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.
Just speaking for myself, I am not sure how bad my room sounds now. I hear good tonal balance, sound stage, dynamics. Perhaps some room acoustics would really step it up to the next level, but I suppose the process of analysis which would reveal what is wrong with my room (that I cannot hear, now) is somewhat of a mystery to me. And I'm not sure what is missing.
In interior decorating, someone is hired to come to your home and point out things worth improving -- flow of a room, containing noise, too little light, etc. In energy audits, someone comes an identifies places where heat is lost or why a room is cold in winter, etc. Perhaps there’s a similar role for someone who could do an ’acoustic’ audit.
Maybe that is it ... the average audiophile just does not know what they are missing and don't understand that if you have not acoustically treated your room, what you are missing is likely substantial.
Its an instant gratification thing........All you have to do is spend as much money as you can afford on some snake oil item, it gets delivered to your door in a box, you plug it in, and your done (it has to sound better).
You need a lot of patience and effort optimizing room acoustics. And even though the cost can be minimal in many cases a lot of people don't go through the effort.
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.
There's a lot of reasons, and you already listed many of them. But like so many other things you can get the lion's share of the results for next to nothing and then spend a fortune to eke out the last few percent.
Acoustics in my listening room are so much better than the rest of the house everyone notices the minute they walk in the room. Yet the most obvious improvement is from some ordinary Owens Corning 703 acoustic panels that cost probably only about $100 altogether. The fabric covering them cost way more than the actual acoustic material! This was all done like the rest of the system by a process of trial and error over a period of time. https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/8367
I know from experience this simply does not have a great deal of appeal. The vast majority of guys would rather pay big money to some "professional" with "expertise" who will tell them what to do. The idea of walking around clapping your hands and listening, or even listening to music, moving panels, listening some more, these things are too much "work". Work is not cool. Spending money is cool.
Also the most effective acoustic treatment in the room is hard to understand and almost invisible. Its the Synergistic Research HFT on the speakers and walls. Look close, they are only about 1/3" diameter. Bling factor near zero. Audiophiles like bling. These ain't it.
Oh and audiophiles love narrative. Stories. Dither is not a very good story.
My room could really benefit from some diffusion panels. Something that wasn't apparent years ago but now as the system improves its becoming more apparent. I know what to do. Know exactly what I want, and how to make it.
Unfortunately it involves work. Which proves my point.
Seriously though, I just looked at the last several hundred active discussions. 1 was definitely about discussions, 1 sort of, and I know they are mentioned any time subwoofers are brought up. In that period of time, tons of cable and similar discussions. Gik is frequently mentioned, but usually as a response to something else, perhaps not even asked, but acoustics rarely as a topic and never discussed in any depth.
I would also apply the GK factor, where the ultimately usefulness of a thread = 1/GK, where GK = the likelihood that geoffkait will post in a thread. This greatly skews the post count and ultimate usefulness of a thread, but anecdotally it is rare he posts in acoustics threads, which makes them far more useful, even if there are less of them :-)
I thought of "improving" the room, started looking up what could be done simply, realized it will be some work/time, and got bored with thinking about it. I did not consider cost as the factor, but it seemed it would add up quickly. That was before I saw millercarbon's recommendation about Corning. Which will be my first choice once I decide to proceed. Until then, it is pure lack of willingness to invest time and effort while accepting the sound is way worse than it could be.
Cable threads are more popular because it allows for more "electrical conspiracy" theories and "being smart". Not to mention fanboy threads dedicated to whole (and small) companies producing magic. Acoustics of the room is not disputable, not much to argue and outsmart the other guy about.
This is an excellent question. I've suggested on a number of occasions that people who are dealing with room issues (or dissatisfaction with pretty good systems) invest the time and effort required to measure and interpret room acoustics using REW and use those measurements as guidance in treating their rooms. I'm skeptical that I've actually convinced a single person to do so other than my son, who heard the difference with his own ears.
I was late to the room treatment party myself. In my case, I had no clue how much difference speaker and listening position alone could make, much less addition of bass traps and absorption panels. So the first obstacle for me was ignorance of what was possible.
The second obstacle was the time it took to learn what to do and how to do it. My retirement home has a dedicated listening room, but the room had a bunch of problems from suboptimal dimension ratios to flooring that was resonating badly. Had I not been retired, there is simply no way that I could have afforded the time investment to sort all this out. Even so, I've done my work in 4 phases over 5 years and I am still not done, although I am getting close. Initial work afforded modest returns because I didn't know enough to get the biggest bang for the buck. I'm guessing some people may buy a trap or two and don't do enough to make an appreciable difference so they give up.
