Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

All about acoustics. This is your new home if you already have a studio or other acoustic space, but it isn't working out for you, sounds bad, and you need to fix it...
recaro19
Active Member
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed, 2019-Oct-09, 11:20
Location: Toronto

Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

#1

Postby recaro19 » Wed, 2019-Oct-09, 18:08

Hey everyone,

New to the forum and very excited to be here as I embark on this journey in professional music production. A little bit about me. I'm a DJ and Producer out of Toronto, ON. Been putting my career on hold for quite some time and up until a few months ago, I recently moved into a much better space that will (hopefully) allow me to get creative again.

The purpose of my studio is mainly for working in the box with some outboard pieces of gear. It will be primarily used for production and mixing. I do plan on recording but nothing major. Some hand instruments and such just to add some unique sounds textures to the genre I'm making. I predominately produce techno and progressive styles of electronic music.

Here is the current gear I have:

- Komplete Audio 6 (what was used for REW measurements)
- RME Fireface UFX
- Dangerous D-Box
- Neuman KH120's
- Sonarworks Measurement microphone

I also have a second set of monitors which are KRK Rokit 8 RPG 2 and a KRK 10s subwoofer. I am not planning on setting these up just yet as I want to make sure I have position and measuring of the KH120's first since they will be my main near field monitors. I'm also not setting up the RME and D-box at this time so I'm using the Komplete Audio 6 for now as I'm not sure how to take measurements with the RME and D-Box set up. I'm assuming it won't matter which soundcard I take my measurements in but any insight on this would be greatly appreciated.

From what I've learned so far, I will most likely require two large Superchunk bass traps in the front two corners and bass trap panels at 6" thick all around using Roxul Safe n Sound. I'm planning on cutting some wood at 24"x24" to cut into triangles which will give me two pieces with an approximate 34" face for both the top and bottom of the Superchunk. This was what was recommended by Mike at GIK after speaking with him about DIY options. I'm going to be making them 72" high since I need to leave about 24" from the floor to make room for two outlets on either side. Of course, I'm here to learn and since I haven't started building any sort of traps I'm still open to recommendations best for my room.

In terms of REW measurements, I had some trouble getting initial measurements when I first started out. Stuart knows of my multiple attempts but after carefully revisiting his instructions, I think I've figured things out. Here is the latest measurement file:

Oct 7 2019 - Baseline Measurements.mdat
Oct 7 2019 - Baseline Measurements
(7.11 MiB) Downloaded 59 times
Oct 7 2019 - Baseline Measurements.mdat
Oct 7 2019 - Baseline Measurements
(7.11 MiB) Downloaded 59 times


If things are still off please do let me know and I will circle back and re-measure. Please note that I am a total beginner when it comes to measuring a room and reading these graphs. I have limited knowledge in terms of what each graph is showing me, but I do have a slight understand from my knowledge in the pro audio world. What I have trouble with is understanding how to identify problems based on the information the graphs are giving me and how to interpret them to make the correct treatment decisions.

Here are the dimensions of my room as well as a 3D layout:

Floor Plan 1.jpg


Floor Plan 2.jpg


Floor Plan 3.jpg


These are photos of when I first moved in to give you a better idea for the space:

IMG_5024.jpg


IMG_5025.jpg


IMG_5026.jpg


IMG_5028.jpg


And here is the current set up of my room. I've built a monitor shelf to allow for my sweet spot to be a bit smaller and got rid of the TV on the keyboard stand so my desk can be pushed right up against the wall. I already noticed a better sound from the below set up compared to the above.

DSC_0528.jpg


DSC_0529.jpg


DSC_0530.jpg


DSC_0531.jpg


DSC_0532.jpg


DSC_0533.jpg


DSC_0534.jpg


DSC_0535.jpg


DSC_0536.jpg


DSC_0537.jpg


I am very excited to be here and already have noticed some great improvements from my new setup. Just looking to take it to the next level and really open up my stereo imaging and sound quality. I look forward to working with each of you and if there is something I missed in terms of information, please let me know. I will be watching this thread actively while at work as I'm hoping to get to work on this project soon.

Best



User avatar
Soundman2020
Site Admin
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu, 2019-Sep-19, 22:58
Location: Santiago, Chile
Contact:

Re: Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

#2

Postby Soundman2020 » Sat, 2019-Oct-12, 00:28

Hi there, and Welcome! :thu: :) So glad you made it over here, to the new forum.

- Neuman KH120's
I think I said this to you before, elsewhere, but I'll say it again: Those are nice! They should work well in that room.

I'm assuming it won't matter which soundcard I take my measurements in but any insight on this would be greatly appreciated
There's probably very, very little difference at all. Most audio interfaces these days are pretty darn good, with only very minor differences. If you really wanted to, you could do calibration and testing with both of them, to see if you can find any difference, but I'm betting that they will be the same.

