Don’t confuse “DEAD” and “DRY” room sound - What sound engineers NEED to know
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 фев 2024
- ►► Download the FREE Home Studio Treatment Framework and get everything out of your room and speakers → www.acousticsinsider.com/home...
Learn how to build your own professional-looking broadband bass trap that works down to 40Hz and a diffusor front that keeps your high-end lively:
→ www.acousticsinsider.com/bbt
I think we’ve all heard the stories of people plastering their rooms with pyramid foam from Amazon.
Maybe you were even one of the lucky ones to try such a masterpiece yourself..? (high five)
Then you’ll know how bad such a “dead” space can be.
It’s absolutely awful.
It feels awful, it looks awful, it sounds awful.
And the natural consequence is to think: “I better not overdamp my room next time!!”
But this approach might actually be just as detrimental.
Of course I’m not implying that you SHOULD overdamp your room.
But you do need to HEAVILY damp your room.
Because what you do need is a “dry” room. Very dry in fact.
Otherwise you’ll always be at the mercy of your room’s distortion.
Let me explain what I mean.
Related blog post on Acoustics Insider:
www.acousticsinsider.com/blog...
Acoustics Insider on Social Media:
/ acousticsinsider 
Развлечения
Your videos are always so helpful! This video made me realize that many people thing of room treatment as something you plan out, and then go do all at once. But really you can do it in stages so you can assess the impact of each thing you do. Working this way you would never need to worry about a "dead" room because you see it coming a mile away and make different and more effective choices instead.
I often hear people say diffusion doesn’t work in a small room…however if you have 5 feet of distance…you can diffuse most of the midrange…so I’m not sure why this generalization statement is so common.
Diffusion is definitely better than a flat wall. But one can question if it’s maybe better to absorb than to diffuse in that time frame. A reflection from 8 feet away (2,5 meters) - 16 feet in total falls below that critical timeframe of 20 to 30ms.
So an alternative there would be to redirect the sound to the ceiling and diffuse it there… so yes, I would absorb at those distances, especially at ear height.
In my experience, diffusion works well to fight comb filtering created by air gaps behind absorbers (lowers effective frequency but increases comb filtering).
I think to best utilize diffusion you need to have everything dealt with first. So that means, acceptable low frequency and reverberation management. To accomplish this best, you need to make the room smaller which doesn't give much room for diffusion...
@@Hamachingo how does an air gap increase comb filtering? Where do you place the diffuser relative to the absorber to counter it?
@@Hamachingo are you referring to when the air gap exceeds the thickness of absorber? A more common example of comb filtering would be the air gaps between slats.
I remember how acoustics class in college ('80's) was more difficult than sight singing in front of the class. Sight singing can be practiced. Acoustics could not. These videos make the text book much more understandable and raises my curiosity. My eclectic room is quite unique and offers a great learning opportunity. Interpreting rew and moving towards the most dry sound possible is a project I look forward to.
Very helpful thanks
Interesting, thanks. Us non-experts say dead when (nearly) all reverb is removed - so are we using the wrong term (as you've implied) or is the distinction between dead and dry quite niche? There's also the issue that if 99% of people say 'dead' to mean little to no reverb, then that's kinda what it means, even if it shouldn't.
i like dry acoustics, i can not get enough absorption. at least for general use, might be possible to overdo it for music listening but only some music benefits from that and that is not the only audio i use my speakers for.
How does Scattering differ from Diffusion? I am new to this term :). Thanks Jesco!
Diffusion reflects every frequency in a different direction. Scattering typically spreads sound in all directions at once, think horn tweeter.
Diffusion is predictable and consistent, scattering is not. Diffusion is also a technology that makes the room sound larger than it is...
@@Hamachingonot low frequency energy...
Diffusion doesn't increase reverb? Doesn't the energy have to travel at different distances, effectively causing a time delay?
What happens is that the impact is spread out over time, so the amplitude doesn't it all at once, and is thus reduced. For example, if you heard multiple reverberations in 0.3 seconds loudly, with diffusion you might hear it over 0.4 seconds but softer. So it changes the decay. I think that's how it works. The more reflections you have, the less impact the sound has when it hits you.
In my room it seems that when I add reverb to a track and it sounds good, there is a bit too much when I listen back outside?
