CHANGSTAR: Audiophile Headphone Reviews and Early 90s Style BBS
Lobby => DIY => Topic started by: Marvey on March 06, 2013, 12:51:24 AM
-
I believe it was someone from Head-Fi a few years ago said (I am paraphrasing) that headphones are awesome because we can get the sound quality equivalent of a $40,000 speaker system for a tenth of that. Considering how much headphone pricing has escalated...
I call BS on that.
I got seriously into headphones after my second child was born, and how much I have forgotten about speakers!
This modest setup ($500 speaker kit, Crest CA-2 power amp [$500 ebay], Schiit Mjolnir as pre $750, Schiit Gungir $750) beats the crap out of any headphone rig for me. It's not finished yet as I need to add a supertweeter and will try to integrate a subwoofer (I know REL's secrets.) It does some things worse than TOTL headphones, but it also does some things better. It sounds great at low volumes for that 2am magic hour listening. And low volume means I won't wake up the rest of the family.
I strongly encourage everyone to quit this HF mickey mouse shit, get rid of (or augment) their headphones, and start building easy speaker kits (of any sort).
-
:-00 BLASPHEMY!!!! :-00
(http://cdn.head-fi.org/3/38/3833cf6d_yo-dawg-at-first-i-was-like.jpeg)
NOTE: Purrin speaks truth. :)p1
-
Those speakers look kinda familiar...
(http://blogs.sundaymercury.net/weirdscience/assets_c/2009/06/simpsons-alien-thumb-450x337.jpg)
-
Actually, if you recall how truly awful most $40K speaker systems can sound, it's not that bad an argument.
I think the better argument is that relatively accurate and enjoyable performance can be had for modest sums if you choose wisely. Chasing the dragon is a whole other phenomenon which can be just as bad if not worse in the speaker world.
-
I'd take my 400 dollar psb rig over many headphones 9 times out of 10. Ironically, I've begun to take a liking to headphone presentation of soundstage. There's actually times where it's cool to have the sound envelop you.
I certainly never agree when people say headphones can provide more detail or speed than speakers per price. I find the right speakers to separate different tones and timbres in busy passages very well.
-
The HD800 is the only headphone which has better detail than a good speaker. Stats are the only headphones faster than good dynamic speakers, and even then they have issues.
-
Btw are those massive bass ports at the bottom of your towers? They remind me a little of Atlantic Technology's HPAS tower speakers.
-
HD800s have ruined me for speakers. I just can't do their soundstage anymore. Listened to a WTL Amadeus -> Leben 300 -> Harbeth 5 setup for like 4 hours Saturday night and only on one track out of all of those did the soundstage somehow materialize into something as good or better than the HD800. The other tracks were just bad.
Since I feel I'm pretty much done in headphone land with picking up the GS-X and X-Sabre lately, I might look at those kit speakers for a fun project.
-
i always found speakers overall better value than headphones in my experience. but of course people thought i was nuts as usual but i don't know really. i love both. just currently in most situations since i had to move i been using headphones primary for music cause i hate wall reflections and just drives me crazy(that's why my hair is way it is).
but anax does have a point as well. lot of speaker systems tend to sound not too stellar. there is good options at very modest prices but then again ''modest'' is dependable on the individual.
speakers are also harder understanding than headphones cause there is lot more to learn to get most out of your speaker system then headphone system. i know one of the most misunderstood and dumbfound topics when coming to speakers is involving both speaker and room acoustics which i think are very important personally.
-
With the ever-escalating prices of TOTL's, headphones are definitely much less of a value proposition than they once were.
However, there are some things great headphones do that I've found even great speakers have a hard time with (speed of Stax, low level detail of the HD800 as examples you pointed out) and there is so much less that goes into setting up a listening session with headphones. You put them on your head and that's it. I daresay headphone listeners spend more time actually listening to music than speaker users. Its just inconvenient most of the time.
Just spent the last couple hours listening to speakers though, and it was very experiential and enveloping. Headphones can have a hard time with that as its pumping the music straight into your ears.
-
Why settle. Get both.
-
HD800s have ruined me for speakers. I just can't do their soundstage anymore. Listened to a WTL Amadeus -> Leben 300 -> Harbeth 5 setup for like 4 hours Saturday night and only on one track out of all of those did the soundstage somehow materialize into something as good or better than the HD800. The other tracks were just bad.
Since I feel I'm pretty much done in headphone land with picking up the GS-X and X-Sabre lately, I might look at those kit speakers for a fun project.
Well, to be fair, those Harbeths suck.
The stage the speakers throw also depends on how they're set up, and even dealers have trouble with this at meets/shows so I wouldn't trust a new owner to really know how to maximize their potential in an unfamiliar environment.
-
Listened to a WTL Amadeus -> Leben 300 -> Harbeth 5 setup
Not sure you want to base your entire opinion on that setup. I mean, it is supposed to be all "musical" and whatever, but I wouldn't really call anything that setup does faithful to the recording. Also, not to speak ill, but travis is a bit of a brand nerd, his logo recognition trumps his ears.
-
It is also not suggested to take anything your dealer says as gospel. Just because a setup is the best the dealer has doesn't mean its good.
-
Not basing it only on his rig, but my own speakers, which I used to think sounded good until I got the HD800. Now they are practically impossible to enjoy because of their soundstage. They aren't anything special, actually cost me about the same as my HD800, but I did used to enjoy them so something is afoot.
-
Well.. headphones are miniaturized speakers are they not? And the only advantage they have is that you're almost always dead centre.. at the right spot.
I'm using some really old AudioPro floorstanders to a modest NAD amp.
Sounds better than most headphones I've heard... It's just.. speakers are too damn loud, I'm not comfortable with my neighbors listening to my Pr0n
-
That kit ended up looking really nice, nice job.
Regarding soundstage, those Harbeths must be awful, or set up really awfully? The HD800's staging/imaging did not hold a candle to what I had going here in that regard (before selling my Invicta yesterday). Agree with the inner level detail thing though.
Also, it probably takes a little while to get used to having the music come from in front of you, rather than behind you (or next to your face).
-
I need to make it out to one of these shows one day to listen to some nice speaker setups. I grew up listening to music primarily on headphones (other than the car on the long commute to school, but it's hard to fully immerse yourself in music while explaining to your mom why Wu-Tang can be considered poetry), so headphones sound more natural to me. I even prefer the enveloping experience of cheap headphones (like the Sony V6 that I listened to for a decade) than going to live concerts, in terms of purely digesting music.
I once went with my co-worker to the local hi-fi shop when he was shopping for speakers, and listened to a few setups (some Martin Logan electrostats up to some 100K/pair rig). Pretty impressive sounding, but I'd prefer the presentation of my headphones on most nights probably. Then again, really hard to say unless I live with a set of great speakers for a while.
Not saying one is better than the other, but I can see where Maxvla's coming from in saying he prefers the presentation of headphones.
-
That kit ended up looking really nice, nice job.
Regarding soundstage, those Harbeths must be awful, or set up really awfully? The HD800's staging/imaging did not hold a candle to what I had going here in that regard (before selling my Invicta yesterday). Agree with the inner level detail thing though.
Also, it probably takes a little while to get used to having the music come from in front of you, rather than behind you (or next to your face).
Yes, I think a lot of it is the sound coming from in front of me. With the HD800s I feel like the sound is all around me like I am there, not just being played towards. Going to fire up my speaker rig tonight for the first time in months and see what I can pull from it.
-
HD800s have ruined me for speakers. I just can't do their soundstage anymore. Listened to a WTL Amadeus -> Leben 300 -> Harbeth 5 setup for like 4 hours S
Well, to be fair, those Harbeths suck.
The stage the speakers throw also depends on how they're set up, and even dealers have trouble with this at meets/shows so I wouldn't trust a new owner to really know how to maximize their potential in an unfamiliar environment.
That setup is "kind of like OK" -> "the suck" -> "the suck". BTW most speakers are the suck. Many of them are compromised too much for the wife acceptance factor. Setting up speakers requires serious compromises. For example, have you guys noticed how far off the back wall my Bk-16s are placed. Also, the left boundary for the left speaker requires me to dial in -1db on the left channel for proper center imaging. I'm also playing around with the internal stuffing - so far not yet to my satisfaction. I will probably need to put a bass trap of some sort in left corner. There is actually a ottoman cushion along the left wall (not seen in picture). Lots of little stuff... I'll eventually be resorting to digital PEQ.
I'm looking forward to slapping my laptop on the coffee table and working from there with the band in a stage in front of me and the vocalist in the center, not enveloping around the universe around my head.
BTW, there is of course an immense value proposition for DIY speakers.
-
Regarding soundstage, those Harbeths must be awful, or set up really awfully? The HD800's staging/imaging did not hold a candle to what I had going here in that regard (before selling my Invicta yesterday). Agree with the inner level detail thing though.
Also, it probably takes a little while to get used to having the music come from in front of you, rather than behind you (or next to your face).
What's your 800 rig again?
-
my high WAF factor compromise at the gf's place has been Sunfire CRM-2 ribbons on CRM-stands, unobtrusive amplification, and an outlaw LFM-1 EX that doubles as a side table :(
Unlike my place, there's no treatments in the room and it sounds only okay. I had to ditch my custom woofers and speakers in compromise.
It's funny, no matter what I've heard from both sides of the argument, the closest I've ever heard to "being there" has been a pair of Dennis Murphy's Philharmonic 3s in a well treated room on a pro amp. I've never heard imaging from a setup (stereo no less!!!) that has come close. I still get chills. I had the opportunity to pop in MTT and the SF Symphony performing Mahler's 6th and I swear to god it sounded as close to being there as I've ever heard it (having had the pleasure of hearing them perform in person).