From what I've learned so far, I will most likely require two large Superchunk bass traps in the front two corners and bass trap panels at 6" thick all around using Roxul Safe n Sound.
Something like that, yes. I would also consider doing another superchunk horizontally in the wall/ceiling corner directly behind you (above the bed), and something very think on the rest of that wall.

You have a strange shaped room, which isn't symmetrical behind you. Normally, that's not to much of a problem, but in your case, you have a large reflective surface back there: the wall and door to the bathroom. That's going to need some serious attention too.

I'm planning on cutting some wood at 24"x24" to cut into triangles which will give me two pieces with an approximate 34" face for both the top and bottom of the Superchunk.
There's not really any need to build "shelving" for your superchunks; you can just cut out the triangles of OC703 directly and stack them on top of each other, like this:

superchunks-01.jpg


superchunks-04.jpg


superchunks-02.jpg


superchunks-05.jpg


Superchunk-8_737.jpg
Superchunk-8_737.jpg (79.23 KiB) Viewed 1631 times
Superchunk-8_737.jpg
Superchunk-8_737.jpg (79.23 KiB) Viewed 1631 times


Just a few photos of how they are done, typically. You'll probably want to build a light wooden frame and stretch some attractive fabric over it, to hide those ugly monsters behind.

I'm going to be making them 72" high since I need to leave about 24" from the floor to make room for two outlets on either side.
To be fully effective, superchunks should run from floor to ceiling. If that would cover over an outlet, then consider extending the outlet with a surface-mount raceway, that can cover over the existing outlet and be used to extend the wiring to a more convenient place. Legrand makes good systems for that.

surface-mount-electrics-01.jpg
surface-mount-electrics-01.jpg (22.56 KiB) Viewed 1631 times
surface-mount-electrics-01.jpg
surface-mount-electrics-01.jpg (22.56 KiB) Viewed 1631 times


Then you would just cut out a some parts of the OC703 to fit around that.

In terms of REW measurements, I had some trouble getting initial measurements when I first started out. Stuart knows of my multiple attempts
:thu: I remember! :)

but after carefully revisiting his instructions, I think I've figured things out. Here is the latest measurement file:
Yes! It looks like you got it right! The data is valid, and in fact your results are not too bad at all. One surprising thing that caught my attention, is just how closely matched your left and right channels are: there's not a lot of difference between them at all, which is a very good thing: It means you have your room set up symmetrically, with your speakers placed and aligned accurately. And it also means you have good speakers, of course... :)

Your overall frequency response is reasonably good, with the expected modal stuff going on, and your decay times are all fairly close to each other, across the spectrum.... just too high. Around 600ms right now, and you'll probably want to get that down to around 250ms or so.

The good response is partly due to having a nice sized room, in addition to the other things I mentioned.

I would say that your room should be able to turn out rather well, if you treat it suitably.

If things are still off please do let me know and I will circle back and re-measure. Please note that I am a total beginner when it comes to measuring a room and reading these graphs.
You are doing fine! You have it all figured out now: your measurements are good, the data is valid, and your room is looking very promising.

I have limited knowledge in terms of what each graph is showing me, but I do have a slight understand from my knowledge in the pro audio world. What I have trouble with is understanding how to identify problems based on the information the graphs are giving me and how to interpret them to make the correct treatment decisions.
I'll try to respond to that a little better tomorrow, with some examples from your own data, but interpreting REW graphs is both easy and not so easy! :) Easy to get an overall idea of what's going on, with a bit of insight about what they are really showing, but also "not so easy", in the sense that there's a lot more stuff hidden in there, if you just know what to look for...

And here is the current set up of my room. I've built a monitor shelf to allow for my sweet spot to be a bit smaller and got rid of the TV on the keyboard stand so my desk can be pushed right up against the wall. I already noticed a better sound from the below set up compared to the above.
I would suggest that you get your speakers completely off the desk, onto stands behind the desk, up against the wall. Then you can use the "walking mic" test to find the optimal location for your mix position. The procedure is here: Soundman "Walking Mic" test procedure, for finding optimum mix position location (and other things)

Once you find that initial "best" location, move the desk up to the mix position and locate it so it is comfortable for you to work at with your head at the spot where the mic was.

Next, you can do something similar with the speakers: sliding them further apart in small incremental steps, with REW measurements at each step, while also changing the angle to keep them aimed at a spot about 18" behind that "best" mix position, then looking at the data to find the best spot for the speakers... and finally repeating the "walking mic" test, but just over a small range of distance this time, to see if there's a final "even better" spot. There's no need to do the entire room this time: just a small range around where the initial best position was.

