Dear all,
It seems like an eternity ago that I began trying to improve the acoustics of my 4.3m square living room.
I think my journey is almost at an end.
I recently remembered reading that placing a speaker in the corner of a room results in the excitation of all the room's modes. In my heretofore most recent experimentation with sub placement, I'd found that placing it at the side of the couch,
relatively close to the back right corner gave the best response up to around 80Hz (the frequency at which the sub is crossed). With the sub being close to the corner, I reasoned that placing a greater degree of absorption there than I already had might help, though possibly simultaneously detracting from it's loss elsewhere in the room.
That one thought resulted in the largest experimentation with sub and trap placement I have ever undertaken. However, the end result is a quality of audio the likes of which in my life I have never before heard. I simply cannot describe the superb sound I've obtained, nor the depth within which I can easily pluck sounds/detail from music.
Given the latest results, it was always a foregone conclusion that I'd post them, but the thought came to me that I could also take the opportunity to show just what a difference RealTraps acoustic absorption and my sub integrated with my front two towers has made by including before/after measurements of my as-close-to-perfect-as-I'm-likely-to-get present setup.
So, without further ado, first up are plots of my untreated room's low frequency waterfall responses in
Direct Analogue and
2ch Stereo mode. For those unfamiliar, Direct Analogue mode corresponds to the front two towers being used as full-range (i.e. Large) speakers without any contribution from the sub. Conversely, 2ch Stereo mode corresponds to my front towers effectively being set as Small and with the sub active.
Next, the piece de résistance, the treated room's
low frequency and
low frequency waterfall responses! Note that for the 2D low frequency time-slice overlay, the front towers and sub's contributions to the total response are also shown.
In case anybody is interested, the subs contribution was captured by having the receiver in 2ch Stereo mode, but swiching Speaker A and B (my speakers are biwired (don't ask - hey, it was before I discovered Audioholics!)) off.
By comparing the 2ch Stereo waterfall plots for both the room
untreated and
treated (aided by the 2D low frequency time-slice
overlay), you can see the contribution solely from the traps. Quite a difference eh?, though in the interests of fairness, it should be pointed out that it
might be possible to get an improved untreated room response with the sub in another location.
In addition, by comparing the
Direct Analogue and
2ch Stereo mode low frequency waterfall plots for the treated room, you can see the difference between my front towers being used as full-range, and having the sub properly integrated. In the former case there's an enormous hole where I wouldn't hear any bass whatsoever!
Moreover, a comparison of the RT60 times for the room both
untreated and
treated shows that the traps have reduced the RT60 time to one more comfortably located within the range 0.3 to 0.39, typical for a small room (RT60 times below approximately 200Hz are not accurate and should be ignored).
Furthermore, by joining up the 2ch Stereo
low frequency and
1/3rd octave plots for the room treated, you can see that if we adopt a datum level of say 91dB, I've effectively got what would generally be considered a flat response, i.e. ±3dB, from approximately 40Hz to 4kHz! And not an EQ in sight! (sorry WmAx
)
At last I have a response that I am
extremely happy with. It's taken a fair bit of reading and a unbelievable amount of experimentation, mostly due to inexperience on my part, but trust me, it's all been worth it. I am truly content...
...for the moment.