Many audiophiles have more money than time, so time is subject to triage. Spending money on the next cable or tonearm is less painful than investing 100 hours of free time in getting the room right.
Perhaps, because it’s such a personal specific subject, it doesn’t lend itself to much general discussion. The interaction of specific speakers in specific room dimensions, with specific furnishings and materials at specific listening positions overall becomes, well too specific. While I agree that it’s very important, I some times wonder that without specific measurements, that hap-hazard room treatments can sometimes do more harm than good?
There are probably 100 products for treating the room. Half of them I’d opine don’t operate on acoustic waves. I sell a bunch of “room treatment” devices myself, most do not (Rpt not) operate on the acoustic waves. But they’re still “room treatments.” Even the tiny little bowl resonators do not operate entirely on acoustic waves In the room. Surprised? 🤗 Confucius say keep open mind but not so open brain fall out.
This happens when people apply too much absorption.
While I agree that it’s very important, I some times wonder that without
specific measurements, that hap-hazard room treatments can sometimes do
more harm than good?
The way to deal with the "spouse" factor is to take them to a fabric store and let them pick the fabric (avoiding ones with "shiny" coverings). Rectangles are used because they are easy, but other shapes work too. We built some octagons because 45 degrees is an easy setting on the mitre saw.
That was before I saw millercarbon's recommendation about Corning. Which will be my first choice once I decide to proceed.
What is ironic (?) / incomprehensible (?) is that some people spend more on equipment and accessories than it would take for them to build a dedicated listening room of near-ideal dimensions.
Hi, This is the third time I am attempting to post. This is a different science that needs experimentation, basic to good knowledge and messing up a little. How many audiophiles are willing to spent time reading, practicing, listen to music and debate less for cable differences if they exist or not. The risk remains that after attempting to correct or upgrade the sound with room treatments results may not be likeable. This is a great subject not catchy though and even the majority of high end stores are not in the position to display or even suggest what path to follow. Here comes personnal involvement of how far should anyone go. Professional studios start from here and then proceed with equipment. How many rooms are dedicated ones, I believe most are living rooms and waf plays significant role for I am looking for 2 decorative diffusers and then check for something like resonators.
Whatever you decide to get for room treatment first get a hold of a SPL meter and the test track (s) of your choice. I happen to like 315 Hz, maybe you prefer other frequencies, who knows? Without some way to measure the results of room treatment - just like speaker placement - you’re shooting blanks in the dark. Trying to treat the room by listening a little and moving a little is a lot like trying to solve x simultaneous equations in x + n unknowns. Rome wasn’t built in a day. After you establish where all the tube traps, diffusers, tiny little bowl resonators, etc. go, one at a time, then you need to reestablish speaker locations again.
Audiophiles have to make compromises when they have a better half. It can be difficult enough to get a decent symmetry for your speakers in a living room. A lot of absorbers and diffusers just look plain ugly. And people don't have the knowledge or the tools for room measurements. So they make the best of it of what they have. A separate room would be the best. But that is not everyone's privilege. Little tweaks like cable swapping is just pastime between bigger upgrades to keep our ears satisfied.
I think not many on audiogon can find way around an SPL meter let alone REW or Studio Six.... to dial in a room, dedicated or not... Yes there are bright spots but not all that many.... yes, it’s possible to spend years dialing it in...so you can buy build or decorate yourself into diffraction, absorption, etc... BTW on the WAF point, you can hide 1” 703 behind a lot of framed art...RPG in distressed Walnut.... now that’s a project !!!!
post up some delay curves in your virtual system pages...
Actually most dedicated rooms ain’t that good, precisely because they tend to lack natural diffraction- no that endless stack of IKEA record shelves doesn’t do much ( somebody should tell Mikey ) ... the forest of monoblocks right in front of the turntable, no plants, small trees, etc... green glue, double drywall, weather seal on doors, get a listening couch aka napping tube trap !!!
The stores the problem? You visit a high end audio seller and listen to a multi billion system in a poorly treated room without correction systems and you are told it sounds fantastic..... Most people will buy and live with that.
Maybe the Roon Eq. will conquer the audiophile community?
Like system building, you gain knowledge and discover your likes in regards to sound by trying things in acoustic treatments--some you will like and others you find you went the WRONG way. Lots of reading helps, but not as much as the experience when trying out something new in the room treatment.
Heaudio, you are absolutely right. I don't even visit the cable topic. I'd loose whatever hair I had left. Having the ability to measure and graph your acoustic environment is a real eye opener. Bass can easily change 10 db in just a few feet. 99% of a systems sound quality is due to the speakers in combination with the room.