I would also suggest replacing that desk with something that is lower profile (no shelves or other things sticking up above the work surface), and as small as possible. Desks can have an effect on the acosutic response of the room, and in general it's not good to have the speakers on the desk either.

With that setup (everything in the "optimal" location), you can then start treating the room. And once it is treated: repeat! Try optimizing the mix position and speaker locations one more time, with the treatment in place.

I have a hunch that your room can be really good...


- Stuart -



recaro19
Active Member
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed, 2019-Oct-09, 11:20
Location: Toronto

Re: Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

#3

Postby recaro19 » Fri, 2019-Oct-18, 14:12

Soundman2020 wrote:Hi there, and Welcome! :thu: :) So glad you made it over here, to the new forum.


Thanks Stuart! My apologies for my delay in responding. It was Thanksgiving weekend for us over here in Canada which mean a long weekend. Also meant that work was quite busy when i came back and have also been battling a cold! Anyways, glad to be here and look forward to documenting this journey.

Soundman2020 wrote:
- Neuman KH120's


I think I said this to you before, elsewhere, but I'll say it again: Those are nice! They should work well in that room.


You did say this before. I'm really quite happy with them but obviously i'm still not getting the full benefit without treatment. So far, I'm noticing much more clarity in my mixes. Things just sound right now rather than the KRK's which were really bottom heavy. I haven't heard my KRK's in a good room though so i'm not sure how they compare. Eitherway, really happy witht he Neuman's and look forward to using them as my main speakers.

Soundman2020 wrote:
I'm assuming it won't matter which soundcard I take my measurements in but any insight on this would be greatly appreciated


There's probably very, very little difference at all. Most audio interfaces these days are pretty darn good, with only very minor differences. If you really wanted to, you could do calibration and testing with both of them, to see if you can find any difference, but I'm betting that they will be the same.


This is good to know. I tend to over complicate things and think of all of this which gets me stuck and left in an uncertain state. Especially since I'm still a beginner at this. The reason I brought this up is that the RME is running through the D-Box so I wasn't sure if the D-Box would mean I'd have to redo measurements. I'll stick with the Audio 6 for now until I get the outboard gear running and figure out the routing. Right now, my main concern is treating the room.

Soundman2020 wrote:
From what I've learned so far, I will most likely require two large Superchunk bass traps in the front two corners and bass trap panels at 6" thick all around using Roxul Safe n Sound.


Something like that, yes. I would also consider doing another superchunk horizontally in the wall/ceiling corner directly behind you (above the bed), and something very think on the rest of that wall.

You have a strange shaped room, which isn't symmetrical behind you. Normally, that's not to much of a problem, but in your case, you have a large reflective surface back there: the wall and door to the bathroom. That's going to need some serious attention too.


Good to know. A few things here... Would a large panel on the back wall be ok instead of a Superchunk on the ceiling? I don't know how I would be able to accomplish that so I was thinking of just making a few panels at 6" thick to cover that back wall. Is the superchunk necessary or will i be ok with jus the panels?

Soundman2020 wrote:
I'm planning on cutting some wood at 24"x24" to cut into triangles which will give me two pieces with an approximate 34" face for both the top and bottom of the Superchunk.


There's not really any need to build "shelving" for your superchunks; you can just cut out the triangles of OC703 directly and stack them on top of each other, like this:

superchunks-01.jpg

superchunks-04.jpg

superchunks-02.jpg

superchunks-05.jpg

Superchunk-8_737.jpg

Just a few photos of how they are done, typically. You'll probably want to build a light wooden frame and stretch some attractive fabric over it, to hide those ugly monsters behind.


The problem is that I rent the apartment so if I ever move, I'd like to have some sort of casing so I can pick them up and move them. May require a bit more work upfront but in the long run, it will be less of a hassle when I move.

Soundman2020 wrote:
I'm going to be making them 72" high since I need to leave about 24" from the floor to make room for two outlets on either side.


To be fully effective, superchunks should run from floor to ceiling. If that would cover over an outlet, then consider extending the outlet with a surface-mount raceway, that can cover over the existing outlet and be used to extend the wiring to a more convenient place. Legrand makes good systems for that.

surface-mount-electrics-01.jpg

Then you would just cut out some parts of the OC703 to fit around that.


Again, I rent so I can't really change anything to the Unit so I need to be mindful of this. Will 24" of space underneath really matter? I could build two smaller traps to fill in space. Maybe two of those concrete post form tubes filled with insulation to place underneath?