If they weren't ugly as sin and I wouldn't be compromising my relationship, I'd be living with those suckers happily.
-
Funny you mention that, I was just reading about some Murphys a few days ago.
-
glad you're enjoying the Fostex FR experience purrin. i love my modest uFonken^2 with a pair of FF85K per side for 'puter-fi. they're reflex loaded in a smaller cab and not horn loaded so bass is lacking, but feck all hell, the mid-range is lovely. no super tweets needed with this 3" driver IMO. the speaks are driven by a DIY B1/F5. better than HPs, technically speaking, yes in most regards, but i really like the intimate experience of HPs. i don't really prefer one over the other.
just slap a few coats of tung oil in the cabs after a bit of sanding and call it good.
-
With the ever-escalating prices of TOTL's, headphones are definitely much less of a value proposition than they once were.
However, there are some things great headphones do that I've found even great speakers have a hard time with (speed of Stax, low level detail of the HD800 as examples you pointed out) and there is so much less that goes into setting up a listening session with headphones. You put them on your head and that's it. I daresay headphone listeners spend more time actually listening to music than speaker users. Its just inconvenient most of the time.
Just spent the last couple hours listening to speakers though, and it was very experiential and enveloping. Headphones can have a hard time with that as its pumping the music straight into your ears.
This. +1
-
I plan on engineering high quality speakers (whatever the fuck that means) and placing them inside a pocket universe that will, from the outside, resemble a pair of Portapros covered in lilac-purple nail polish.
-
Funny you mention that, I was just reading about some Murphys a few days ago.
If you can, do your damndest to audition a pair. I've been a believer since I heard the Salk Songtowers. The man knows crossovers like an artist.
-
[size=78%]just slap a few coats of tung oil in the cabs after a bit of sanding and call it good. [/size]
Yup, I've got a can of it and 400grit sandpaper. I will probably be doing it the hard way. Tung-oil, sand, wait. x2. x3. x4.
BTW, I recall you mentioning the uFonkens. Must have planted a subliminal seed.
-
Hooked up the spare stuff with the speaker rig, so CD player and Gungnir, and still was not feeling it. Decided to throw the X-Sabre in to see if anything changed, and boy did it. Soundstage opened right up. I still lack a lot of detail with my Paradigm Studio 40s but this is actually pretty nice. With the smoothness yet still detailed sound it is very relaxing, I actually fell asleep accidently. Still a bit tired from this weekend, and haven't helped myself by staying up really late so it wasn't unexpected.
I could listen to this setup a lot more.
-
Nice work Purrin. I wasn't always a fan of wide-banders, but I've come around. They have many of the upsides of horns without the massive coloration and "cupped hands" sound that ruins most horns for me.
Getting the most out of speakers pretty much requires at least a semi-dedicated listening space. You need to be able to allocate at least 2-3 feet of space between the speaker and the front and side walls, and some space behind the listening position is also a big plus. Then you need to start dealing with the acoustics, and the smaller the space, generally the worse problems you'll have there, with swings in response that can be +/- 10dB or more. Suckouts that usually occur around 50-70Hz can completely vaporize response in that region entirely.
Take a really good speaker though like an OBX-RW and put it in a proper room, and no headphone will be able to come within a mile. Soundstage and headstage are two different things. At their best, headphones sound like monitors in a small space. At their best, speakers sound like you have your own private concert.
Harbeths are massively overrated buzz boxes. Feh.
-
Where are these rooms that cause 10 dB swings in response? Have you actually ever heard that? Or do i have invisible acoustic angels following me everywhere? Or do audiophiles all live in little cement basements with no furniture? 10dB is huge.
-
Obviously you guys haven't heard the ATH-M50! FTW!
Besides, how can you collect like 30 speakers?
I have to agree that space and circumstance plays a part in my personal decisions.
My previous place was pretty small so headphones were a great compromise to get great sound without taking over my space. I kept a very small speaker set up that doubled as my entertainment system.
Now with a dedicated listening room I have had a chance to spread out. I picked up some modest monitors and I am really enjoying getting the sound out of my head. My wife and I spend a bunch of time lounging and reading while I spin vinyl. Unfortunately this assignment is temporary, so I don't want to get too crazy with investing in a speaker system that may or may not fit in whatever place we get when we return the US.
When I return I think I'll fall into that camp that does both... The DIY kit road looks really fun.
-
Two to four powered monitors aptly placed with specific volume settings for the best combination of stereo and detail and I'm done with speakers. A big spacious speaker set up doesn't appeal to me. Good monitors aren't always expensive...
I'll always have headphones though. I need something that can isolate me from my surroundings.
-
Harbeths are massively overrated buzz boxes. Feh.
I don't agree. I find Harbeth's to be really dependent on room/placement/and the system behind them. I heard the same Harbeth speakers driven by different components in different rooms at the same store and the other system was not much better than my hd600 but the pair at the other room was amazing! I mean they would easily qualify to be in the top 5 best in sound at a Las Vegas CES.
-
The two are... very different experiences, it's very similar to saying that you have an ipad (portable computer) and you don't need the Laptop/PC anymore because the ipad is doing everything better.
I find these extremists to be... completely destructive of everything they have seen and will encounter in their paths. :)p3
I haven't bought any headphone gear for a while now and definitely not getting anymore speakers because of my plans to go living in Hong Kong again.
-
What's your 800 rig again?
Well it *was* Zodiac > F3 > HD800. It was my favorite headphone, second only to the Paradox. (Just priorities)
About staging I see it exactly as Dave said, with headphones the best you can hope for (and the best is the HD800 in this regard) is a stage with an imaging space the size of...an acoustic afro*. With a well set up speaker/room it can sound like armageddon, or like what ascension must have felt (and sounded) like, depending on what you're listening to. It's complete and enveloping.
Where are these rooms that cause 10 dB swings in response? Have you actually ever heard that? Or do i have invisible acoustic angels following me everywhere? Or do audiophiles all live in little cement basements with no furniture? 10dB is huge.
There are these marketing videos on youtube for acoustic panels that show measurements** with significant suck outs, etc, pretty big swings from what I recall. They also have before/after recordings of the space on these same vids, and it's quite easy to tell how much of a difference smoothening the response makes after you add the panels. These are normal rooms by the way with furniture and real world problems.
*Albeit a big afro.
**By the way I understand that the measurements can be purposefully convenient.
-
Yeah, 10dB is really nothing out of the ordinary for a regular room. You need serious work to damp the low frequency modes. Once you're in the midrange, the proportion of direct and reverberated field is going to also affect the perceived response, 5dB is absolutely in the realm of possibilities.
I'm also of the opinion it is stupid to claim either one is better than the other. But at a given price point it does seem cheaper to get to the top with headphones. Trying to bring up the arguments of imaging / chest impact is silly, it's all a question of habits and what you are after. In my case, I find most speaker rigs I get a chance to listen to (and it goes to the very high end in Tokyo) plain suck in comparison of what my headphone rig brings me (the speed, the articulation, the precise layering).
Headphone systems are getting more and more expensive by the year and loosing of their proposition value but still, you can't just ignore the fact it takes a whole lot of effort to optimize a speaker rig in a way it can sound as faithful as a good headphone rig does.
-
it's all a question of habits and what you are after.
sactly
-
My speaker setup's fairly modest (Conductor's DAC -> Some Yamaha Receiver -> PSB Imagine Mini's + SudSeries 1), but I have to admit it has better timbre than most headphone setups I could throw together. I generally find myself preferring the more immersive aspects of headphone listening, though. And am often too self-conscious of people hearing what I'm listening to.
-Edit-
I also feel like I'd be compelled to just get ridiculously high end stuff if I ever really got into speakers and it would probably be a lot more expensive (including everything but the computer) than the $10,250 (I think?) headphone setup I'll be looking at soon. Iuno, this hobby isn't a rational thing for me.
-
Headphones? How about IEMs? :)p15
Of course both are fiddly to match your personal head transfer function (and in IEMs, pinna and ear canal response), and even then some virtualization (e.g. crossfeed) is a must for correct soundstaging...
-
Marv let us know when the bug hits to upgrade to Lowther field coils :&
-
With the ever-escalating prices of TOTL's, headphones are definitely much less of a value proposition than they once were.
However, there are some things great headphones do that I've found even great speakers have a hard time with (speed of Stax, low level detail of the HD800 as examples you pointed out) and there is so much less that goes into setting up a listening session with headphones. You put them on your head and that's it. I daresay headphone listeners spend more time actually listening to music than speaker users. Its just inconvenient most of the time.
Just spent the last couple hours listening to speakers though, and it was very experiential and enveloping. Headphones can have a hard time with that as its pumping the music straight into your ears.
If I may offer another view point, I would question the number of headphone users actually listening to music. Headphones are so convenient that people (I used to be guilty of this) put them on and do other things, most commonly surf the web.
Sometimes it's worth it for music to be difficult to listen to. Like it's taking the time preping/cooking a good meal opposed to the Papa John's drive through.
-
I heard Purrin's system last night.
I must admit, it's not the most accurate or neutral system but DAMN...it's a fun sounding rig. MY idea of proper coloring on a system. I want to build these speakers too. :)
-
I'm also of the opinion it is stupid to claim either one is better than the other...
...you can't just ignore the fact it takes a whole lot of effort to optimize a speaker rig in a way it can sound as faithful as a good headphone rig does.
Sorry that part of the thread has degenerated into this argument of headphones vs. speakers.
