Generally for a small listening space,the acoustic issues tend to revolve around the low frequencies and bass trapping is the main tool used here - ie absorption. Diffusion techniques are normally effective in the mid to high frequency range. You can use both acoustic treatment techniques but in a small recording or listening room for example, I would direct all of my energy and money in controlling bass reflections through absorption bass traps etc. A diffuser that has 15cm as its larger dimension would work down to about 1kHz. (ie the wavelength = twice this dimension). If The smaller dimension is 5cm the upper frequency will be about 3kHz. To design a diffuser that works down to say 100 Hz, the larger dimension would need to be about 1.5 metres which makes it impractical in a small space. 50 Hz would need a 3 metre lower dimension. Bass traps that work on absorption are much more effective and practical
I agree with everything to have said. I would just like to add that for diffusion to actually work there needs to at least 3m distance between you and the diffusor. So it's a total waste of time in a small room. Often the only place you have the distance to use a diffusor is between the speakers on the front wall which I highly recommend as it opens up the soundstage a lot.
I’ve been adding diffusion and bass trapping along with some absorption to rooms for years. The science is not always 100% adhered to because how live you want the room to sound or the client wants the room the sound is what really matters. People have different tastes. I have no absorption in my own listening room only diffusion and some base trapping. Am I an audiofile ? After 43 years of owning and running a hi-fi store i’d like to think I am, but I probably just know more than the average. Many know much more than myself and I watch and listen to different videos because I enjoy it and hope to learn. I don’t think anybody’s ever definitively right or wrong as so much with sound quality is subjective.
I think Anthony Grimani is explaining the absorption/diffusion topic best. His practices are rooted in the Dr. Toole research backed up by Harman's years of research. Too much absorption is bad, too much diffusion is bad :) Usually, in the normal room up to 1500 cubic feet, and with a speakers with good neutral frequency response and a good off-axis response you will not need any absorption/diffusion if you have furniture, high ceilings, and a carpet.
It's bad because oftentimes the wrong material, typically building insulation, is used to absorb these frequencies, and that type of material is not designed for music
Generally, I prefer a balance of both. Absorption in the corners and at primary reflection points then diffusion on the front walls and on secondary reflections.
Absorption has its purpose. For example, my stereo is in my living-room. Adjacent and to the left of my seated position is a den. I do not want any sound, that traveled that distance, and bounced around the den's walls, to come back to me ears. It would be far out of sync, time-wise. Absorption can also help with bass humps. Panels are designed to absorb frequency ranges. So if you have a corner that is creating a bass boom, then absorbing those bass peaks will help. Yes, generally speaking, diffusion is the best option. But do not rule out panels that absorb. Our host has near-ideal room dimensions, and seems to be recommending what works best for such rooms. But most folks do not have such rooms, especially ones dedicated for that singular purpose. Absorption panels are designed and sold for a reason, even if our host does not have a reason for his own listening rooms.
I broadly agree with Paul, My RT60's are around 350ms dropping to 300 or less at the very top end and remaining at 600-800 at the lower end. Once you remove slap echo and have a more balanced response then you will gain little by adding more absorption. Multichannel can tolerate a little more absorption but easy to over do and remove energy from the sound
Absorption, if you do it right, won't deaden the sound. It's the material being used, typically building insulation, that does that. Building insulation was never designed for music so don't use it because it's affordable. Diffusion should be the last thing you should consider because it has its prerequisites. The key thing to understand here is pressure and reflections. Treat those properly and then consider diffusion.
90% of the song we listen are mixed and mastered in pretty dead room. So if you want to listen to the « artist intention », you should not add your room reverb… since I have both kind of room (mixing studio and living room) it is also true that a good sounding live room add a nice liveliness to recordings and contribute to a larger soundstage. But in my experience that doesn’t work in small room or to big room…
Sometime you do want absorbing at the first reflection point. But it depends on the size and layout of your room. In a lot rooms you will use both. Because as he put it you don't want an completely dead room room. The goal is the stop standing waves (which create dead points and exagerated doubling) and comb filtering. Every room will be different. No one solution fixes all.
I overdid the absorption technique in my home theater and although it’s a very quiet non-echo chamber, for audiophile music the music almost sounds dead now. I learned the hard way and Paul is reinforcing my belief. It does help keep the noise out of the rest of the house during wild home theater movie scenes.