Also, is safe and sound okay to use? I don't really have access to OC703 and the only place that has it is quite expensive. $3.00 a square foot where I can get 8 bats for about $59.00. If the OC703 really is that much better then maybe I can build them gradually but for a 2x4 piece it's going to be $24 apiece

Soundman2020 wrote:
In terms of REW measurements, I had some trouble getting initial measurements when I first started out. Stuart knows of my multiple attempts


:thu: I remember! :)

but after carefully revisiting his instructions, I think I've figured things out. Here is the latest measurement file:
Yes! It looks like you got it right! The data is valid, and in fact your results are not too bad at all. One surprising thing that caught my attention, is just how closely matched your left and right channels are: there's not a lot of difference between them at all, which is a very good thing: It means you have your room set up symmetrically, with your speakers placed and aligned accurately. And it also means you have good speakers, of course... :)

Your overall frequency response is reasonably good, with the expected modal stuff going on, and your decay times are all fairly close to each other, across the spectrum.... just too high. Around 600ms right now, and you'll probably want to get that down to around 250ms or so.

The good response is partly due to having a nice sized room, in addition to the other things I mentioned.

I would say that your room should be able to turn out rather well, if you treat it suitably.

If things are still off please do let me know and I will circle back and re-measure. Please note that I am a total beginner when it comes to measuring a room and reading these graphs.


You are doing fine! You have it all figured out now: your measurements are good, the data is valid, and your room is looking very promising.


Awesome! So happy to hear this. I did notice a massive difference when i placed my speakers closer together on the shelf i built. Can't wait to see what happens once I start to treat.

Soundman2020 wrote:
I have limited knowledge in terms of what each graph is showing me, but I do have a slight understand from my knowledge in the pro audio world. What I have trouble with is understanding how to identify problems based on the information the graphs are giving me and how to interpret them to make the correct treatment decisions.


I'll try to respond to that a little better tomorrow, with some examples from your own data, but interpreting REW graphs is both easy and not so easy! :) Easy to get an overall idea of what's going on, with a bit of insight about what they are really showing, but also "not so easy", in the sense that there's a lot more stuff hidden in there, if you just know what to look for...


That would be fantastic! I'd love to better understand and know what I'm looking at. It will help me tremendously as I'll understand further what is going on and why I'm doing things.

Soundman2020 wrote:
And here is the current set up of my room. I've built a monitor shelf to allow for my sweet spot to be a bit smaller and got rid of the TV on the keyboard stand so my desk can be pushed right up against the wall. I already noticed a better sound from the below set up compared to the above.


I would suggest that you get your speakers completely off the desk, onto stands behind the desk, up against the wall. Then you can use the "walking mic" test to find the optimal location for your mix position. The procedure is here: Soundman "Walking Mic" test procedure, for finding optimum mix position location (and other things)

Once you find that initial "best" location, move the desk up to the mix position and locate it so it is comfortable for you to work at with your head at the spot where the mic was.

Next, you can do something similar with the speakers: sliding them further apart in small incremental steps, with REW measurements at each step, while also changing the angle to keep them aimed at a spot about 18" behind that "best" mix position, then looking at the data to find the best spot for the speakers... and finally repeating the "walking mic" test, but just over a small range of distance this time, to see if there's a final "even better" spot. There's no need to do the entire room this time: just a small range around where the initial best position was.


The stands I have will be used for the second set of monitors I have (KRK Rokit 8 G2) so I build the shelf since I have iso acoustic stands. It also allows me to get the Neumans much closer to the front wall as you suggested. Isn't this still correct considering i see many studios with their monitors on the bridge meter or on a desk with a similar shelf?

Soundman2020 wrote:I would also suggest replacing that desk with something that is lower profile (no shelves or other things sticking up above the work surface), and as small as possible. Desks can have an effect on the acosutic response of the room, and in general it's not good to have the speakers on the desk either.


I have a 61 key midi controller that is not yet set up but will be going on the desk to occupy that space. I don't think i'd be able to manage with a smaller surface

Soundman2020 wrote:With that setup (everything in the "optimal" location), you can then start treating the room. And once it is treated: repeat! Try optimizing the mix position and speaker locations one more time, with the treatment in place.

I have a hunch that your room can be really good...


- Stuart -


In regards to treatment, I have access to a discounted rate for Primacoustics products so I am still considering using them since DIY will be difficult for me to do. Not impossible, but if I can get great results with a pre made product then I may consider. As it stands, I can get the London 12 kit for almost cost so was thinking of buying these panels and building some frames to hold them so there is a gap behind them and then adding the MaxTraps in the corners? Would you still suggest i go diy?

Thanks again Stuart. Look forward to hearing back from you!



recaro19
Active Member
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed, 2019-Oct-09, 11:20
Location: Toronto

Re: Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

#4

Postby recaro19 » Sun, 2020-Jan-19, 21:04

Hey Stuart!