I think some people took my post a little bit too personally. Although my first post was provocative, the intent was for really for people to open their eyes and at least try something else other than headphones (Dammit, haven't you guys figured out my writing style by now! Geez!) A lot of the younger generation have not been exposed to speakers - good speakers - and DIY at that, which has an immense value proposition and allows one to pursue a design tailored to someone's priorities.
I could really give a rat's ass how many high cost speakers there are at Tokyo. LFF, analmort, ultrabike + others, and I get to hear a lot of high cost speakers here at the various shows at least once a year. Out of several dozens, maybe two or three we would consider high-end (and each of those had drivers I could identify, and thus build myself). The biggest, most expensive speaker I've heard, a Focal monstrosity, loved by TAS, and placed in a HUGE room, was incredibly mediocre.
I call BS on the argument that speakers require "a whole lot of effort to optimize." That's a fucking cop-out for lazy people people - and this site was never meant for lazy people. I see Head-Fi'ers (this includes myself) having spent a lot more energy dealing the with angst associated with dwelling on headphone selection, component synergies, tubes, cables, etc. - that is how to spend their next $3300 or whatever. All this neurotic energy and money could go into something much more worthwhile... learning about sound and how its reproduced.
I do agree that if and only if your priorities are articulation and layering, there's really no need to pursue speakers as a value proposition when you have STAX earphones. Then again, a pair of Quads isn't that much more than an SR009.
-
With the ever-escalating prices of TOTL's, headphones are definitely much less of a value proposition than they once were.
However, there are some things great headphones do that I've found even great speakers have a hard time with (speed of Stax, low level detail of the HD800 as examples you pointed out) and there is so much less that goes into setting up a listening session with headphones. You put them on your head and that's it. I daresay headphone listeners spend more time actually listening to music than speaker users. Its just inconvenient most of the time.
Just spent the last couple hours listening to speakers though, and it was very experiential and enveloping. Headphones can have a hard time with that as its pumping the music straight into your ears.
If I may offer another view point, I would question the number of headphone users actually listening to music. Headphones are so convenient that people (I used to be guilty of this) put them on and do other things, most commonly surf the web.
Sometimes it's worth it for music to be difficult to listen to. Like it's taking the time preping/cooking a good meal opposed to the Papa John's drive through.
I think all headphone users to listen to music at some point during their headphone listening, its a question of how much of their music time is spent multi-tasking and how much they're focused on music at that point. Even if you were to excise multi-tasking time as not counting (something that may or may not be fair, as some people listen to music while multi-tasking as background noise/energy, some really do listen even if their central focus is on something else) there is still a lot of dedicated time headphone listeners listen when speaker listeners would not. Nighttime in apartments or with kids, when the house is crazy with activity (unless you have a dedicated listening room), if the chore of setting up in the listening room is almost enough to discourage you from taking the trouble because you just want to listen to a song or two, in transit if using public transit... I don't have any statistics on trends but I could definitely say for myself that I end up doing more real listening with my JH13's and HP-1's than I ever will with my speaker rig (at least before retirement).
If this is too OT someone can feel free to split this to a different thread.
-
I heard Purrin's system last night.
I must admit, it's not the most accurate or neutral system but DAMN...it's a fun sounding rig. MY idea of proper coloring on a system. I want to build these speakers too. :)
Yeah, just wait until I measure it and apply digital PEQ.
-
I would have to say that I have applied just as much neurosis to setting up my listening room as I have over my entire headphone career. Now granted, I am also soundproofing the space for drums(practice and hopefully some recording)
I think the key is just focus. You can spend your time DIY'ing or or you can spend it obsessing on what other people think is "the best." One is more work, but more rewarding. I suppose it is comparable to the difference between eating healthy, exercising, and getting enough rest vs relying on drugs, alcohol and partying to de-stress.
I agree with the original premise. Headphones are no longer the cheaper, easier route to great sound. It's debatable, but I would argue that once upon a time that was more true than it is today.
-
Then again... I was sitting on the couch listening to a new album on the speakers and it paled in comparison to how good it sounded on my headphone rig last night. It's not as simple as just plugging some speakers in and you're good to go! :-Z
-
Then again... I was sitting on the couch listening to a new album on the speakers and it paled in comparison to how good it sounded on my headphone rig last night. It's not as simple as just plugging some speakers in and you're good to go! :-Z
This ^
I've had James Blake's album for a while now and have tried to enjoy it, but just really do not like it. Popped it into my speaker rig last night and actually did enjoy it. Then put in BT's These Hopeful Machines which I love on headphones and it was just meh on my speakers.
-
Not my fault you have a shitty speaker rig. Just stick with headphones and continue to upgrade DACs and amps. You will be better off.
-
I've had James Blake's album for a while now and have tried to enjoy it, but just really do not like it. Popped it into my speaker rig last night and actually did enjoy it. Then put in BT's These Hopeful Machines which I love on headphones and it was just meh on my speakers.
This is beyond strange to me, and symptomatic of someone listening to their gear more than listening to music. It's the same music regardless. I can see preferring one over the other, but to not enjoy it on headphones and then enjoy it on speakers, when you're listening to the exact same recording is a bit extreme.
-
They are just different. If speakers are good on one track and then "meh" on another, then there is probably something something seriously wrong with those speakers.
-
I've had James Blake's album for a while now and have tried to enjoy it, but just really do not like it. Popped it into my speaker rig last night and actually did enjoy it. Then put in BT's These Hopeful Machines which I love on headphones and it was just meh on my speakers.
This is beyond strange to me, and symptomatic of someone listening to their gear more than listening to music. It's the same music regardless. I can see preferring one over the other, but to not enjoy it on headphones and then enjoy it on speakers, when you're listening to the exact same recording is a bit extreme.
Assuming you've heard James Blake's album, you'll know that the slightly out of time left and right voices can be really distracting on headphones. On speakers the sound is coming from far enough away that the effect is minimized, but still present. I can enjoy it like that. It's almost as if I need more time from the emission of sound to my ears to process it. With the BT album, I want to be IN the music so it starting from several feet away just isn't immersive enough.
@ purrin it really has nothing to do with the quality of my speakers.
-
Not my point... I wasn't trying to say it was track/genre/album dependent, I was just saying my speakers are probably pretty shitty and not set up well for the room they are in. I still love listening to them, but I've spent more time getting my headphones sounding right and it's evident. I need to give a little love to the speaker set up.
But there is some truth that it's probably easier to buy a complete headphone set up that is "proven", plug it all together and you're "good to go". All you need is a check book. Since every room is more or less different I think setting up speakers, even a simple set up, takes a little more work/skill. Or not, I really know jack shit about speakers.
FWIW, I think that James Blake album is unlistenable on a crap system. I tried listening to it in the car and couldn't take it... I find it really engaging on my home systems. Just say'n.
-
I've had James Blake's album for a while now and have tried to enjoy it, but just really do not like it. Popped it into my speaker rig last night and actually did enjoy it. Then put in BT's These Hopeful Machines which I love on headphones and it was just meh on my speakers.
This is beyond strange to me, and symptomatic of someone listening to their gear more than listening to music. It's the same music regardless. I can see preferring one over the other, but to not enjoy it on headphones and then enjoy it on speakers, when you're listening to the exact same recording is a bit extreme.
Assuming you've heard James Blake's album, you'll know that the slightly out of time left and right voices can be really distracting on headphones. On speakers the sound is coming from far enough away that the effect is minimized, but still present. I can enjoy it like that. It's almost as if I need more time from the emission of sound to my ears to process it. With the BT album, I want to be IN the music so it starting from several feet away just isn't immersive enough.
@ purrin it really has nothing to do with the quality of my speakers.
Word. I can see where you're coming from if I remind myself that you're only speaking on subjective experience rather than quality of the music. I've enjoyed that album on my headphones, speakers and even laptop speakers playing a 192k web stream. But I agree that they're much different experiences.
Funny you used the James Blake example. My girlfriend didn't like his album at all, and tried to get into it. She listened mostly on her laptop speakers and in the car. I dragged her to see him at the Fillmore where they set up huge subwoofers -- literally the glasses on the back bar were clinking on the bass drop from Limit To Your Love, and you can feel the room shaking under your feet. She loved it.
-
Assuming you've heard James Blake's album, you'll know that the slightly out of time left and right voices can be really distracting on headphones. On speakers the sound is coming from far enough away that the effect is minimized, but still present. I can enjoy it like that. It's almost as if I need more time from the emission of sound to my ears to process it. With the BT album, I want to be IN the music so it starting from several feet away just isn't immersive enough.
@ purrin it really has nothing to do with the quality of my speakers.
o i c. It's obvious you need surround sound. Not only will this immerse you in the environment. You will get amazing localization.
-
Where are these rooms that cause 10 dB swings in response? Have you actually ever heard that? Or do i have invisible acoustic angels following me everywhere? Or do audiophiles all live in little cement basements with no furniture? 10dB is huge.
Actually, for an untreated room, 10dB is pretty run of the mill. I've seen it happen in my old office, which was a nightmare to work with. Small and squarish in shape is a 1-2 punch for bad acoustics. There was a suckout at right around 62Hz where response dropped off the face of the earth. Subwoofer placement was pretty much impossible.
Not everyone will have to go to this extent to get a good sounding room, but it certainly helps. Particularly in a space that's this narrow.