Let me guess, are your panels filled with building insulation? If it is, that material type wasn't designed with music and voice in mind, that's why it sounds dead to you
@@djhmax09 didn’t build them myself, they were purchased years ago and custom-made. I don’t remember what’s inside honestly. Between the absorption panels, the home theater furniture, the carpet, the carpeted stairs, and the window blinds. It’s very quiet room. You can clap your hands in it and not hear the slightest echo though.
@@peterw2714 most companies use building insulation inside, so I think it's safe to assume that the panels you bought are too. Your room only "sees" two things, pressure and reflections. Reverberation (which you call echo), is a subcategory of reflections.
Oh you want to hear ringing, life, breath and so on as you saying. But all that is some kind of reverberation in YOUR listening room (as if they're playing in your room) That might be ok if the recording microphone is mounted in the guitar body. Then we have no sounds from the recording location.. But in all other occasions when the recording microphone is a bit in front and a way from the instrument/s (the majority of times). Guess what.. that microphone will as if you were there capture not only the instrument! It will capture the room size, and that room sound while that instrument in playing in that specific room.. What do YOU really want to listen to? All the shit from your room that also always sounds the same regardless if the music is performed in a church or on the beach.. Or being able to hear the different rooms or lack of the room on different recordings as you were there.. (not that they were in your room) I am for sure always wanting to travel (in my mind) to the location and time of when the recording were done and created... And when I change songs I will be at home..😂😅❤
If you think about how it works, diffusion *_is_* absorption. This may be hard to understand, but diffusion scatters and takes many multipaths that has to go through air. Every time you double the distance you get -6dB and the scattering means that the air can tackle this absorption better. Indeed air is an absorber too, more gradual and also selects higher frequencies more that LF.
In my listening room, there's a wall of glass doors on the left and a large window on the right. My acoustician recommended heavy cloth curtains over the glass doors and window, and acoustic panels in the corners. Absorbent curtains sound way better than glass, and the corner treatments should make the room sound even better. I'm open to the possibility that a diffusion treatment over my glass surfaces could be superior to my absorbent curtains, but I don't know how I'd achieve that and still be able to open up the doors and window to let in air and light.
I got an almost square room of 150 sq ft. I use quite a bit of absorbtion, the room is good for podcasting for sure. But i listen nearfield so it works fine. Only have a diffuser on the front wall.
If you need to dry up your bass response, mostly depending on material used in your listening room walls/floor/roof = thick absorption mostly in corners and/or roof. If it' s sounds too dry = add slats on your absorbers or reflective materials, be creative. Measure to know what you are doing. Easy? Nope. This kind of stuff eats space and is not good looking in a normal living room... Your lucky if you have a dedicated listening room. If not, just buy more expensive gear and "trust your ears" :)
Acousticians usually recommend absorption, but usually the first thing they look at is the reverberation time. If the reverberation time is too long, absorption is the only way to reduce it. I am not getting into the discussion if short decay times may be called reverberation or not. And of course I am not claiming that (average) reverberation time says everything and reflections nothing. But a general approach (diffusion is better than absorption) can never apply to every room. A listening room with two seconds of reverberation (and I have seen many living rooms like that) will sound terrible. And no amount of diffusion will change that. I am sure Paul would agree. On the other hand - if adding more absorption will make your listening room into an anechoic chamber, there is already a huge lot of absorption (furniture, books, etc), and you probably are better off adding diffusors. So first, look (listen) at the reverberation time - then decide.
I think it's best looking at it in two ways, pressure and reflection. Reverberation is dealt with under reflections. Those are the only two things a room "sees," and all other things are just subcategories of pressure and reflections.
They might be multimedia installers. Multimedia prefers a dead room so each of the multi speakers can be a specific location's source. They don't understand that audio rooms want some controlled liveness.
I a few years behind Paul and I have lost 3". Looks like I need to leave my 600' above sea level home for somewhere further from the gravitational center of our planet.
That's because most companies use building insulation for absorption which is the wrong material to use for music. Building insulation was never designed to make your room sound better.