So revisiting this and finally invest in some sound acoustic treatment. I went with Primacoustics and also picked up a new studio desk. I'll post pics and a new baseline measurement soon!



User avatar
Soundman2020
Site Admin
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu, 2019-Sep-19, 22:58
Location: Santiago, Chile
Contact:

Re: Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

#5

Postby Soundman2020 » Sun, 2020-Jan-19, 21:53

Great! That sounds insteresting, and it would be fantastic to have an update the room response, after you have the treatment in place.
Cool!

:thu:


- Stuart -



recaro19
Active Member
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed, 2019-Oct-09, 11:20
Location: Toronto

Re: Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

#6

Postby recaro19 » Mon, 2020-Jan-20, 11:55

Soundman2020 wrote:Great! That sounds insteresting, and it would be fantastic to have an update the room response, after you have the treatment in place.
Cool!

:thu:


- Stuart -


Agreed! I'm going to take my first measurement as the room is without treatement once again. Then put up some treatment and take a few measurements as I put panels up.

Would you recommend i put the base traps in first and measure from there or leave the bass traps last?



User avatar
Soundman2020
Site Admin
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu, 2019-Sep-19, 22:58
Location: Santiago, Chile
Contact:

Re: Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

#7

Postby Soundman2020 » Tue, 2020-Jan-21, 11:42

Do the first tests with the room completely empty, then another set of tests once the bass traps are in. That way, you can see how well they are working...

I think you have seen this before, but just in case, here's a brief tutorial on how to calibrate and use REW to test and tune your room acoustics

- Stuart -



recaro19
Active Member
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed, 2019-Oct-09, 11:20
Location: Toronto

Re: Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

#8

Postby recaro19 » Tue, 2020-Jan-21, 21:04

Soundman2020 wrote:Do the first tests with the room completely empty, then another set of tests once the bass traps are in. That way, you can see how well they are working...

I think you have seen this before, but just in case, here's a brief tutorial on how to calibrate and use REW to test and tune your room acoustics

- Stuart -


Yes, of course i've seen that guide. I used it to make the below measurements :) . Hoping it came out ok.

Awesome. Will start with installing the bass traps. I just uploaded my first initial measurements after installing my new desk and a slightly different room set up. See attached. Once I install the bass traps I will do another set of measurements. What should I set the limits too for viewing the waterfall and SPL graphs?

Look forward to sending the next set of measurements
Attachments
Jan 20 2020 - 1A Measurements.mdat
(7.12 MiB) Downloaded 40 times
Jan 20 2020 - 1A Measurements.mdat
(7.12 MiB) Downloaded 40 times



recaro19
Active Member
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed, 2019-Oct-09, 11:20
Location: Toronto

Re: Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

#9

Postby recaro19 » Sat, 2020-Jan-25, 22:14

Hey Stuart,

Here is the second measurement with the Primacoustic Bass traps. I'll be adding the rest of the panels tomorrow and will take a final measurement.

I did make any adjustments on the levels. I just did a check levels test and then did the next three measurements.

Let me know!

UPDATE: Took 3rd Set of Measurements (3A) with Bass Traps and Broadband Panels. I noticed the 2A measurements were a little lover on the SPL level. Not sure how to interpret these but please let me know. Still have some panels to put up but for now, i'm noticing a much more better stereo field. Things sound clearer.

Jan 25 2020 - 2A Measurements.mdat
Bass Traps Only
(1.59 MiB) Downloaded 45 times
Jan 25 2020 - 2A Measurements.mdat
Bass Traps Only
(1.59 MiB) Downloaded 45 times
Attachments
Jan 26 2020 - 3A Measurements.mdat
Bass Traps and 2" Broadband Panels on Front / Left / Right Walls and remaining three control columns on wall between two windows. No scatter blocks.
(24.62 MiB) Downloaded 38 times
Jan 26 2020 - 3A Measurements.mdat
Bass Traps and 2" Broadband Panels on Front / Left / Right Walls and remaining three control columns on wall between two windows. No scatter blocks.
(24.62 MiB) Downloaded 38 times



recaro19
Active Member
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed, 2019-Oct-09, 11:20
Location: Toronto

Re: Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

#10

Postby recaro19 » Sun, 2020-Jan-26, 20:30

So I just realized that the outputs were flipped when taking measurements :horse:

I was measuring the left speaker but it was plugged into the R output. Not sure if that matters but 1A-3A measurements were all taken like that.