(http://i989.photobucket.com/albums/af12/notrace_photo/RoomfromchairextendedMarch2012.jpg)
(http://i989.photobucket.com/albums/af12/notrace_photo/RevisedRearRoomAugust2012.jpg)
-
i agree it helps a lot. also i think the acoustic stuff you see online and studio pictures is more for aesthetic reasoning as well. you can simply get your own supplies at local home dept. roxul rockwool is very good but only problem i have with mineral wool is it is not flexible material. it is denser than fiberglass though per R unit. it's very easy to make panels and shouldn't cost too much at all cause it's very easy to eliminate high and midrange frequency reflections. it's usually from mid-bass to sub-bass due to the wave lengths that can be a pain.
my old room before i moved i had it really,really dead sounding. you were able to actually hear very easily what ''silence'' sounds like. when i moved and in current room with no treatment it doesn't sound bad at all but i can still hear some reflections(i guess you call them peaks. i don't know). currently all i'm using is heavy ass cinder blocks as stands and it alone helped a good deal eliminating standing waves. i have my speakers 3ft away as well from the walls(i always found it best to do atleast 2 1/2-3ft away in my experience).
-
Not sure if anyone here knows luvdunhill, but here are his corner loaded Lowther DX4's driven by F4 monoblocks. I imagine they sound good.
-
And that's a good example of how we can make the room work on our behalf. There's no need to go apeshit on dedicated treatments for a "Googleli" factor. A lot of regular stuff in the house can be used to great effect.
-
Yeah pretty much eliminated the need for any bass traps :)p1
-
...Not everyone will have to go to this extent to get a good sounding room, but it certainly helps. Particularly in a space that's this narrow. ...
Wow, who's space is that?
I was headed in that direction and I decided to just reverse course and start with minimal. Corner bass traps, first reflections and a ceiling cloud.
Those skyline diffusors look sick though.
EDIT:
Are those (helmholtz?) resonators below the skyline diffusors?
Also, that space probably wasn't that narrow before all the treatment, what are those, like 8"+ traps at the sides of the speakers? Is that for sbir/room modes/both?
-
Wow, who's space is that?
I was headed in that direction and I decided to just reverse course and start with minimal. Corner bass traps, first reflections and a ceiling cloud.
Those skyline diffusors look sick though.
EDIT:
Are those (helmholtz?) resonators below the skyline diffusors?
Also, that space probably wasn't that narrow before all the treatment, what are those, like 8"+ traps at the sides of the speakers? Is that for sbir/room modes/both?
This guy. He started off pretty minimally as well, and that's what I would suggest for most people. Just stuffing a room full of traps can be just as bad as no treatment at all. Some triangle bass traps in the corners and traps at first reflection points can go a long way towards solving most of the problems with a room without requiring buckets of cash. You can follow that up later with a few strategically placed diffiusors on the wall behind the listening position and maybe a skyline or some traps on the ceiling, and that'll pretty much do it.
Audimute's 2" traps start at as little as $25 for a 1'x2' panel, and GIK's 2'x4's are $60. You definitely don't have to spend a lot.
http://www.audioenz.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/11492-Music-from-a-farther-room?s=a5c0f86556ccd74d7b387ceaa0dce9bf (http://www.audioenz.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/11492-Music-from-a-farther-room?s=a5c0f86556ccd74d7b387ceaa0dce9bf)
-
Marv, we come from the same background I believe. I was into speakers for something like 10 years before I went seriously into headphones. I don't pretend to know so much but at least I did design several speakers (some really terrible souding as I recollect) while doing an internship at a small high end audio maker. I work daily on problems involving room acoustics. From this, there's one sure thing: it's a hell lot harder to make a speaker system sound right and there are so many compromises to make in the design.
"Using the room to your advantage" by loading the speaker in the corner. That's another load of bs, you're just exciting the first modes of the room even more strongly, which is required here to get some impression of bass out of typical full range horn loaded drivers. I can't stand full range drivers, the tonal colorations (you invariably get breakup modes right where it hurts (1-5kHz) range. You might like that better than headphones, I think it's just the change of flavor that is attracting you and it will sooner or later get old.
-
A fairly typical room response plot from a smallish room. Again, 10dB or more is nothing out of the ordinary. In the bass region there are MASSIVE swings here, closer to 25dB.
(http://www.audioenz.co.nz/attachment.php?attachmentid=6138&d=1301197609)
-
A fairly typical room response plot from a smallish room. Again, 10dB or more is nothing out of the ordinary. In the bass region there are MASSIVE swings here, closer to 25dB.
(http://www.audioenz.co.nz/attachment.php?attachmentid=6138&d=1301197609)
Yeah. Small rooms are always a problem. Best to place speakers where the room isn't fully enclosed. This requires space of course and would be difficult for most in Europe and Asia where there is higher population density and folks living in tighter living spaces. My advice for people with small enclosed rooms is to use headphones while checking out the latest FOTM portable DAC/amps, or commit suicide, unless they are willing to work really hard to make speakers work.
Bass is always problematic no matter what. However, I would argue that 1/3 - 1/6 octave smoothing be applied as this would be more representative of human hearing acuity. It's impossible for people to detect such sharp dips, i.e. 900, 2k, 6k, etc. with music.
-
With 1/3 octave smoothing:
(http://www.audioenz.co.nz/attachment.php?attachmentid=6139&d=1301197632)
And after repositioning the speakers and listening position:
(http://www.audioenz.co.nz/attachment.php?attachmentid=6311&d=1304317509)
With absorption at the first reflection point:
(http://www.audioenz.co.nz/attachment.php?attachmentid=7329&d=1320550176)
with diffusors at the first reflection point:
(http://www.audioenz.co.nz/attachment.php?attachmentid=7325&d=1320550158)
Common wisdom says you should put traps at first reflection points, but in small rooms with close wall placement, diffusors can work better.
-
A fairly typical room response plot from a smallish room. Again, 10dB or more is nothing out of the ordinary. In the bass region there are MASSIVE swings here, closer to 25dB.
(http://www.audioenz.co.nz/attachment.php?attachmentid=6138&d=1301197609)
Yep. The modal region is the one place where headphones are usually far superior to speakers in room. However, one can fix that by using multiple subwoofers and a suitable controller. Then it's possible to have the bass look like this at the listening position:
(http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/244/sms1frgraphwebsizeod6.jpg)
AND have very low mean spatial variation (MSV, which is what all of the Welti/Devantier work on multisubs at Harman is really about).
What that kind of bass performance sounds like is superior top-to-bottom coherence, slam (which is really an integration thing, not an extension thing or an output thing), and much greater variability in the size of the perceived space. A piano in a living room sounds like a piano in a living room sounds like a piano in a small room. An orchestra (played at realistic volume, at least) sounds like its playing in a large hall.
Any home audio system that does not employ multiple subwoofers and suitable EQ based on in-situ measurements is a low-fidelity system. Period. Doesn't matter if the speakers are some cheap full-range deal or TAD Model Ones.
PS: That room above would work much better, IMO, with very narrow-directivity speakers cross-fired (i.e. aimed to cross a bit ahead of the listening position). That would eliminate the need for the sidewall treatments, and likely increase perceived spaciousness without compromising imaging. Nice job of removing diffractive elements from around the speakers, though.
-
Any home audio system that does not employ multiple subwoofers and suitable EQ based on in-situ measurements is a low-fidelity system. Period. Doesn't matter if the speakers are some cheap full-range deal or TAD Model Ones.
I was with you right up until that - which is a big pile of horseshit. Stereo subs are almost universally better than a single one, but even two subs can often introduce as many problems as they solve when it comes to integration and timing. You can get extremely even, extremely balanced bass response without subwoofers or active EQ, you just need to use targeted bass traps like GIK's Scopus Tuned models instead of broadband absorbers.
-
I do plan on multiple subs. DCX2496 is great as a subwoofer x-over. You can program in time delay and phase to align with your sitting position. Once it's dialed in, it's really scary how good it is.
BTW, I love EQ with the tools available today. Not so much true 10 years ago.
-
I can't stand full range drivers, the tonal colorations (you invariably get breakup modes right where it hurts (1-5kHz) range. You might like that better than headphones, I think it's just the change of flavor that is attracting you and it will sooner or later get old.
(http://topcultured.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/neenerneener.jpg)
http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,833.msg20484.html#msg20484 (http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,833.msg20484.html#msg20484)
-
Any home audio system that does not employ multiple subwoofers and suitable EQ based on in-situ measurements is a low-fidelity system. Period. Doesn't matter if the speakers are some cheap full-range deal or TAD Model Ones.
I was with you right up until that - which is a big pile of horseshit. Stereo subs are almost universally better than a single one, but even two subs can often introduce as many problems as they solve when it comes to integration and timing.
It's "horseshit" when we agree that one sub (remember, I wrote "multisubs + EQ") is bad idea?
But two is usually not much better than one, especially if one is highpassing the mains rather than letting them run. (One reason I much prefer closed box mains to any kind of 4th-or-more order system is that the mains stay monopole, rather than going dipole and unloading below box tuning.) Three is a useful minimum in a room with good LF damping (false lossy walls and such, not pre-packaged room mutilation products shoved against the walls) and mains playing down to the first-mode region (50Hz or so). I'm actually using 5 right now, though two are stands for the mains with and play significantly higher to smooth out the floor-bounce region ("Allison effect"). Alternately, one could think of the setup as two full-range biamped mains and three randomly-distributed subs, all controlled from a miniDSP 10x10HD.
The exception is a nearfield setup. Generally, one can get pretty good bass with one sub and thoughtful EQ. It does fall apart if one moves one's chair a foot, true, because MSV is going to be very high in any system with only one subwoofer. But in a nearfield setup imaging collapses with lateral movement too, so that's just a price to pay for good sound in one spot.
As for integration, that is correct. One needs some skill in integrating them, and the patience to suffer through sometimes seemingly endless tedious measure-adjust something (gain, delays, EQ, etc)-measure loops. I wish there were publicly-available software packages to help, but there aren't. Harman's SFM is not available, and Geddes won't run his software (AFAIK) for people who don't buy his subs.