@@djhmax09Since you are dead set against using materials like rockwool or mineral wool, please tell us what material you would recommend. Personally, I've had good results using at least 2" compressed rockwool panels framed so as to position the insulation 1.5" off the wall. No good for bass but absorbs well above about 300 hertz.
@@irashapiro9189 I would use very dense open cell foam to get the consistency for music and voice. The thickness/depth will determine the lowest rate at which it will absorb. Don't expect it to absorb anything in the lowest of frequencies though because there's not enough horsepower to do so
Because my hifi system is in the corner of the living room and creates in the corner a bigger soundstage because of the reflection, I can also use diffusion? I know now it is a first reflection point which I still didn't deal with it.
They can help with diffraction around sharp edges around the speaker mounting area or cabinet edges. They can also even out a speakers dispersion if it's mounted off center to the front speaker panel. Honestly I cannot think or a time when they would hurt so why not try them?
I have literally unsubscribed because of this video. To assume that using absorption as a first reflection point means the person is not an audiophile and is mainly concerned with measurements is just plain ignorant.
by "[non-]audiophiles" he refers to audiophiles who favor scientific theory as a means of predicting things. it's assumed the acousticians are on the asr side of the culture war this kind of thing is consistent with the sentiment expressed by numerous other videos on the channel ruclips.net/video/G0ZQHTzYv9I/видео.html
Generally for a small listening space,the acoustic issues tend to revolve around the low frequencies and bass trapping is the main tool used here - ie absorption.
Diffusion techniques are normally effective in the mid to high frequency range.
You can use both acoustic treatment techniques but in a small recording or listening room for example, I would direct all of my energy and money in controlling bass reflections through absorption bass traps etc.
A diffuser that has 15cm as its larger dimension would work down to about 1kHz. (ie the wavelength = twice this dimension).
If The smaller dimension is 5cm the upper frequency will be about 3kHz.
To design a diffuser that works down to say 100 Hz, the larger dimension would need to be about 1.5 metres which makes it impractical in a small space. 50 Hz would need a 3 metre lower dimension.
Bass traps that work on absorption are much more effective and practical
I agree with everything to have said. I would just like to add that for diffusion to actually work there needs to at least 3m distance between you and the diffusor. So it's a total waste of time in a small room.
Often the only place you have the distance to use a diffusor is between the speakers on the front wall which I highly recommend as it opens up the soundstage a lot.
@@stephens2r338... 3m? Okay ... thought around 6' would suffice. TQ
Yup, diffusion should be the last thing one should implement in a room because it's expensive and has its prerequisites.
I’ve been adding diffusion and bass trapping along with some absorption to rooms for years. The science is not always 100% adhered to because how live you want the room to sound or the client wants the room the sound is what really matters. People have different tastes. I have no absorption in my own listening room only diffusion and some base trapping. Am I an audiofile ? After 43
years of owning and
running a hi-fi store i’d like to think I am, but I probably just know more than the average. Many know much more than myself and I watch and listen to different videos because I enjoy it and hope to learn. I don’t think anybody’s ever definitively right or wrong as so much with sound quality is subjective.
I think Anthony Grimani is explaining the absorption/diffusion topic best. His practices are rooted in the Dr. Toole research backed up by Harman's years of research. Too much absorption is bad, too much diffusion is bad :) Usually, in the normal room up to 1500 cubic feet, and with a speakers with good neutral frequency response and a good off-axis response you will not need any absorption/diffusion if you have furniture, high ceilings, and a carpet.
It's bad because oftentimes the wrong material, typically building insulation, is used to absorb these frequencies, and that type of material is not designed for music
Generally, I prefer a balance of both. Absorption in the corners and at primary reflection points then diffusion on the front walls and on secondary reflections.
Absorption has its purpose.
For example, my stereo is in my living-room. Adjacent and to the left of my seated position is a den. I do not want any sound, that traveled that distance, and bounced around the den's walls, to come back to me ears. It would be far out of sync, time-wise.
Absorption can also help with bass humps. Panels are designed to absorb frequency ranges. So if you have a corner that is creating a bass boom, then absorbing those bass peaks will help.
Yes, generally speaking, diffusion is the best option. But do not rule out panels that absorb.
Our host has near-ideal room dimensions, and seems to be recommending what works best for such rooms. But most folks do not have such rooms, especially ones dedicated for that singular purpose.
