What exactly do you need to tell your carpenter to build you the most amazing room?

Facts around Rives Audio designs

I have been asked by someone to respond on this thread. My experience with these things tells me that a response typically only fuels fire, but some facts should be brought to light I suppose.
1. The room in question is the second room designed for this client. He was so thrilled with the first that he wanted a second design.
2. The first time I was at CEDIA I was asked to come listen. I was not told there was a problem or any issue at all, just asked to come over for an enjoyable listen. It did not really work with my schedule and I listen to a lot of rooms, so I elected not to.
3. After I returned I was told there was a problem and this is why I was asked to come listen. As a result, and a good repeat client, I did what we virtually never do. I sent our measurement test kit for what was a level 1 design (no measurements included), thereby going beyond the services we were hired to do.
4. After evaluating the measurements we could not find anything that was associated with an upper mid/high frequency grain and harshness. To further troubleshoot the problem we essentially used a lot of absorption to "kill" all upper mid band and high frequencies. Knowing this would sound bad was not the purpose. The purpose was to find the source of the problem. With all this high frequency absorption, we were told the problem still existed. Yes, it was at this point that I became completely convinced that it was not the room causing this.

Bruce--thank you for your comments. It's nice that some of our happy clients speak out, but I think we all know that unhappy people make the most noise. We of course attempt to have 100% customer satsifaction, but after doing more than 1000 rooms, there are a small handful that are not happy.

I will not likely respond any further to this thread. As I said my experience in issues like this is usually not pleasant and I would rather get back to designing rooms. I did feel that it was appropriate to at least clarify some of the facts that had been omitted.

Richard Bird
President, Rives Audio

1. The room in question is the second room designed for this client. He was so thrilled with the first that he wanted a second design.

Click to expand...

Correct. From 100hz up, it was the very best room I have ever heard, before or since. From 100hz down, his design did nothing to help the bass but I was using digital room correction at the time so the room was very good. And that is why did contact him again.

I'm not gong to take each of his comments and respond as that is not the issue. There are a couple of additional points that he raises that are not correct but I have no interest in in a urinating contest.

I also have no issue that the final product had problems. As I have since discovered from my own experience and comments made by some very competent competitors of Rives, while there is much science involved in a good room design, art, experience and some good fortune (aka the x-factor) play very key roles in the ultimate outcome.

What I have stated elsewhere is that my issue was/is his refusal to admit that the room was the problem. I don't care what his measurement system said. My ears and those of some very well respected competitors of his said the room is the issue. How did we know that? There are only two general possibilities for what we were hearing: the equipment (and in the case of speakers, placement in the room) or the room. We had tried 5 different speakers, multiple amps, 3 preamps, 3 different cd systems and many combinations of wire. Furthermore, we moved the speakers all over the room, including a 180 degree swap. And all kinds of combinations and permutations of this equipment. The problem persisted. (and I told Richard about all of this).

By working with one of his competitors (GIK), we have significantly reduced the problem --- by making some important and non-trivial room treatment modifications. Which yet again proves that the issue was room induced

I run a small (non-audio) company. We have a 99+% retention rate of our customers. When a customer calls and has a complaint, even if I know the issue is not valid or if it is, we are not the cause, I always ask: "what can we do so that you are satisfied". And we do it. Problem goes away. Whatever it cost us out of pocket is always a very small price to pay in the grand scheme of things. The majority of my new customers come from referrals from old customers.

caesar said:

A simple question for the experts: what is the value-add of an acoustician vs. building a large, assymetrical (say 10' high x 26' long x 16' wide) room and buying a bunch of treatments from Real Traps?

Click to expand...

If you're going through the expense of building a room, forget about Real Traps. Acoustics can be built into the room where you won't even see them. Save your wall space for some classy pictures of Duke or Miles.....

caesar said:

Interesting discussion. Audioguy, what are your lessons learned? What advice would you give to others based on what you had to go through?

Click to expand...

There is a HUGE amount of free information on the Web. Read, read and read some more. Study, study, study!! Learn some things about room acoustics and room dimension and room treatment. Study the web sites of those who provide room acoustic treatment. And if you are starting from scratch, I agree with Bruce that buying add on bass traps is silly since you can build them into the room.

As I noted previously, there are some very competent services that can assist that I have personally had contact with (albeit not inexpensive). Bob Hodas; the guys that did Amir's room (Keith Yates); and even Rives if you use his partner (Chris Huston). I know Dennis Erskin has been doing this for a long time and have met him but have not talked to any of his custoers so can not comment on quality. And there are folks who visit this forum who are also in the business but I know nothing about their work.

And whoever you select, agree on some measurable parameters before any work begins.

caesar said:

Nyal, nice paper. But seems to me the measurement numbers are just the effect. How well can acousticians predict the cause (such as the number and the kind of room treatment - absorption, diffusion, thickness, size, etc.)? How well do acousiticians predict the measurements?

And what part do measurements play in new construction?

Click to expand...

It is pretty predictable caesar if the acoustician is provided with detailed construction details. The real acousticians know the coefficients of different materials, how these figures change depending on how and where they are employed, etc. The math is pretty solid at this point in time. Execution is another story however and these may result in some deviations. The trickier part for them isn't the design itself but designing to match what the client wants. Most clients have to articulate what they want and the designers have to translate this into the target parameters hence the questionnaire of Nyall. There's a lot that can be lost in translation. That's where Audioguy's recommendation comes in. Study, study, study! The better you can communicate with your acoustician the higher your likelihood for success.

This is a recurring problem. Most common in auto repair. The question is who should pay for the cost of attempted efforts to solve a problem. My own conclusion that the professional be able to properly diagnose the problem and guarantee his efforts to remedy it. My suggestion is if you can't clearly diagnose the problem and demonstrate it is cured by your efforts don't take the job. I almost always hear this: I told them I did not know if this would fix the problem but he insisted I do it anyway."

I by no means see what Rives did makes them an incompetent or dishonest company. Apologies are often viewed as an admissions of liability. I take the position that if the solution did not work a refund or the cost of a fix is due. IMO

Business is competitive and nobody wants to pass up a good opportunity to make money.Get it in writing. This is my opinion and I am biased toward the consumer.

caesar said:

A simple question for the experts: what is the value-add of an acoustician vs. building a large, assymetrical (say 10' high x 26' long x 16' wide) room and buying a bunch of treatments from Real Traps?

Click to expand...

This was already answered but piling on , the information on the web is highly contradictory. There is no way you are going to know who is right unless you know the science better than them in which case you don't need their help .

I dare say the advice from many acoustic designers may be wrong too . I sat through two identical presentations on theater acoustics at CEDIA. One was clearly at odds with the other and even the presenter admitted it.

In other words, even if you go with professional advice, you might be going the wrong route.

amirm said:

I sat through two identical presentations on theater acoustics at CEDIA. One was clearly at odds with the other and even the presenter admitted it.
.

Click to expand...

I'd say know your purpose as well. The acoustics for a Home Theatre are totally different than a 2-channel listening room.

Hi

I tend to favor the Acousticians who use Mathematics and sophisticated modelling. While this doesn't automatically provide a perfect solution, it minimizes the percentage left to chance. I like What Keith Yates does and have heard one of his designs, I also like Terry Montlick works.. I have good things about Rives and if short on cash would recomend a person to talk to Ethan Winer. He knows his stuff even if he may come across rubbing orthodox audiophiles the wrong way (Very easy to do )

caesar said:

Nyal, nice paper. But seems to me the measurement numbers are just the effect. How well can acousticians predict the cause (such as the number and the kind of room treatment - absorption, diffusion, thickness, size, etc.)? How well do acousiticians predict the measurements?

And what part do measurements play in new construction?

Click to expand...

The measurements presented in the white paper are my goals for what the room should measure like once everything is done ie room built, system installed and calibrated.

At this point the modeling capabilities for frequencies above 250hz or so easy (ray tracing) and coupled with knowledge of acoustic treatment performance and speaker radiation characteristics the design can be pretty much guaranteed to be good. Though as someone else mentioned minor deviations in build from design e.g. The choice of a different wall covering or drapes can lead to variation from the designers intent.

With low frequencies, well if the room is rectangular simple modeling will give very accurate results. For odd shaped rooms one must resort to boundary element modeling or similar. Then the results are as good as the way the model is built with accurate specification of boundaries (and this is difficult as there has not been a ton of work done on how to specify the boundary conditions of a single sheet of sheetrock on a stud). More accurate results are had when wall construction is massive i.e. changes little with frequency.

Noise isolation, well, here design can be spot on but if the builder forgets to put some caulk down in the specified place then actual performance can be way off.

You get the picture that for best results regular inspections should occur during build and that the small things make a difference.

Also note that the cost of fixing errors in design gets larger and larger the further through the build process you get. Change a wall design on paper - not a lot of work...change it after it is built...big deal.

Getting a check on your design and the incorporating a designers recommendations is much cheaper, even if you dont want someone to do the full construction blueprints, than you probably think and in the context of how much else we spend on equipment money very well spent.

caesar said:

Apparently the guys on the gearslutz site are nuts about this book. Any thoughts on this approach? Is recording studio design just like audiophile 2 channel room design?

Click to expand...

Not a chance. I have a recording studio "Post/Control" room and a 2-channel listening (Mastering) room. Two different animals.

Would suggest you read this explaining the difference.

Home vs. Studio Control Rm.

caesar said:

A musician friend of mine, who likes to record, handed me his copy of Rod Gervais' "Home Recording Studios - Build it like the Pros". I haven't had a chance to read it yet, but my friend tells me that I should forget dropping $10K on a design and just work with my architect to incorporate these very simple ideas from a $30 book into the design. I could then hire an acoustician to tweak it out.

Apparently the guys on the gearslutz site are nuts about this book. Any thoughts on this approach? Is recording studio design just like audiophile 2 channel room design?

Click to expand...

Get the "Sound Reproduction" book by F. Toole. He clearly explains the differences between the two different groups of listeners. Reading it will make it clear why the solutions for the small 3mx4m control room are not valid for an audiophile listening room, and it is an enjoyable book.

caesar said:

Coming back to the Home Recording Studios book, it's not solely for the control room. He does a nice job covering things like isolation techniques, wall construction, electrical and HVAC considerations, etc. Although it may not be 100% applicable, it has a lot of good ideas, many of which were recommended here by the members.

Click to expand...

True true, many of those things do apply to both listening rooms and control rooms.

One of the approaches I have used with some clients is for them to come up with a 'rough' design using their architect, interior designer, wife, friends, dog, cat, etc and then have me review that and provide suggested amendments. I call it a 'Design Review'. It a bit of a different approach than giving a blank slate to a designer and saying 'design me a room'. Both approaches are obviously valid.

The obvious reason why you really, really should have someone review your design before you build it is that correcting mistakes after the build is going to be WAY more expensive than correcting the paper design before you start building.