As for "timing," consider the wavelengths involved, and typical small room dimensions. The science is fairly settled that we don't perceive "timing" down low. We perceive the steady-state frequency response. "Timing" errors in the bass are usually just FR anomalies caused by poor integration. Unfortunately, most of the automated tools out there, because they ping mains and subs separately rather than doing a combined sweep, integrate subs and mains poorly. (Trinnov is the only system that I've ever heard get it right automatically. Even ARC requires post-facto fixes, though it's substantially better than Audyssey.)
You can get extremely even, extremely balanced bass response without subwoofers or active EQ, you just need to use targeted bass traps like GIK's Scopus Tuned models instead of broadband absorbers.
That has never been my experience, except in very, very large rooms.
Also, "Bass traps" are usually too small to do much. A real bass trap is a whole lossy wall, with constrained layer damping. I don't care what brand they are, mind. I care what they do. A good rule of thumb for "bass traps" is that if you can buy them and fairly easily transport them, they're going to be minimally effective in the modal region and below. As your own measurements above show, with a modal region (say, 50-200Hz, though the upper and lower bounds vary with room volume) FR swing of about 13-15dB more than I'd consider "high fidelity."
-
Now you are tempting me with three or more subs. It's good to know of someone who has done it successfully. (I've only read papers, and these were from 10 years ago.) I do find the "endless tedious measure-adjust something measure loops" much more fun than agonizing over which new headphone or portable DAC/amp combination to upgrade or sidegrade to.
-
Now you are tempting me with three or more subs. It's good to know of someone who has done it successfully. (I've only read papers, and these were from 10 years ago.) I do find the "endless tedious measure-adjust something measure loops" much more fun than agonizing over which new headphone or portable DAC/amp combination to upgrade or sidegrade to.
I don't know if it's kosher to post links to other sources here after my blog thing, but you can find more information by searching under the terms "modest multisub system" for an AVS thread about decent result in a temporary apartment setup using three small subs, and also searching for some of Dr. Earl Geddes' stuff on multisubs. Geddes' approach differs from the Harman (Welti/Devantier) approach because his first priority is smooth FR at the listening position with MSV second, whereas Harman's optimization prioritizes minimal MSV with the presumption that the summed low-variation response can be EQ'ed to taste.
I'll have more and better - a fair critique of what I've posted earlier is that the MIC-5/SMS-1 I was using for measurement at the time* is a highly smoothed measurement - measurements on my current/new system up when I, um, finish setting it up. And even then, it won't be "done" because I'm getting new sub cabinets made for two of my five subs for aesthetic reasons. I may also turn my side-surround speaker stands into subwoofers, because I have the DSP and amp channels available to do so without adding new electronics boxes. That should further lower MSV, but bespoke cabinetry is expensive and I haven't yet decided if that's important enough to throw a couple more grand at.
*The SMS-1 is not in the signal chain except for as a source in the "modest multisub" measurements, so ignore any EQ. It WAS in the chain for the above graph. That is the response of three subs with only gain optimization. No EQ at all. That room was, however, just about perfect for bass. Each wall pair (front/back, floor/ceiling, side/side had one wall that was very lossy, and one that was very rigid (brick or concrete). I've never subsequently had a room that well-optimized for bass reproduction. Also, as an unmarried grad student at the time I had extraordinarily wide latitude as to subwoofer placement.
-
Links are fine... especially when they are for the benefit of the muggles.
-
I don't know if it's kosher to post links to other sources here after my blog thing, but you can find more information by searching under the terms "modest multisub system" for an AVS thread about decent result in a temporary apartment setup using three small subs, and also searching for some of Dr. Earl Geddes' stuff on multisubs.
It's fine. I was giving you a hard time when you first signed up. This site is getting more popular and we are getting more and more weirdos signing up. But then again, we are probably a bunch of raving lunatics ourselves.
-
Also, "Bass traps" are usually too small to do much. A real bass trap is a whole lossy wall, with constrained layer damping. I don't care what brand they are, mind. I care what they do. A good rule of thumb for "bass traps" is that if you can buy them and fairly easily transport them, they're going to be minimally effective in the modal region and below. As your own measurements above show, with a modal region (say, 50-200Hz, though the upper and lower bounds vary with room volume) FR swing of about 13-15dB more than I'd consider "high fidelity."
Saying "your system sounds like crap unless it's stuffed full of subs and uses active EQ" is just as much bullshit as the title of this thread. The first measurements were done in a mostly empty, untreated space, and the last ones were done without any targeted bass trapping like the Scopus or Vicoustic's Varibass. In my experience, by far the most problematic frequencies in rooms are in the 50-70Hz region, which is exactly what Varibass goes after. Below that, the Scopus T40 has a center target frequency of 40Hz, though GIK can custom make one to target the exact frequency where the problem is. Obviously when you get below 35Hz waves become exponentially longer and harder to control, although for what I listen to, the need to be perfectly flat from 25Hz-35Hz and the big pile of subwoofers and EQ that would be necessary to achieve that response is questionable at best.
Plenty of people are happy with monitors where output much below 45Hz is basically non existent. I'm not going to tell them that they are listening to a "low fidelity" system.
-
Also, as an unmarried grad student at the time I had extraordinarily wide latitude as to subwoofer placement.
Yeah, I know what you mean. I used big futons (flat on wall or rolled up in a corner) as bass traps once upon a time. I'm sure my wife wouldn't allow such anymore.
-
Saying "your system sounds like crap unless it's stuffed full of subs and uses active EQ" is just as much bullshit as the title of this thread.
As before, you seem to be replying to something other than the text I actually wrote. Something can be "low fidelity" but subjectively enjoyable.
SThe first measurements were done in a mostly empty, untreated space, and the last ones were done without any targeted bass trapping like the Scopus or Vicoustic's Varibass. In my experience, by far the most problematic frequencies in rooms are in the 50-70Hz region, which is exactly what Varibass goes after.
How long are those wavelengths? How big are the name-brand baubles you are using to manipulate them?
The answers are, respectively, more or less "very long" and "not big enough," if you were curious.
Below that, the Scopus T40 has a center target frequency of 40Hz,
Name brands and model names of products don't really matter. Audio is full of products with lots of hype and either little substance or promises that are physically impossible. The "room treatment" (or as I prefer to call it, "room mutilation" because the products are uniformly ugly to behold) sub-industry is no different. All those devices seem to be passive. If they were active devices, they could do something useful at that size. Anyone who's set up multiple subwoofers has observed that at some frequency ranges an active subwoofer actually acts as a sink, lowering the overall energy in the room at that range. Perhaps there is interesting work to do on active bass absorption, though that would still leave the MSV problem unaddressed for those who care about more than one seat.
Obviously when you get below 35Hz waves become exponentially longer and harder to control, although for what I listen to, the need to be perfectly flat from 25Hz-35Hz and the big pile of subwoofers and EQ that would be necessary to achieve that response is questionable at best.
The "big pile" of subwoofers (interesting metaphor but factually incorrect, because to be useful the multiple subwoofers need to be distributed around the room as far away from one another as practiceable; if they are in a "big pile" they sum to effectively one subwoofer) is deployed not to smooth response in the first-mode region (below about 40-50Hz in a "small room"). The first-mode region is best addressed with global EQ for all subs, because the modes are so sparse.
Multisubs only help where the modes are dense enough that they can be excited randomly to smooth out their overall impact, i.e. in the "modal region."
I do, incidentally, share your opinion about the importance of flat-line bass in the first mode region. The reason is simply that just-noticeable differences in sub-bass are much larger than they are an octave or two up. So honestly I do wonder if lots of EQ down low is just to make the person feel better about having a nice graph. If that nice graph is attained by applying lots of boost, it may actually be deleterious because it could rob the bass subsystem of significant power headroom.
Plenty of people are happy with monitors where output much below 45Hz is basically non existent. I'm not going to tell them that they are listening to a "low fidelity" system.
"Happiness" is, of course, out of the scope of "fidelity." People are happy with all sorts of things.
-
Links are fine... especially when they are for the benefit of the muggles.
Well, then:
Two Geddes papers with commentary (linked to my blog rather than his forum, because accessing them on his forum requires registration):. http://seriousaudioblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/two-great-articles-on-multiple.html
Recent talk by Geddes to his local audio club on multisubs (technical difficulties make it hard to follow at times): http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/28637776/highlight/319149
Powerpoint from above presentation: http://www.gedlee.com/downloads/Optimal%20Bass%20Playback%20in%20Small%20Rooms.pptx
Modest multisub thread on AVS that illustrates the sequential calibration process, with some discussion of Harman SFM in the thread: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1340062/measurements-of-a-modest-multisub-setup-in-a-temporary-rental-apartment/0_100
-
Damn you! Now I need to make 3+ subs. I wonder if this will cost me less than an LCD-3?
-
Fascinating stuff :)
I guess I will be content with my low fidelity setup and 'analog' bass traps :)p13
-
As before, you seem to be replying to something other than the text I actually wrote. Something can be "low fidelity" but subjectively enjoyable.
How long are those wavelengths? How big are the name-brand baubles you are using to manipulate them?
The answers are, respectively, more or less "very long" and "not big enough," if you were curious.
The "big pile" of subwoofers (interesting metaphor but factually incorrect, because to be useful the multiple subwoofers need to be distributed around the room as far away from one another as practiceable; if they are in a "big pile" they sum to effectively one subwoofer) is deployed not to smooth response in the first-mode region (below about 40-50Hz in a "small room"). The first-mode region is best addressed with global EQ for all subs, because the modes are so sparse.