Absorption panels are designed and sold for a reason, even if our host does not have a reason for his own listening rooms.
Totally agree, same with measurements, it lets you know how your room sounds but it's listening to the music on how i dial it in.
I ❤ to see 3D printing used for what it does best : rapid prototyping.
I broadly agree with Paul, My RT60's are around 350ms dropping to 300 or less at the very top end and remaining at 600-800 at the lower end. Once you remove slap echo and have a more balanced response then you will gain little by adding more absorption. Multichannel can tolerate a little more absorption but easy to over do and remove energy from the sound
Man, those FR5s are gonna be really special!
Absorption, if you do it right, won't deaden the sound. It's the material being used, typically building insulation, that does that. Building insulation was never designed for music so don't use it because it's affordable. Diffusion should be the last thing you should consider because it has its prerequisites. The key thing to understand here is pressure and reflections. Treat those properly and then consider diffusion.
90% of the song we listen are mixed and mastered in pretty dead room. So if you want to listen to the « artist intention », you should not add your room reverb… since I have both kind of room (mixing studio and living room) it is also true that a good sounding live room add a nice liveliness to recordings and contribute to a larger soundstage. But in my experience that doesn’t work in small room or to big room…
Sometime you do want absorbing at the first reflection point. But it depends on the size and layout of your room. In a lot rooms you will use both. Because as he put it you don't want an completely dead room room. The goal is the stop standing waves (which create dead points and exagerated doubling) and comb filtering. Every room will be different. No one solution fixes all.
I overdid the absorption technique in my home theater and although it’s a very quiet non-echo chamber, for audiophile music the music almost sounds dead now. I learned the hard way and Paul is reinforcing my belief. It does help keep the noise out of the rest of the house during wild home theater movie scenes.
Let me guess, are your panels filled with building insulation? If it is, that material type wasn't designed with music and voice in mind, that's why it sounds dead to you
@@djhmax09 didn’t build them myself, they were purchased years ago and custom-made. I don’t remember what’s inside honestly. Between the absorption panels, the home theater furniture, the carpet, the carpeted stairs, and the window blinds. It’s very quiet room. You can clap your hands in it and not hear the slightest echo though.
@@peterw2714 most companies use building insulation inside, so I think it's safe to assume that the panels you bought are too. Your room only "sees" two things, pressure and reflections. Reverberation (which you call echo), is a subcategory of reflections.
My listening room is like a NASA control room filled with measuring instruments.
So you hate music?
@@PetraKann Oh oh, dip detected at 600hz. Houston, we have a problem
@@PetraKannYes, he does. Might as well call an audiophile an idiophile (silent t lol) ..
Oh you want to hear ringing, life, breath and so on as you saying.
But all that is some kind of reverberation in YOUR listening room (as if they're playing in your room)
That might be ok if the recording microphone is mounted in the guitar body.
Then we have no sounds from the recording location..
But in all other occasions when the recording microphone is a bit in front and a way from the instrument/s (the majority of times).
Guess what.. that microphone will as if you were there capture not only the instrument!
It will capture the room size, and that room sound while that instrument in playing in that specific room..
What do YOU really want to listen to?
All the shit from your room that also always sounds the same regardless if the music is performed in a church or on the beach..
Or being able to hear the different rooms or lack of the room on different recordings as you were there.. (not that they were in your room)
I am for sure always wanting to travel (in my mind) to the location and time of when the recording were done and created...
And when I change songs I will be at home..😂😅❤
🎤You better start doin’ it right, 💿you better start doin’ it right..🥁🎸🎹
If you think about how it works, diffusion *_is_* absorption. This may be hard to understand, but diffusion scatters and takes many multipaths that has to go through air. Every time you double the distance you get -6dB and the scattering means that the air can tackle this absorption better. Indeed air is an absorber too, more gradual and also selects higher frequencies more that LF.
In my listening room, there's a wall of glass doors on the left and a large window on the right. My acoustician recommended heavy cloth curtains over the glass doors and window, and acoustic panels in the corners. Absorbent curtains sound way better than glass, and the corner treatments should make the room sound even better. I'm open to the possibility that a diffusion treatment over my glass surfaces could be superior to my absorbent curtains, but I don't know how I'd achieve that and still be able to open up the doors and window to let in air and light.
