There's a lot more bass in a 6.5" driver than most of you think

What is your definition of "steady state measurements"?

I’m using Dr. Toole’s, which is clear from his contrast with time-gated measurements.

Please note, this paper is from 2015, what changed since then in the area we are discussing?

My past experience in motion picture auditoriums goes back decades. I’m just utterly surprised RTAs are still used in a theater at all.

He discounts the claims made by the proponents of so called "room EQ". And the inadequacy of "room" bass traps is self evident.

You are missing the entire context of his paper. His paper is about how to set EQ, whether to use reference or house curves and if so why and how we could validate them. Essentially he’s asking how we get to neutral. He doesn’t say we can’t fix room modes.

It does not address small room bass modes, which are a catastrophic attack on anything like neutral. Again, others have covered this directly and precisely. He’s not talking about that at all.

His point if I may be allowed to paraphrase the good doctor:

"We don’t have a very good way of understanding how the ear brain mechanism perceives complex sound, so the idea of using either steady state or gated measurements to set the color is laughable."  The last part I think modern systems have started to get a little better at, at least for the bass and room gain, but as I said, it's basically personal taste converted to DSP code.

And again, I agree with everything he said. He’s brilliant and correct, and attempting to claim he discounts the use of bass traps, or EQ to fix problems is not in this paper. In fact, he’s asking HOW to use EQ.

And I want to let go of this subject with another point:

The multiple sound problems Toole is addressing in this paper is going to be exactly the same with a swarm.

Best,


Erik

Apparently we read different papers from two different universes, each with its own laws of physics. In your universe the definitions of physical states (eg. "steady state") follow circular logic. Let’s leave it there. As a parting note: "room EQ" makes poor systems sound better above Schroeder frequency, in the listening spot, by acting as an ersatz speaker correction technique. It does not improve systems designed properly from the start. That’s how it works in my universe anyway. Toole never really studied distributed bass, he left it to Welti. Geddes had the last word though. He also allowed bass EQ in some circumstances and so do I after him.
www.gedlee.com

Apparently we read different papers from two different universes, each with its own laws of physics. In your universe the definitions of physical states (eg. "steady state") follow circular logic.

@pirad

I’m not feeling very charitable. Did you not understand how Toole used the term? That may explain where your reading went awry. Right up at the top of the paper.

As a parting note: "room EQ" makes poor systems sound better in the listening spot by acting as an ersatz speaker correction technique.

Man, you really can’t read context can you? Like, at all. Toole writes a paper about how hard it is to judge a room response and you claim it proves vaccines cause autism, but later, you claim Toole never said anything.

Toole never really studied distributed bass, he left it to Welti. Geddes had the last word though.

So, you are bringing up Toole as your authority to prove Toole said you can’t fix bass problems .... but he didn’t really study distributed systems, so he couldn’t know, and therefore your use of the paper was to.... blow smoke.

Here, I answered fully this issue in another thread.


I used to work in motion picture equipment industry, including design, installation and set up of some of the best sounding motion picture audio gear in the world. I also make my own loudspeakers and do my own room EQ.

My views are pretty much the same as those posted by JL Audio, though as I posted elsewhere, I disagree with them in some nuanced ways:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/me-vs-jl-audio-an-open-discussion?highlight=me%2Bvs%2Bjl%2Bau...

The problem you’re having rooze, and the mistake you’re making, is the same one I made and everyone makes and that’s following the conventional wisdom, because the conventional wisdom is WRONG! The conventional wisdom is based on the idea that because sound is waves and bass is waves then bass must be the same as midrange and treble. When its not.

That’s not the conventional wisdom, and not what I’ve seen anyone propose. The general solution, as written by and accepted by professional acousticians and installers, for getting deep bass in a room with moderate spend is bass traps + EQ.


http://ethanwiner.com/basstrap_myths.htm


My views and recommendations are also largely in line with what GIK Acoustics would recommend, so please, contact them directly and ask.

https://www.gikacoustics.com/

If you have lots of room, time and money, get more subs, and a custom room. Otherwise, I stand by my advice of using a DSP based solution along with appropriate room treatment and question your judgement and qualifications.

Best,

Erik

You write in your comments to Toole:
"It’s 2020, who on earth uses steady state measurements?? "

Toole does not give a definition of "steady state" in this paper, the readers learn it in EE101. Lacking that , some believe it is better to negate a simple concept like that because it sounds stale in 2020. The rest is just a consequence.