You wrote: "Any home audio system that does not employ multiple subwoofers and suitable EQ based on in-situ measurements is a low-fidelity system. Period. Doesn't matter if the speakers are some cheap full-range deal or TAD Model Ones."
That sentence is a big pile of bullshit. That's the text that you wrote, that's what I'm replying to. "does not employ multiple subwoofers and suitable EQ " vastly overestimates the importance of the 25-40Hz region which is actually fairly moderate in overall importance, in the grand scheme of things.
A typical 2" trap stops being effective around the 250Hz region. A 4" trap placed flat on the wall can still manage NRC 1.0+ down to about 150Hz. Putting them in corners with an air gap behind them makes them far more effective, they can manage NRC 2.0+ down to 100Hz, and are still absorbing (0.80) down to about 80Hz. Below that, you really need targeted traps. A standard 8" trap is far more absorptive at around 80hz, but still ineffective below that. Again, targeted traps work differently than traditional broadband absorbers and are much more effective than you seem to think. Whether you think they are "ugly" is completely irrelevant.
I'm really glad you're so in love with your multisub arrangement. To suggest that it's "required" for high-fidelity sound in a room however is a bunch of BULLSHIT.
-
Have the two of you forgotten that there is more to hi-fi than just bass reproduction? I think sometimes audiophiles get so lost examining the texture of tree bark they forget how to look at the forest.
-
Have the two of you forgotten that there is more to hi-fi than just bass reproduction? I think sometimes audiophiles get so lost examining the texture of tree bark they forget how to look at the forest.
That's what I was trying to get at when I said that plenty of people are perfectly happy with monitors that have little to no deep bass extension. DS-21's response was basically "those people are ignorant fucks."
-
I think it comes down to what high-fidelity means. I know many an audiophile who feel that accurate 20Hz-20khz reproduction is a basic tenet of high-fidelity (personally I'm happy with 30Hz-18kHz). Perhaps DS21's statement on "low-fidelity" was a bit too strong or exaggerated. Although what DS21 says makes sense to me from a logic and intuitive level:
- Can't do much with the first room mode anyways other than alter the room, so notch it down with EQ
- Distribute multiple subs throughout the room to even out response (frequency and spatial) irregularities. I'll have actually walked around a room and measured bass SPL levels @ specific frequencies with one sub. It's pretty messed up.
LOL, it's probably cheaper (but more work) to build /x-over/plate amps/subs than buy bass panels which are only marginally effective at lower frequencies. The cost does start adding up over multiple panels.
Now I feel like writing a computer program to see SPL over time at specific frequencies with various sub placements and defined boundaries.
-
Hence we're back square one with headphones! Kidding, I have a feeling my presence in the thread is not appreciated so I will sit back, watch, laugh, and maybe learn a bit about the advances in room acoustics over the past 10 years ;)
-
LOL, it's probably cheaper (but more work) to build /x-over/plate amps/subs than buy bass panels which are only marginally effective at lower frequencies. The cost does start adding up over multiple panels.
If you're building subs, you probably have the skills to build bass panels/traps. I know manufacturers claim their magic material X and what not but there is plenty of DIY data out there for plans :)p5
Personally for me (and I have not listened to these multi-sub systems) I place far more emphasis on midrange tonality than perfect bass response. If you can have both, that's great. I prefer simpler stuff, but I also like tube amps and vinyl so what the hell do I know.
Not to say I'm dismissing it, but if I'm serious about speakers I'm always going to have a dedicated listening room, well proportioned and large.
-
I think it comes down to what high-fidelity means. I know many an audiophile who feel that accurate 20-20k reproduction is a basic tenet of high-fidelity. Perhaps Jay's statement on "low-fidelity" was a bit too strong or exaggerated. Although what Jay says makes sense to me from a logic and intuitive level:
LOL, it's probably cheaper (but more work) to build /x-over/plate amps/subs than buy bass panels which are only marginally effective at lower frequencies. The cost does start adding up over multiple panels.
Perhaps some do, but IMO 20-30 in particular is of marginal importance at best vs FR overall, is very difficult to get perfect, and is not worth spending tons of cash on. If you want to buy a bunch of drivers, boxes, and plate amps or amp/eq combinations and build them all, be my guest. Maybe if you do it 100% DIY it won't cost a fortune. Commercial subs OTOH that are any good will cost you a minimum of about $1000/ea. The big RELs and JL Audios are triple that amount. And you need what, 3? 4? A targeted 10" membrane bass trap will cost you $200-250.
One of the best systems I've heard in recent years was a pair of NOLA Micro Grands in a professionally treated room. The NOLAs are all out of ideas by 35Hz. To call that "low-fi" is idiotic.
-
DS-21 would you mind posting a picture of your setup? I'm curious about the "WAF"
I tried reading your blog, but TBH rather dislike the huge BlogSpot blogs that load the entire website in a single page requiring endless scrolling. I was able to find one picture.
-
If you're building subs, you probably have the skills to build bass panels/traps. I know manufacturers claim their magic material X and what not but there is plenty of DIY data out there for plans :)p5
Personally for me (and I have not listened to these multi-sub systems) I place far more emphasis on midrange tonality than perfect bass response. If you can have both, that's great. I prefer simpler stuff, but I also like tube amps and vinyl so what the hell do I know.
Agreed. Panels aren't hard to make. Audimute makes theirs out of cotton and recycled paper, and anyone with some woodworking skills and math skills can make their own diffusers as well. A 2D type skyline would take a lot of patience, but you could definitely do it. On a list of important factors for me, perfect bass is pretty much at the bottom. If the highs aren't right and if the soundstage isn't enveloping, I get bored, no matter how amazing the bass is. When I was at the Musikverein, I was not thinking "oh man, the bass in here is so flat and awesome!" I was thinking, "oh my god, the voices float out into the room and it's like I can reach out and touch them. I've never heard speakers do this."
-
If you're building subs, you probably have the skills to build bass panels/traps. I know manufacturers claim their magic material X and what not but there is plenty of DIY data out there for plans :)p5
What it comes down to for me is control. I don't feel as confident with DIY bass traps (which aren't effective/practical when things go low) as I do with surgical EQ and two or three DIY subs. Besides I may be able to make end tables out of subs. Wife would kill me with the bass traps.
-
If you're building subs, you probably have the skills to build bass panels/traps. I know manufacturers claim their magic material X and what not but there is plenty of DIY data out there for plans :)p5
What it comes down to for me is control. I don't feel as confident with DIY bass traps (which aren't effective/practical when things go low) as I do with surgical EQ and two or three DIY subs.
I agree the bass traps become less and less effective the lower you go. Was mostly just addressing the cost issue comparing DIY vs commercial :)
-
I'm already pushing it with the mess I've made and having the speakers off the back wall 2 feet.
(http://webpages.charter.net/jdgeisen/BassTraps/P9130149.JPG)
Shit like this is certainly not going to be acceptable to the wife.
-
that roll of TP is all one really needs. perhaps you could fashion some lamp shades ?
-
Agreed. The lighting is a bit peaky, the highlights are blown out and it hurts my eyes. Hard to see the midtones and shaddows. I think a good 4 ply TP mod over the light source should even it out nicely.
-
Now I don't got no fancy learnin', but I'm pork positive that TP is just the upper portion of a paper towel cylinder.
-
And there are no Shakti sticks, that's just not acceptable
(http://i.imgur.com/1uBxRfh.jpg)
-
The Shakti sticks are amateur hour. This is how we do.
(http://www.synergisticresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Acoustic-ART-system-big.jpg)
-
The added subwoofer(s) for bass management is a cool concept. It is really too bad that there always seems to be an accompaniment of zealotry every time "new" ideas are introduced in audiophilia.
I happen to have at least one extra subwoofer sitting around the house...
-
Theoretically, if you're after controlling the response in a free field at a single point, you need a single source. If you're trying to control the response at multiple locations you invariably need more sources.
In a room at low frequency, it's a little different. You need only one subwoofer if it happens to drive all the modes you want to "actively damp" at the location it is placed. At least for the first frequencies, at wavelengths larger than the room dimensions, a single sub should effectively affect the whole room response and it should be pretty darn hard to localize. I know that subjectively, you can sometime feel where the sub is but I suspect these are mistuning effects else side effects like nearby furniture rattle and such.
Now, you might object there is no way to place the sub such as all targetted resonances are excited but a corner of the room should be just fine to attack the first couple of modes in the length of the room. Along the same lines, parametric equalization of a full range speaker pair can yield pretty reasonable results as demonstrated by davebsc.
Note: I'd love to understand where I am wrong, so please feel free to correct!
-
You wrote: "Any home audio system that does not employ multiple subwoofers and suitable EQ based on in-situ measurements is a low-fidelity system. Period. Doesn't matter if the speakers are some cheap full-range deal or TAD Model Ones."
That sentence is a big pile of bullshit. That's the text that you wrote, that's what I'm replying to. "does not employ multiple subwoofers and suitable EQ " vastly overestimates the importance of the 25-40Hz region which is actually fairly moderate in overall importance, in the grand scheme of things.
That is what I wrote, and I stand by it. You do not, however, seem to possess sufficient analytic rigor to properly distinguish "fidelity" from "enjoyment." People can enjoy whatever, and often do enjoy rather low-fidelity music reproduction.