Updated the 3A measurements after switching the L&R outputs to their correct speakers. Anyways, "3A UPDT" are the latest measurements... can't believe i wasted all that time with he wrong outputs for L&R but i don't see any drastic changes really...
Attachments
Jan 26 2020 - 3A Measurements.mdat
3A UPDT - Correct outputs for measurement
(31.63 MiB) Downloaded 42 times
Jan 26 2020 - 3A Measurements.mdat
3A UPDT - Correct outputs for measurement
(31.63 MiB) Downloaded 42 times



recaro19
Active Member
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed, 2019-Oct-09, 11:20
Location: Toronto

Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

#11

Postby recaro19 » Wed, 2020-Feb-26, 12:22

Has anyone been able to take a look at my measurements?

Curious to see what needs work and what you all think. Please let me know :)



User avatar
Starlight
Active Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed, 2019-Sep-25, 12:52
Location: UK & Slovakia, Europe

Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

#12

Postby Starlight » Thu, 2020-Feb-27, 06:38

I have looked but as I am not yet conversant with REW it is not my place to comment; we should wait for Stuart or someone else that understands REW thoroughly.



recaro19
Active Member
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed, 2019-Oct-09, 11:20
Location: Toronto

Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

#13

Postby recaro19 » Thu, 2020-Feb-27, 11:06

Starlight wrote:Source of the post I have looked but as I am not yet conversant with REW it is not my place to comment; we should wait for Stuart or someone else that understands REW thoroughly.


Same as me. It was hard enough wrapping my head around proper setup and understanding. I've researched as best as I can but translated the measurements into knowledgable changes is difficult for me. have no idea how to fix issues nor how to identify them in the first place.



User avatar
Soundman2020
Site Admin
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu, 2019-Sep-19, 22:58
Location: Santiago, Chile
Contact:

Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

#14

Postby Soundman2020 » Fri, 2020-Mar-06, 01:36

I finally had the time to take a look at the results! So sorry it took such a long delay.

One strange thing that struck me, is that there is no "very high end": All of your most recent graphs show a sharp drop-off at about 16 kHz (it varies between graphs: some as low as 13 Khz, others up around 18 kHz.)
16k-cutoff.png
That was not the case for the Jan 25 tests, or for Baseline tests, way back in October: those had more normal high end. So the first question is: do you know why that might be? It's sort of like there's a very steep low-pass filter that has been applied to the signal, then adjusted up and down a bit between tests. Any idea what that might be? It needs to be fixed, since you are missing the top end.

OK, so the above is probably just a signal thing, not an acoustic thing, and thus easily fixable. Now for the acoustic stuff:

You have a large dip at around 223 Hz in all of your tests, going right back to the early tests, and for all speaker combinations.
223hz-dip.png
This is very likely a phase cancellation from a reflection. The graph below is a close-up of that, and shows phase (dotted green) in addition to the plain frequency response (red), and you can see how the phase suddenly shifts through about 180° at that same point.
223-phase-flip.png
A clear sign that this is a phase cancellation from a reflection. So I would suspect a floor bounce, ceiling bounce, or SBIR. It's probably not SBIR from the front wall, since you have your speakers very close to the front wall (too close to account for a frequency of 225 Hz, I think), so it is probably something else. To help you figure out what that is, I would suggest doing this "walking mic" test (click here to find out about that). Strangely enough, this dip was not so evident in your original Baseline test, but that might be for other reasons.

Now for the good stuff: Considering the small size of the room, and the strange shape, you have achieved some some very nice control in the low end. Here's a comparison of the waterfall plots for the low end of the spectrum (up to 500 Hz), showing the original baseline (in orange) and where you are today (in red):
Recaro19--REW--WF--12-500--baseline-COMP-Jan-26-2020--LR.png
The improvement is very clear, I think! You have completely controlled the modal issues at 80 Hz, 95 Hz, 107 Hz, 138 Hz. 174 Hz, and 213 Hz, plus quite a few others. Surprisingly, you even got the one way down at 31 Hz! Very nice.

You have also greatly improved the over decay times. Here's two graphs, firstly from the baseline test:
Recaro19--REW--RT--42-10k--baseline-LR.png
and now the most recent one:
Recaro19--REW--RT--42-10k--Jan-26-2020-LR.png
This is remarkable! you have greatly smoothed out the decay times, and reduced them from a rather live 530 ms to a very usable time; around 350 ms. But the best part is the smoothness: all of your decay times for all frequency bands are within about +/-70ms, which is unusually good for a small room like that. What often happens when treating rooms like yours is that the room ends up too dead, and with a deep dip to very short decay around 200-400 Hz. But you didn't get that, which is great. You could probably add a little more general broadband absorption if you wanted to, and bring the times down a bit more, as they are still a bit long for a small room like that. I would shoot for something a bit under 300 ms. Maybe around 250 or so.

