree with: Typically there is considerably more energy in the reflections than in the direct sound.

The second part implies that reflections ruin the timing cues. Imo this depends on when they arrive, their spectral content, and their arrival direction.

Very early reflections (those arriving within about .68 milliseconds of the direct sound) are the most likely to affect imaging precision, but they can also affect clarity. These are more likely to be loudspeaker diffraction and/or reflection artifacts than room artifacts.

Again with imaging and clarity in mind, note that Linkwitz recommends avoiding room reflections within 6 milliseconds of the direct sound, while Geddes recommends avoiding room reflections within 10 milliseconds of the direct sound. According to Geddes and Griesinger, early reflections in the vertical plane are more benign than those in the horizontal plane.

So assuming room size and/or speaker characteristics and placement do not prevent early reflections, what should we do about them? Ignore them, absorb them, diffuse them, or reflect them away from the listening area? I’m not sure there is a "one size fits all" answer.

Incidentally the above implies that RT60 falls short as a metric of room acoustics, as (for starters) it tells us nothing about what’s happening in those first several milliseconds.

Duke
" Since time and effort is a commodity that many don’t have enough of, as several have pointed out, there is a need for some expert advice. The problem becomes that most expert advice is tied to sales of a particular solution. And there isn’t really a profession dedicated to consumer audio acoustic consulting." 

Thanks for indicating that this is the perception. 

Jeff Hedback of Hedback Designed Acoustics only sells information and expert advice, and he does home audio as well as pro audio rooms.  He sells no acoustic treatment products but will make expert recommendations.  If money is an issue he can tell you how to construct your own, tailored to your specific issues and requirements, in your specific room.   

Duke