I’ve had the same issue with every room I’ve worked in. I suspect it has something to do with consumer grade equipment having some natural compression? I just get it where I like it then drop it a db or so and it usually works out okay.
Interesting, I have not worked in studios in over 20 years, but I always experienced hearing the reverb more in the studio, than on consumer gear after the fact
What's the best target reverb time? For a small room. 15'8" x 11'3" 7'3" tall ceiling. REW taken at listening position. I have all but low end down to 150MS and low end just under 300MS. Adding more treatments now.
Your high end is well damped! Adding more treatment if it's thick enough will fix your low end further while only having a marginal (10-20ms tops) effect on your highs. So keep going ;) Everything under 200ms is kind of the golden zone.
Nice video, as per, Jesco. Just wondering though. Im in a small room, with bass traps and some diffusion. I also have Sonarworks. Is this overkill, in terms of mitigating the effects of my room?
Cheers
Alex
The world is so lost on most of this stuff. One smart sounding guy makes a statement in some forum somewhere and 100 readers with no understanding simply regurgitate it with their own twist. That's how rumors spread though.
The simple fact is, everyone everywhere needs and wants to be much closer to anechoic than further from it. Regardless of what they think they know or think they want.
Cheers 🍻
unrelated question: what is your advice on 'vertical' vs 'horizontal' speaker orientation? I'm referring to the commonly configured two-way near-field monitor, which is taller than it is wide and has the tweeter located directly above the woofer in bilateral symmetry. (for reference, I use a pair of Focal Solo 6 BE.)
I have read that when you place such speakers on their side, the tweeter being located to the left or right of the woofer (rather than above, or above and to the right/left of the woofer) disrupts the intended voicing of the speaker. I have also read that it makes no practical difference, except to the ear of the listener - given that each orientation may slightly change the effect of direct reflections, depending on room layout/shape. I have had my speakers oriented 'normally' for several years (in the vertical orientation, with the tweeter above the woofer). however, due to limited space, I am experimenting with a 'horizontal' orientation, with the tweeters on the outside of the stereo image and the woofers on the inside.
the Focal manual contains an image which depicts a variety of layouts, horizontal and vertical (including inverted, with tweeter below the woofer) that indicates any of these orientations may be appropriate to optimize your monitor layout, depending on the needs of your room.
in my case, in the vertical orientation, the tweeters sit a few cm above my ears when sitting in the ideal (equilateral triangle) monitoring position. with them oriented horizontally, the tweeters sit at a height between my shoulder and ears. I am experimenting with this orientation in an attempt to achieve a better monitoring position (proper equilateral triangle) and improved stereo width. in either orientation, the center of the woofer cones are about 90cm apart). in the horizontal position, the center of the tweeters sit approximately 110cm apart, but in the vertical orientation they sit about 90cm apart, same as the woofers. in practice, I am working a bit closer to the monitors than they are spread apart, about 80-90cm from the face of the monitors. again, this is mostly due to space constraints.
I feel that in the horizontal orientation I may experience a bit more of the desired stereo image width, though I am also aware that this can probably be attributed to recency bias as much as any actual change in imaging. however, being that the monitors sit very close to the wall, and in the corners of a slightly recessed space (the room is a very irregulary shape, with concrete support structures and ducts protruding from the walls) which may or may not also affect the resonance of the bass response relative to each orientation.
other than trusting my ears, which I do - I have been training them in clairaudience for some two-plus decades - do you have any advice on which orientation is "correct", when the tweeters do not sit above/above and to the left or right of the woofer, if oriented horizontally, and rather sit to each side and still in bilateral symmetry?
apologies if this question is long-winded, I simply am trying to be as accurate as my vocabulary allows in order to convey the nuance. quite frankly, I doubt the difference is meaningful or appreciable in my less than optimized, untreated room. but I trust in your experience and knowledge and I wanted to ask this question of a professional acoustitian for some time.
thank you for your time, Jesko, I really appreciate the wisdom you afford us via your channel.
A musician will want a Dry room. However, for voice work, there is not supposed to be no reverb. The room is not to have an input on the recording. As such, we need a Dead Room. It is all about what the room is made to do.
Your phrasing confuses me but I want to understand. Are you saying there is supposed to be some reverb for voice work?
Sorry, For voice work they want NO reverb. That way it can be combined with others and have no room change.@@patriciareedy7967
@@patriciareedy7967no reverb for voice work