Yes , ALIVE , luv it 😁
I absorb what Paul diffuses...or is it confuses.
I got an almost square room of 150 sq ft. I use quite a bit of absorbtion, the room is good for podcasting for sure. But i listen nearfield so it works fine. Only have a diffuser on the front wall.
If you need to dry up your bass response, mostly depending on material used in your listening room walls/floor/roof = thick absorption mostly in corners and/or roof. If it' s sounds too dry = add slats on your absorbers or reflective materials, be creative. Measure to know what you are doing. Easy? Nope. This kind of stuff eats space and is not good looking in a normal living room... Your lucky if you have a dedicated listening room. If not, just buy more expensive gear and "trust your ears" :)
what you think about VR headsets audio? :)
Acousticians usually recommend absorption, but usually the first thing they look at is the reverberation time. If the reverberation time is too long, absorption is the only way to reduce it.
I am not getting into the discussion if short decay times may be called reverberation or not. And of course I am not claiming that (average) reverberation time says everything and reflections nothing.
But a general approach (diffusion is better than absorption) can never apply to every room. A listening room with two seconds of reverberation (and I have seen many living rooms like that) will sound terrible. And no amount of diffusion will change that. I am sure Paul would agree.
On the other hand - if adding more absorption will make your listening room into an anechoic chamber, there is already a huge lot of absorption (furniture, books, etc), and you probably are better off adding diffusors.
So first, look (listen) at the reverberation time - then decide.
I think it's best looking at it in two ways, pressure and reflection. Reverberation is dealt with under reflections. Those are the only two things a room "sees," and all other things are just subcategories of pressure and reflections.
They might be multimedia installers. Multimedia prefers a dead room so each of the multi speakers can be a specific location's source.
They don't understand that audio rooms want some controlled liveness.
I a few years behind Paul and I have lost 3". Looks like I need to leave my 600' above sea level home for somewhere further from the gravitational center of our planet.
Use diffusion.
Absorption can cause as many problems as it seems to solve --- sometimes more,
That's because most companies use building insulation for absorption which is the wrong material to use for music. Building insulation was never designed to make your room sound better.
@@djhmax09Since you are dead set against using materials like rockwool or mineral wool, please tell us what material you would recommend. Personally, I've had good results using at least 2" compressed rockwool panels framed so as to position the insulation 1.5" off the wall. No good for bass but absorbs well above about 300 hertz.
@@irashapiro9189 I would use very dense open cell foam to get the consistency for music and voice. The thickness/depth will determine the lowest rate at which it will absorb. Don't expect it to absorb anything in the lowest of frequencies though because there's not enough horsepower to do so
Because my hifi system is in the corner of the living room and creates in the corner a bigger soundstage because of the reflection, I can also use diffusion?
I know now it is a first reflection point which I still didn't deal with it.
Is that a Tesla Coil in the background?
Has anyone experimented with those stick on felt tweeter rings, if so with what results? Thanks!
They can help with diffraction around sharp edges around the speaker mounting area or cabinet edges. They can also even out a speakers dispersion if it's mounted off center to the front speaker panel. Honestly I cannot think or a time when they would hurt so why not try them?
@@OldTooly good to know, thanks! I will try and find some good ones 👍🏻
People wonder why Bose sold so many speakers.🤔
I have literally unsubscribed because of this video. To assume that using absorption as a first reflection point means the person is not an audiophile and is mainly concerned with measurements is just plain ignorant.
by "[non-]audiophiles" he refers to audiophiles who favor scientific theory as a means of predicting things. it's assumed the acousticians are on the asr side of the culture war
this kind of thing is consistent with the sentiment expressed by numerous other videos on the channel ruclips.net/video/G0ZQHTzYv9I/видео.html
Ok so you unsubbed just because you disagree? That makes me kind of sad.
@@MrWingman2009a disagreement as to whether or not absorption-advocates can possibly be audiophiles
@@technology4617 1st world problem. You have differing opinions and he didn’t explain it very well. Who cares.
@@GetzenBassPlayerme; see above
you'd be hard-pressed to find third-world problems in high-end consumer hifi