Here's your actual EDT impulse response graph:
Recaro19--REW--IR-EDT-360ms--Jan-26-2020-LR.png
There's still some pretty large reflections going on, but you can see that overall the Schroeder curve is fairly smooth and even.

And finally, here's the "zoomed in detail" of the critical first 30 ms of the IR:
Recaro19--REW--IR-reflections-30ms--Jan-26-2020-LR.png
That shows that the early reflections that are still going on: this hasn't changed much since the baseline, since most of those are likely coming from your desk or other things very close to the speakers: especially the ones within the first couple of ms. After about 10ms it's pretty good, but it would be ideal to try to identify some of those and eliminate them, or at least reduce them. The psycho-acoustic effect of those very early reflections is to mess with your brain's ability to accurately determine direction and frequency: those two are related in a complicated way by the way your ear works: if your ear hears the direct sound followed a very short time later by a strong reflection of the same direct sound, that creates frequency cancellation patterns inside your ear canal that fool your brain into thinking that sound came from a slightly different direction from where it really came, and that the frequency response was slightly different from what it really was. So if you can, it would be good to identify those and try to fix them.

So, your "to-do" list is: identity and fix the missing "top end", identify and fix the 225 Hz phase cancellation, and identify and fix the very early reflections. And there's still a modal issue at 53 Hz that needs attention.

But overall, you have done a nice job so far, and the results are looking pretty good! Congratulations! :thu:

Maybe you could post some pictures of how the room looks now, with your treatment in?


- Stuart -



recaro19
Active Member
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed, 2019-Oct-09, 11:20
Location: Toronto

Music Studio in my Studio apartment!

#15

Postby recaro19 » Sat, 2020-Mar-14, 21:03

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the post I finally had the time to take a look at the results! So sorry it took such a long delay.


Hey Stuart! First off, no need to apologize. I know you must be busy and I understand that responding to these posts is not your priority. Especially when you are taking your personal time to do so. I really appreciate your help thus far and all you have taught me. I have no problem waiting as I embark on this journey. Getting the correct information and feedback is key to my success and ensuring i'm not wasting my money or time so thank you again. It is really appreciated.

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the postOne strange thing that struck me, is that there is no "very high end": All of your most recent graphs show a sharp drop-off at about 16 kHz (it varies between graphs: some as low as 13 Khz, others up around 18 kHz.) 16k-cutoff.png That was not the case for the Jan 25 tests, or for Baseline tests, way back in October: those had more normal high end. So the first question is: do you know why that might be? It's sort of like there's a very steep low-pass filter that has been applied to the signal, then adjusted up and down a bit between tests. Any idea what that might be? It needs to be fixed, since you are missing the top end.


In all honesty, I have no idea what it could be. I took a look at REW measurement settings and the Start Freq. is set to 10hz and the end Freq. is set to 22,000hz. Do you have any recommendations on how to fix this? Of course, once again, my measurements are not up to standard! I'll never get this right... :lol: :lol: :horse:

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the postOK, so the above is probably just a signal thing, not an acoustic thing, and thus easily fixable. Now for the acoustic stuff:

You have a large dip at around 223 Hz in all of your tests, going right back to the early tests, and for all speaker combinations. 223hz-dip.png This is very likely a phase cancellation from a reflection. The graph below is a close-up of that, and shows phase (dotted green) in addition to the plain frequency response (red), and you can see how the phase suddenly shifts through about 180° at that same point.223-phase-flip.png A clear sign that this is a phase cancellation from a reflection. So I would suspect a floor bounce, ceiling bounce, or SBIR. It's probably not SBIR from the front wall, since you have your speakers very close to the front wall (too close to account for a frequency of 225 Hz, I think), so it is probably something else. To help you figure out what that is, I would suggest doing this "walking mic" test (click here to find out about that). Strangely enough, this dip was not so evident in your original Baseline test, but that might be for other reasons.


This is quite interesting because I do still notice a bit of a dip in the low end when I'm sitting in my sweet spot and at times, have to get up to walk around the room to hear the low end in various pockets. I assume the phase cancelation you are speaking of here is what I'm hearing? Could it be the TV behind me on the dresser? Should I move that to allow the sound to hit the back wall where the scatter blocks are? I was also recommended a ceiling cloud to put above me which I still want to get so I was thinking of investing in a cloud and two more bass traps for the corners. Would that fix the issues?

I have the bass switch down on the kh120 to -2.5 dB as suggested by the manual when placing them close to the wall. I use these as my main reference monitors. Should i be adjusting them to an even lower setting or perhaps leaving them flat at 0dB? I may also play around with the placement again as well but so far I am noticing a tremendous difference in clarity after putting in the treatment. The krk's on the stands are for secondary reference and playback and I usually get up to stretch or walk around when listening to them so not really worried about their position. Mainly the Neuman's I'm trying to correct.