Identical frequency response can sound completely different if one isn’t paying attention to noise. The biggest gremlin in modern times is plugging direct to a router. And no Cat 7 cables are trash and merely add more noise in. I’ve heard this personally, it can take a system from tons of bass to 0 bass despite the fact an RTA says bass is there. Two speakers can sound completely different in the same space. Goldenear vs Zu for instance don’t sound remotely the same even in the near field even. Some speakers need ideal conditions while some are so musical, room treatments don’t matter as much.
Frequency response doesn’t matter as much as timing and phase. Take any room and play an acoustic guitar... it always sounds like an acoustic guitar. Why is the market so obsessed with speaker design which butchers the time/phase domain? So when you combine the jacked up timing domain with poor driver / amplifier control due to the crossovers... instruments never sound real. This is because you split the harmonics between drivers which have different timing behavior... this is a major reason nothing sounds real no matter what you do. I want music to sound live.... room treatments do not alter or change whether the sound coming out of speakers sounds live or not. Now combine a great speaker that is highly musical with some diffusion panels and proper placement... now we’re talking. Take some traditional 3 ways... I don’t care what you do, you’re always listening to speakers.... not music.
That is totally untrue. Speakers shouldn't be musical, and I have never heard a speaker that would not be better with room treatments .. much much better.
Some speakers need ideal conditions while some are so musical, room treatments don’t matter as much.
See your statement above. Unless you are sitting nearfield, there can be more energy in reflections than directed.... guess what reflected energy does to timing?
Why is the market so obsessed with speaker design which butchers the
time/phase domain?
It's a common misconception that low damping factory, i.e. driver connected directly to the amplifier always results in lower distortion. Often it is worse.
So when you combine the jacked up timing domain with
poor driver / amplifier control due to the crossovers... instruments
never sound real.
Well one big reason is because many folks have their systems in shared living spaces like the living room. Many spouses do not want all manner of panels on the walls etc...no matter how attractive some of us think they are. The spousal veto vote on these panels and such is real and impacts many Aphiles.
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.
Audiokinesis 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 sound pressure peaks in room corners and other oft unpredictable locations in the room - including the 3D space of the room - interfere with the primary signals from the speakers. How much do they interfere you might ask. Well, at normal listening volume the sound pressure peaks in room corners can be as much as 6-9dB above the average SPL in the room. That’s 2 to 3 times the average loudness! The comb filter effect of multiple sources of sound pressure in the room kill any chance you have of receiving a pure signal at the listening position. To make things more confusing the peaks might not be exactly in the room corner, it might be a foot or two from the corner. That’s why a SPL meter is valuable. Tube traps are sometimes put in the wrong place for that reason.
Always appreciate the well thought out replies Duke! The comment I made below was mainly a response to a previous post that was made "railing" w.r.t. potential phase issues with speakers, while claiming some speakers are so good, that they don't need a treated room. The point I was trying to make, perhaps in too few words, is that "perfect" phase alignment of drivers in a speaker can be effectively ruined by reflections (of indeterminate frequency response and timing), especially in a "bad" room.
Unless you are sitting nearfield, there can be more energy in
reflections than directed.... guess what reflected energy does to
timing? "
Wonderful methodology discussed here for those who wish to maximize mediocre performance of an audio system. It won't approach upper end performance, but one can always pretend they have obtained it.
I am dealing with this now. I have a dedicated theater room. B&W CM8 s2 front LR and C, 2 B&W ASW 610, B&W DS3 in SR LR, B&W CWM663 S LR, B&W CCM663 in the ceiling. Denon AVR X5200W. Room is basically 200sqft and rectangular. 188” long x 135” tall x 135” wide. Thick carpet floors, and leather theater seating. Walls and ceilings are Sheetrock.
I am looking at GIK because they are recommended here, their product is quality, and pricing is reasonable.
I Have $1,500 to spend on Acoustics right now. GIK is recommending all 244 on side walls, and Monster Bass Traps rear walls. To start. Next phase will be front wall and ceilings.
i am worried the room will be like a black hole for sound. I would like to add some Scatter Plates now. I was thinking 2 on the side walls (1 on each side rear), and 1-3 on the back wall. There will be 5 total panels on the rear wall.
douglas_schroeder Wonderful methodology discussed here for those who wish to maximize mediocre performance of an audio system. It won’t approach upper end performance, but one can always pretend they have obtained it.
If I have the right data sheets, the GIK monster bass trips will be pretty useless for your two primary modes, which is usually the problem with bass traps. To work at the deepest modes they need to be huge.
Not good at guessing your nomenclature, so can you explain "SR LR".
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
