John storyk on room acoustics , glass aint bad , low freq .....

Apr 3, 2010
16,022
0
0
Seattle, WA
#2
Thanks a lot for posting that. It is a really well done lecture. Other than one item mid-point, all the advice and explanation of principals is excellent.

If you don't mind, I am going to steal the link for ASR Forum article posting. :)
 

JackD201

[WBF Founding Member]
Apr 21, 2010
10,989
5
38
Manila, Philippines
#3
Boy time flies. I was at Full Sail in 2000. I drew a lot of inspiration from John's design principles. It was he who inspired me to always seek out new materials and different applications for them. Doesn't he sound like Alan Alda? :D
 
Apr 3, 2010
16,022
0
0
Seattle, WA
#5
Amir , off course it only had 360 views , deserves a lot more , with what he says dont you agree ?
I was shocked to see the low view count too! A lot more people need to watch it but alas at 3 hours, it is more of a burden than most people want to go through.

And oh, between this post and one I created on ASR Forum it is up to 400+ view count. :)

The part I disagree with is the description of comb filtering and simulation thereof from side reflections. The simulation uses a delayed version of the same music and mixes it with itself. This seems like the same thing that is happening in a real room with reflection path taking longer but it is not perceptually the same. In a real room the left ear hears a longer delay than the right ear for example. And the face casts a shadow that filters the reflection that the right ear does not. Listening tests show that we actually prefer the "comb filtered" sound when it occurs in a room whereas we do not when it is created electronically as he has done. Please see the work of Clark in this article I wrote for widescreen Review Magazine a while back on perceptual (psychoacoustic) effects of reflections: http://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/perceptual-effects-of-room-reflections.13/

That said for people who work in studios, they do want dead sidewalls as to hear the results of their mix adjustments so what he is doing for them (building studios) is fine. It just isn't as applicable to majority of home listeners.
 

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,469
0
0
#6
Jan 23, 2011
3,857
0
0
Amsterdam holland
#7
I am merely a messenger .

Regarding room acoustics , best would be i reckon to have a trapezium shaped room built ( best i ve heard ) and a sloping ceiling , to get those (first reflections ) reflected soundwaves well over your head , or past you horizontally, if the speakers are placed on the short side .
I Remember from my speakermeasurements that i had a huge suck out at 45 hz , well that seems to be my room mode then )( cancelling out of low freq waves ) , soundspeed 344(depends on room temp ) m/s : 45 hz = 7,6 m which is .... my room length :D, and another large one at 90 hz which is 344 : 90 is 3,8 meters , half the wave

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?6926-H-J-s-system-!/page16

When i get my clio system FW 01 working again im gonna measure reverberation time and post some graphs , gonna buy some acoustic elements , first try to diffuse( or absorb ) the first reflection points horizontally and built a " cloud " on an angle on the ceiling at the vertical reflection point.
 
Last edited:

JackD201

[WBF Founding Member]
Apr 21, 2010
10,989
5
38
Manila, Philippines
#8
Amir , off course it only had 360 views , deserves a lot more , with what he says dont you agree ?
Remember he is a very expirienced veteran :D
Cool jack , did you do a course /study there ??.

Regarding glass i think he means stiff thick /double glass
Yup. It was a small school back then. It's a full blown university now. It's even got it's own backlot.

Recording Engineering, Advanced Recording, Post Production for Film and TV, DAW and MIDI and Design & Construction of Critical Listening Environments.
 

JackD201

[WBF Founding Member]
Apr 21, 2010
10,989
5
38
Manila, Philippines
#9
I was shocked to see the low view count too! A lot more people need to watch it but alas at 3 hours, it is more of a burden than most people want to go through.

And oh, between this post and one I created on ASR Forum it is up to 400+ view count. :)

The part I disagree with is the description of comb filtering and simulation thereof from side reflections. The simulation uses a delayed version of the same music and mixes it with itself. This seems like the same thing that is happening in a real room with reflection path taking longer but it is not perceptually the same. In a real room the left ear hears a longer delay than the right ear for example. And the face casts a shadow that filters the reflection that the right ear does not. Listening tests show that we actually prefer the "comb filtered" sound when it occurs in a room whereas we do not when it is created electronically as he has done. Please see the work of Clark in this article I wrote for widescreen Review Magazine a while back on perceptual (psychoacoustic) effects of reflections: http://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/perceptual-effects-of-room-reflections.13/

That said for people who work in studios, they do want dead sidewalls as to hear the results of their mix adjustments so what he is doing for them (building studios) is fine. It just isn't as applicable to majority of home listeners.
That was just for quick demo purposes for freshmen. The course proper, goes into ITD in much deeper detail.
 
Jul 25, 2012
2,553
0
36
NY
#12