Also, you're just plain wrong when you write that I "overestimate the importance of 25-40Hz," because the only thing I've written about that range is this, in reply #78:
"I do, incidentally, share your opinion about the importance of flat-line bass in the first mode region. ['First mode region' was defined earlier in that post as 'below about 40-50Hz in a 'small room.'] The reason is simply that just-noticeable differences in sub-bass are much larger than they are an octave or two up. So honestly I do wonder if lots of EQ down low is just to make the person feel better about having a nice graph. If that nice graph is attained by applying lots of boost, it may actually be deleterious because it could rob the bass subsystem of significant power headroom."
Multisubs do not help (except by increasing power headroom due to the extra volume displacement) in the first mode region.
The benefit they provide is smoothing the response in the modal region, roughly 50-200Hz give or take depending on the volume of the room. Also, they reduce MSV, which is important for people who care about the sound at multiple seats.
I'm really glad you're so in love with your multisub arrangement. To suggest that it's "required" for high-fidelity sound in a room however is a bunch of BULLSHIT.
You may be deluded into believing whatever you want about bass, your ineffective room mutilation products, whatever.
But the data show what they show.
Have the two of you forgotten that there is more to hi-fi than just bass reproduction? I think sometimes audiophiles get so lost examining the texture of tree bark they forget how to look at the forest.
No, but the issue under discussion was an area where any decent headphones genuinely beat the crap out of any stereo pair of speakers: timbral fidelity in the modal region. Good headphones and a small room audio system with well-optimized multisubs do about the same in that area, though.
Commercial subs OTOH that are any good will cost you a minimum of about $1000/ea. The big RELs and JL Audios are triple that amount. And you need what, 3? 4?
Actually, excellent (not just "good") commercial subs can be had very cheaply. Note that in the "modest multisub" system, I attained those results with one small DIY sub, and two small commercial subs. Total cost of well under $1500 for the three. A commercial equivalent to my DIY sub, in that uses a similar Peerless XXLS driver in a slightly larger box, is the SVS PB12-NSD. I think it costs around $800. The big Genelec subs use the same 12" Peerless XLS driver I used, which is an older variant of the driver in the SVS sub.
RELs are universally overpriced and poor performers cost notwithstanding. Their most expensive Gibraltar is abjectly inferior in terms of performance to that SVS sub above, or the sealed variant thereof, though the RELs cabinet does look more expensive.
And the Jellos, while excellent as pure bass pumps, aren't really suitable for a multisub system unless one uses it as the single "ULF" sub for the first mode region, with multisubs for the modal region. The reason is that while their BL-over-stroke is as linear as anything, JL incomprehensibly left shorting rings out of their design. Long coil + no shorting rings means limited top-end extension, and lower upper bass fidelity because inductance varies quite a bit over the woofer's stroke.
I personally prefer and use the 3" and 4" voicecoil Aurasound drivers. While they're expensive (underhung motors* have a lot of steel in them, and neo is also quite pricey) they also have sufficiently long stroke, exceptional BL(x) linearity because they're underhung, copper sleeves on the motors for very low inductance and basically no Le(x) variation, and smooth response out to well beyond the subwoofer region. That low inductance and linear frequency response makes subs-mains integration easier. One can do a great multisub system with MUCH less expensive drivers, though. I don't want anyone to think a bunch of $500-$900 drivers is needed. I designed a system for a friend of mine that sounds great and used under $250 in drivers TOTAL (one Peerless SLS-12, two Peerless SLS-10's). It gets plenty loud enough to, say, blast In Rainbows or Shostakovich 7 at noise-ordinance levels, too.
*"Underhung" means that the coil is shorter than the gap. Most drivers are "overhung," which means the coil is longer than the gap. The W7's motor design, like the "XBL^2" dual-gap design and TC Sounds' "LMT" variable-density voicecoil, are clever and generally effective approaches to get the BL linearity of underhung drivers at substantially lower cost for a given stroke.
One of the best systems I've heard in recent years was a pair of NOLA Micro Grands in a professionally treated room. The NOLAs are all out of ideas by 35Hz. To call that "low-fi" is idiotic.
That to me just says that you haven't heard a well-optimized multisub system. Or, for that matter, a speaker with competent pattern control through the midrange..
DS-21 would you mind posting a picture of your setup? I'm curious about the "WAF"
I don't have a current picture of my system, partly because my damn cabinet maker has yet to finish the cabinets I commissioned back in November. But WAF isn't bad, as the front trio are close to the front wall and all of the electronics are inside a cabinet with smoked glass doors (BDI Cirrus). One sub is in the front corner, one is concealed along the back wall. The "flanking subs" will just visually take the place of the speaker stands I'm currently using. Admittedly, my wife doesn't like the small sub (Aurasound NS10-794-4A driver, 15L closed box) on top of the 6.5' tall bookshelves behind the main seating position. :)
The only "room treatments" are a wool shag rug over the loft's concrete floor with an heirloom (in my family since the 19th century) oriental carpet on top of it, and an upholstered ottoman. The wall behind the main listening area has some "diffusion" from books placed on tall bookcases.
I tried reading your blog, but TBH rather dislike the huge BlogSpot blogs that load the entire website in a single page requiring endless scrolling. I was able to find one picture.
Any advice on how to make it easier to navigate? Please PM me if you do. I know basically nothing about programming, so just used their defaults.
As for the picture you posted, that's a picture of a stack of equipment taken after we moved into our current loft last August, yes. I think there's another one in that post that shows my current main sub, a gigantic piano-and-cherry pie wedge (31" on each straight side, about 23" tall) that's not long for this world. (It will be replaced by a ~20" cube containing an Aurasound NS18-992-4A.) The speakers you see in that picture are as follows:
-The big trio are Tannoy System 12 DMT II drivers in low-diffraction cabinets I commissioned from Nathan Funk. They were my reference mains for about 5 years.
-The mid-sized trio are stock Tannoy System 8 NFM IIs. They were my long-time nearfield mains.
-The small ones are the best-sounding cheap speakers I've yet heard, KEF Q100s.
Unfortunately, things didn't work out as I had hoped looks-wise. Not gonna hide behind WAF here; I didn't like the way it looked with the room configuration our two balconies forced us into. So neither of the Tannoys were used, and the front three speakers until my damn cabinets are done with veneer and finishing, are KEF Q100s. And my "nearfield" setup at home is just headphones now. The other stuff is in storage.
-
Now, you might object there is no way to place the sub such as all targetted resonances are excited but a corner of the room should be just fine to attack the first couple of modes in the length of the room.
A corner-placed sub can "see" all the modes, which is why it's usually recommended to have one sub in the corner. But because the modes are sparse in the modal region (that paucity of modes defines the modal region; the region above it, where modes are sufficiently dense, is the "statistical region") merely exciting the modes will result in serious measurable and audible problems in the modal region. So multiple subwoofers randomize and decorrelate the room modes, producing enough confusion to approximate how the bass would sound in a large room where the modal region is much lower, and the statistical region extends to the sub-bass.
-
Now, you might object there is no way to place the sub such as all targetted resonances are excited but a corner of the room should be just fine to attack the first couple of modes in the length of the room.
A corner-placed sub can "see" all the modes, which is why it's usually recommended to have one sub in the corner. But because the modes are sparse in the modal region (that paucity of modes defines the modal region; the region above it, where modes are sufficiently dense, is the "statistical region") merely exciting the modes will result in serious measurable and audible problems in the modal region. So multiple subwoofers randomize and decorrelate the room modes, producing enough confusion to approximate how the bass would sound in a large room where the modal region is much lower, and the statistical region extends to the sub-bass.
Yes, using Statistical Energy Analysis and Finite Element Analysis literally all day / all year long, I am rather familiar with the concepts of modal and statistical regions ;).
Now, I was somewhat with you until your latest post... I am sorry to say though, but the idea of "decorrelating and randomizing room modes" with additional sources is totally non-sense. The modal region it is just that: a completely deterministic behavior of the acoustics with discrete modes that have clearly outlined peaks / nodal lines and not very sensitive to small details like a bloke sitting somewhere in the room (a different story in the statistical region where it becomes a moot point to try to deterministically track individual resonances since a simple fart would be sufficient to shift 2 resonances around).
You're not going to randomize squat by putting 10 15' woofers all over the place, you're simply adding more muscle to equalize (actively damp, whatever way you want to see it) the response. The only motivation to add more than one sub is if 1) it cannot attack a particular mode due to placement, 2) it does not have sufficient volume displacement to handle the job correctly (for instance a room requiring severe correction in a frequency range where the sub is already heavily relying on electronic correction to achieve its output, e.g. below the driver/cabinet Fs), 3) you're audio setup is inside the 12 sq. ft storage room and you need to compensate for low order modes all the way to 200Hz where the subwoofer becomes easier to localize with our hearing.
-
That is what I wrote, and I stand by it. You do not, however, seem to possess sufficient analytic rigor to properly distinguish "fidelity" from "enjoyment." People can enjoy whatever, and often do enjoy rather low-fidelity music reproduction.
You may be deluded into believing whatever you want about bass, your ineffective room mutilation products, whatever.
:)p13
LOL @ your "reference" Tannoys. LOL @ SVS subwoofers. LOL @ you.
-
The Shakti sticks are amateur hour. This is how we do.
(http://www.synergisticresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Acoustic-ART-system-big.jpg)
wtf is that monkey doo?
-
I think those replace active sub-woofers + equalizer when it comes to room modal resonance solutions. More than likely alien technology passed along to the Mayans.
-
At first glance I thought those were just really nice kitchen mixing bowls.
-
Nah, those are Alien testicles.
-
It's a cloche for your CDs. Your butler brings you the CD in the cloche when you shout at him to bring you your favorite album.
"Your album sir"
Then you yell at him "don't just stand there Geofrey load it into my Goldmund transport!"