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the postNow for the good stuff: Considering the small size of the room, and the strange shape, you have achieved some some very nice control in the low end. Here's a comparison of the waterfall plots for the low end of the spectrum (up to 500 Hz), showing the original baseline (in orange) and where you are today (in red): Recaro19--REW--WF--12-500--baseline-COMP-Jan-26-2020--LR.png The improvement is very clear, I think! You have completely controlled the modal issues at 80 Hz, 95 Hz, 107 Hz, 138 Hz. 174 Hz, and 213 Hz, plus quite a few others. Surprisingly, you even got the one way down at 31 Hz! Very nice.


Will the two extra bass traps I'm planning on getting help with cleaning this up for or would it be overkill? I was thinking of getting two more and stacking them one on top of the other in the front corners. Would be floor to the ceiling since the measurement is 96" and the bass traps measure 48" tall each.

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the postYou have also greatly improved the over decay times. Here's two graphs, firstly from the baseline test: Recaro19--REW--RT--42-10k--baseline-LR.png and now the most recent one: Recaro19--REW--RT--42-10k--Jan-26-2020-LR.png This is remarkable! you have greatly smoothed out the decay times and reduced them from a rather live 530 ms to a very usable time; around 350 ms. But the best part is the smoothness: all of your decay times for all frequency bands are within about +/-70ms, which is unusually good for a small room like that. What often happens when treating rooms like yours is that the room ends up too dead, and with a deep dip to very short decay around 200-400 Hz. But you didn't get that, which is great. You could probably add a little more general broadband absorption if you wanted to, and bring the times down a bit more, as they are still a bit long for a small room like that. I would shoot for something a bit under 300 ms. Maybe around 250 or so.


The front entrance area isn't treated since I didn't have enough panels to cover them up. Would adding more treatment in this area clean up the decay time more? I was thinking of also getting a few more control columns to add in this area along with the ceiling cloud and extra bass traps. I'm sure that would drop the time down drastically but I don't know

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the postHere's your actual EDT impulse response graph: Recaro19--REW--IR-EDT-360ms--Jan-26-2020-LR.pngThere's still some pretty large reflections going on, but you can see that overall the Schroeder curve is fairly smooth and even.

And finally, here's the "zoomed in detail" of the critical first 30 ms of the IR: Recaro19--REW--IR-reflections-30ms--Jan-26-2020-LR.png That shows that the early reflections that are still going on: this hasn't changed much since the baseline, since most of those are likely coming from your desk or other things very close to the speakers: especially the ones within the first couple of ms. After about 10ms it's pretty good, but it would be ideal to try to identify some of those and eliminate them, or at least reduce them. The psycho-acoustic effect of those very early reflections is to mess with your brain's ability to accurately determine direction and frequency: those two are related in a complicated way by the way your ear works: if your ear hears the direct sound followed a very short time later by a strong reflection of the same direct sound, that creates frequency cancellation patterns inside your ear canal that fool your brain into thinking that sound came from a slightly different direction from where it really came, and that the frequency response was slightly different from what it really was. So if you can, it would be good to identify those and try to fix them.


This is huge. I am noticing some of this and find I have to reference headphones at times depending on what I'm working on. I suspect adding the cloud, extra bass traps, and some more treatment in the front Entrance area would assist in this. I also feel like the TV behind me probably is the culprit of this issue as well so I will need to find a new home for it I guess. Perhaps a rolling stand would be best.

I was also thinking perhaps the windows are causing this issue as well, Was considering getting some acoustic curtains for the first window to my left to capture the high and stuff that maybe bouncing off. Would that help since I don't have any way of putting panels there?

Soundman2020 wrote:Source of the postSo, your "to-do" list is: identity and fix the missing "top end", identify and fix the 225 Hz phase cancellation, and identify and fix the very early reflections. And there's still a modal issue at 53 Hz that needs attention.

But overall, you have done a nice job so far, and the results are looking pretty good! Congratulations! :thu:

Maybe you could post some pictures of how the room looks now, with your treatment in?


- Stuart -


Amazing. So happy to hear that the work I've done thus far has yielded some pretty decent results. I am hoping to pick up a few more pieces soon so once I install them I'll be sure to take new measurements and update you. I feel like the extra bass traps will help with the 53hz area and i'll try the walking mic test when I can to try and address the 225 hz issue. I'll have to look at the tutorial on that and figure it out. Hopefully i don't mess it up like I have with all the other REW measurements I have done.

Any other tips, please let me know and look forward to the next steps.

p.s. Forum won't let me add photos or embed links for some reason.




  • Similar Topics
    Statistics
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest