|
Post by Michael Granik on Jun 2, 2017 18:55:34 GMT
Dear Ethan, My name is Michael, I'm from Israel. Nowdays I study sound engineering. I'm really intrested in acoustic I built a lot by myslef using Mineral wool, Plywood, Malamine Foam, Polyurethane In this photo you can see my last measurment. My room Dimension: Lenthg: 4m= 13ft 1.480315in Width: 2.8m= 9ft 2.236221in Hight:2.45m= 8ft 0.4566931in I gathered all the information I could find: +-42HZ is my axial room mode I want to build Helmholtz Resonator but I have only a little bit free space By the way the highest RT60 shows 0.36 milisecond and it's in the low end I only can Build an 2.4mX0.12mX0.5m box (144 Liter ) I calculated the one hole(Mouth) I should do 3.6cm Can you give me a simple advice, or to focus me better about this problem? How can I maintain more "Flat" response inmy room? I'm glad for this opportunity Thank's in advance
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on Jun 3, 2017 11:49:38 GMT
Well, afaik your SPL is already good.
I suppose your 42Hz bump is your length dimension.
Being that your speakers are right up against the wall, it's unsurprising you have a bump there.
Is that your subwoofer on the ground? You can try to move it into a null to "integrate" your bass response with your speakers; depends how low those go.
Basically I think SPL is more related to positioning than to treatment. In other words, try to move your speakers or LP a little before building anything.
A resonator is a slow-response unit, from what I understand; it won't help your initial SPL.
I'd be happy with the SPL you're getting.
This is just my current understanding.
-m
|
|
|
Post by Michael Granik on Jun 3, 2017 12:19:34 GMT
Thank's for your replay Hexspa. My subwoofer is on the ground. The measurment I uploaded is after many movements and adjustment at the crossover frequency and adjusting volume of the subwoofer. (I have Adam Sub7 - 32Hz cutoff frequency 140Watt amplifier) so this is the best result for "integration" my bass response with my speakers. <u>you can see the difference here - ibb.co/bNfAFv</u>When I moved my nearfield speakers it's get more Comb Filter at the mid frequency. If I move the subwoofer I get an serius notch @ 55-60HZ . Now it's my optimum measurment--- I done a dozens measurments and that's why I intrested in Helmholtz Resonator. I have a little space behind wall. Is it good idea? I will be glad hearing from you
|
|
|
Post by Michael Granik on Jun 3, 2017 12:31:14 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on Jun 4, 2017 9:56:25 GMT
I have no experience with resonators. Ethan typically advises against them. He also concerns himself with frequencies above 50Hz. (Not that I read him like a book, it's just what I recall). There are other sites which start their concern with 40Hz but their criterion is 20dB decay within 150ms. You're seem nearly on par with that. In my most recent experience, a little extra decay here and there isn't the end of the world. But, in your case, when everything else is so excellent I'm not sure how much more obvious it'd be. All I know about resonators is that they're more difficult to build and have a different time frame in which they work. In other words, they don't work immediately like frictional absorbers do. In that light, I'm not sure how much they'd be of help in your space. All I can do is hold you over until someone more knowledgable with those tools can chime in. Good job in your room; I think you should be giving me tips -m
|
|
|
Post by Michael Granik on Jun 4, 2017 10:30:02 GMT
Thank's Giving you a tip 😜 In corners I built 4 (40cmx40cmx120cm) plywood frame, like an open closet and inserted 7 pieces of mineral wool I used variable 4 densities (60kg/m3-120kg/m3). In addition to that, I covered those with light thin pvc behind( work also to high frequencies)
Most of my acoustics on wheels or portable so it's easy to move in the room
That's my "secret weapon" An 35cmx35cm mineral wool 😉
|
|
|
Post by rock on Jun 4, 2017 14:12:50 GMT
In general I agree with Hexspa but I admit that I have never heard about the non-immediate response of resonant absorbers, but that just be my ignorance as I'm certainly not the expert here. Also, as you are probably aware, a membrane resonant absorber is different than a Helmholtz absorber but I'm unaware of a different "time frame" in which they work but again, this may be due to my lack of understanding. Additionally, I'm not sure targeting a specific frequency band is the best approach but if you want to experiment, you may get positive results. Helmholtz may be easier to calculate than resonant membrane absorbers because of the relative constancy of air VS the potentially random resonant properties of various materials used to build resonant panels. Here are some sites you can check out for details: www.acoustic.ua/forms/calculator5.en.htmlwww.mh-audio.nl/acalculators.asp#showcalcCheers, Rock
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on Jun 5, 2017 10:43:03 GMT
All I can add is that, since it may be your rear wall, you can do 8" thick mineral wool panel gapped 4x off your rear wall to target that frequency. Actually, a 10" absorber 4x would be closer to ideal. Really, about 3' of absorption is probably the best answer but who's going to do that?
In any case, it's not unrealistic to target that frequency with absorption.
In metric we're talking a 20cm thick mineral wool with 80cm gap.
I mean, you're already using 40cm thick in your corners, right? Isn't that 16"? If that's true then this thickness should be a breeze for you. It's just whether or not that air gap is tenable in your space.
So ya. idk anything about anything except just a little about absorption. But, realistically, unless I could manage the kind of treatment I'm suggesting, at this point in my life, I would just live with the slight out-of-specness of your 42Hz ringing. Ultimately, it's your room and you can decide what's best.
If you're really interested in acoustics then it might be a fun project to try out. I'll just say, usually when I test things out on my own it only confirms the common knowledge propagated by Ethan, rock and anyone else with experience. The only thing I've found contrary is that I read he said putting super chunks flush in the corners is best. In my room, I found a little benefit to gapping them as you would any other absorber.
But ya, he never recommends anything but broadband and maybe diffusion once your ringing is set; at least for small rooms.
-m
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on Jun 5, 2017 20:51:51 GMT
In general I agree with Hexspa but I admit that I have never heard about the non-immediate response of resonant absorbers, but that just be my ignorance as I'm certainly not the expert here. Also, as you are probably aware, a membrane resonant absorber is different than a Helmholtz absorber but I'm unaware of a different "time frame" in which they work but again, this may be due to my lack of understanding. Additionally, I'm not sure targeting a specific frequency band is the best approach but if you want to experiment, you may get positive results. Helmholtz may be easier to calculate than resonant membrane absorbers because of the relative constancy of air VS the potentially random resonant properties of various materials used to build resonant panels. Here are some sites you can check out for details: www.acoustic.ua/forms/calculator5.en.htmlwww.mh-audio.nl/acalculators.asp#showcalcCheers, Rock I've just heard that resonators have a kind of delay to their effect. Just what I've heard. -m
|
|