-
"“We began our research by studying Helmholtz resonators, which have been used for over a century to tune low frequencies in an acoustic environment. We worked to modify Helmholtz resonator principles to incorporate the full spectrum of sound – not just low frequencies. We found we could tune music with a system of resonators working together in harmony at key acoustic pressure points. Further research led to several patents-pending. The first deals with the use of magnets to contour activation and decay properties of the Vibratron and Magnetron Satellite resonators. The second includes a new resonator shape called the Vibratron that radiates in a 360 degree pattern over a scientifically-arrived-at frequency range. The third utilizes a unique dispersion baffle to precisely control how the Bass Station resonator affects a rooms’ low frequency acoustics. Later we discovered that using spikes to mechanically couple the Bass Station to a room further enhances control of low frequencies (the Bass Station’s Stilettos). Next began a painstaking process to find resonator material with the correct mass that would operate at mathematically-arrived-at frequencies with target decay patterns. The accumulation of these scientific principals sets the Acoustic ART (Analogue Room Treatment) System apart from all other room tuning methods.”"
Oh Synergistic Research, you're always good for a laugh.
-
C'mon man. Just give it a rest. I could really care less what other people think is high fidelity or not, but instead like to take bits and pieces and see what works for me.
-
synergestic research has to be the worst/most annoying company name ever
-
a new resonator shape called the Vibratron
Wow... um... oh my...
-
I imagine the Vibratron has a very high WAF.
-
http://www.frugal-horn.com/FH3.html
Anyone have any thoughts on these? They are extremely popular at DiyAudio with a few super long threads that I don't particularly want to read through :)p13
I can't find any measurements and I'm not well versed in horns. I'm thinking about either the Madi kit Marv has or the Frugels. Just as a secondary system for low level listening (my current low efficiency boxes don't lend themselves to it) and DIY amp testing. Would the large rear firing port make them more boomy than the BK-16?
If anyone feels this needs a new thread feel free to do so. This one was already veering off topic so I posted here.
-
I almost bought the flatpacks for the frugalhorns. I have not heard them, but I assume they would have less horn coloration in the upper bass region because of the smoothness of the bends. The horn is longer too, which should help with bass loudness and extension.
I decided against them because they use the smaller 4" rivers (the BK-16 kit I put together uses 6" drivers - I wanted at least some SPL and bass capability for subwoofer integration.) I'm sure the frugalhorn setup will not require a supertweeter at all.
-
Any thoughts on placement requirements for the BK-16, BK-12 and frugalhorns?
-
I imagine the Vibratron has a very high WAF.
:)p13
+1 internets to you!
-
The frugalhorn geometry looks interesting. I posted preliminary simulation result of the BK16 horn loading effect in the other thread where Marv posted his build pics and measurements. I could run a similar simulation with the frugalhorns if there's interest.
Ideally, I would like to start from 2D drawing to save time with the 3D model creation. Haven't searched the web yet but if someone has that info, please let me know...
Arnaud
-
The frugalhorn geometry looks interesting. I posted preliminary simulation result of the BK16 horn loading effect in the other thread where Marv posted his build pics and measurements. I could run a similar simulation with the frugalhorns if there's interest.
Ideally, I would like to start from 2D drawing to save time with the 3D model creation. Haven't searched the web yet but if someone has that info, please let me know...
Arnaud
Frugalhorns Linky (http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,833.msg20879.html#msg20879)
-
Ultrabike: EXCELLENT!
This is just perfect to get going. I should be able to generate a simulation quite quickly (probably not before end of next w.e. though, swamped with work). Seems like multiple drivers are proposed, let me knownif there's a particular one you're interested in (note: I'd only use the Fs and maybe Qms though, not a detailed vibration model at this time).
-
No problem. I would be interested in the Fostex FE126EN option. Thanks Arnaud!
-
Hey Arnaud, you think you could try simulating the same driver (FE126En) in the BK-12 cabinet to see how they compare? Whenever you get a chance that is.
Here's the cabinet plan for that one:
http://www.madisound.com/pdf/bk12m-cab.pdf
-
Man, you guys really hate my HL5s don't you? :)p3
To clarify a few things...the space they're in right now is absolute, 100% shit. The new apartment will be much better (and I plan to treat it as well as I can). Move in day can't get here fast enough. It's not a good representation of what this system is capable of.
As for being a brand nerd...I'm still not 100% clear on what you guys are getting at there. I don't like change and I like a clear upgrade path, but if I hear something better in my personal system and I can get it...I'll get that...Whether it's a 'brand I'm familiar with' or not. (I also talk a lot of shit about upgrade plans but it's mostly pipe dreams as I don't have money to throw around like that)
I have decided that I will not buy stuff blind anymore though, so my buys will be somewhat limited to what I have the power to audition. Hoping to get my hands on LFD, Bryston, Parasound and some Simaudio stuff when it comes time to upgrade.
One thing I will definitely say though is this system is colored. Very much so...and I like it. It's toe tappin' and fun...and that's why I bought it. It's at the completely opposite end of the spectrum from my 009 rig and I enjoy both.
I am starting the think the Leben probably isn't the right choice though. TheWuss (HF) seems to really enjoy his new LFD and so do a couple of guys over at SH so that's a serious consideration down the line.
Either way, the whole DIY kit thing has piqued my interest.
EDIT: I did also audition quite a few speakers before choosing these at multiple locations I could get to around town. I talked mainly about my auditions at Whetstone but I also heard stuff from about twice as many brands from other shops. None did what I wanted as well as the HL5 and that was give me good bass without a sub. I also trust my ears a lot more than I trust Brian, just FYI. I like what I like, it just happened to be what he liked as well.
-
To clarify a few things...the space they're in right now is absolute, 100% shit. The new apartment will be much better (and I plan to treat it as well as I can). Move in day can't get here fast enough. It's not a good representation of what this system is capable of.
I have decided that I will not buy stuff blind anymore though, so my buys will be somewhat limited to what I have the power to audition. Hoping to get my hands on LFD, Bryston, Parasound and some Simaudio stuff when it comes time to upgrade.
One thing I will definitely say though is this system is colored. Very much so...and I like it. It's toe tappin' and fun...and that's why I bought it. It's at the completely opposite end of the spectrum from my 009 rig and I enjoy both.
I am starting the think the Leben probably isn't the right choice though. TheWuss (HF) seems to really enjoy his new LFD and so do a couple of guys over at SH so that's a serious consideration down the line.
Use something like XTZ's room analyzer to see what you're dealing with, and then talk to the guys at GIK to get an idea of where you should go. If you're limited in how much wall surface you can cover, RealTraps absorb more than GIK or Audimute panels at a given size, but you pay a big price for that and if you can use more panels it's not really worth it. Vicoustic, Netwell, and Acoustics First have a lot of options for BAD type panels and RPG diffusers that look really nice, not like the typical ugly white foam diffusers.
LFD yes, Bryston and Parasound meh. Simaudio depends.
(http://www.acousticsfirst.com/art-diffusor-model-w/Model%20W%20Oak%201.png)
-
Thanks for the info. It's definitely a priority in the new place. No room mates to bitch about it and a much better space this time.
And another vote for LFD. They're definitely at the top of the audition list right now. The simplicity really hits the nail on the head for me.
-
I strongly encourage everyone to quit this HF mickey mouse shit, get rid of (or augment) their headphones, and start building easy speaker kits (of any sort).
OMG, thank you.
...bye.
-
Speaking of diffusers I've been making my own using the bbc schematic.
(http://i.imgur.com/XsbpfJU.jpg)
I got 5 of 8 done right now. Honestly they're more for aesthetics than actual acoustics. Two sets of 4 in groups-- each group having one each made from walnut, naturally grown heart redwood (impossible to get nowdays), pine and whitewood.
-
Awesome. I actually have a plan to make about six of them and tell my wife they are artsy wall decorations.
-
Good luck with that! I'm guessing she's got you figured out by now...
-
Awesome work!
Good luck with that! I'm guessing she's got you figured out by now...
Lol u have no idea.
-
TMRaven,
just awesome.
-
Speaking of diffusers I've been making my own using the bbc schematic.
I got 5 of 8 done right now. Honestly they're more for aesthetics than actual acoustics. Two sets of 4 in groups-- each group having one each made from walnut, naturally grown heart redwood (impossible to get nowdays), pine and whitewood.
Amazing work.
-
I wonder if I could make that out of legos...
-
I don't see why not.
-
Awesome. I actually have a plan to make about six of them and tell my wife they are artsy wall decorations.
Some of them are actually quite good looking...
(http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/udD7Q2LTMGY/hqdefault.jpg)
-
Wow, looks all deer-in-the-headlights-y, as if his wife caught him gazing hungrily at his audio equipment in a way he never looked at her anymore.
This remains the coolest diffuser I've seen (from a studio guy on gearslutz):
(http://www.gearslutz.com/board/attachments/bass-traps-acoustic-panels-foam-etc/269806d1325521945-rpg-skyline-diffuser-art-panel-idea-104_5436.jpg)
-
Apparently hollow plastic blocks aren't particularly effective at lower frequencies.
(http://www.gearslutz.com/board/attachments/studio-building-acoustics/202097d1289055713-new-idea-skyline-diffuser-foto-2-2.jpg)
-
Being hollow or not shouldn't matter, as long as the surface is reflective. It's the depth of the wells that affects your lower frequency limit and the size of the blocks that affects your upper frequency limit. If I remember correctly I made mine to be 6 inches deep and 1 inch wide for something about 500 to 5000hz? I can't find the calculator right now.
(http://i.imgur.com/SRnhVH9.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/GjpRTIo.jpg)
Aaah nothing like freshly planed redwood all ready to go for a new diffuser.