Room treatment: How do I know if I need it?

[Glenn Kuras]

Thanks for the info. I'm going to put your recommendation on some prescription paper and show it to my wife.

"See here, the doctor says I need to get some more speakers, soon! Or I might suffer brain damage!"

Go buy now, beg for forgiveness later!!!!!

Glenn

 

[avaserfi]

Go buy now, beg for forgiveness later!!!!!

Glenn

Very true it is easier to ask forgiveness than permission!

 

[bpape]

Fiberglass is the most cost effective option. The other thing you can do is use UltraTouch cotton insulation. It's a bit more but no mask/gloves/long sleeves required. It's also a fire rated material.

Bryan

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

I don't believe all rooms need acoustical treatment. From a physics standpoint, this is more or less true. But there's more to room acoustics than Hertzes and decibels and squiggly-line graphs. If the room sounds good to you, then you may not need to do a thing.

I think I'll disagree with that statement. Every sound room with walls & a ceiling will sound appreciably better after necessary steps are taken for acoustic treatment.

Is treatment needed? What is the definition of need? (...LOL I feel like Prez Clinton when he stated... "It depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is.")

Well...let's put it this way......... It's true one can live on foraged roots, & bread & water, and be quite happy and content providing they've never experienced better. But.........as soon as you prepare them a juicy steak dinner and give them a taste of what they've been missing....... they'll soon learn foraged roots and water aren't so great

Unfortunately, I'm not able to feed mpompey that steak, but at least I can tell him what he's missing

 

[Savant]

Buckeye,

To each his/her own, eh?

I think I'll disagree with that statement. Every sound room with walls & a ceiling will sound appreciably better after necessary steps are taken for acoustic treatment.

Let me not be misunderstood. Nowhere have I stated that every room would not benefit from acoustical treatments of some sort. I'm an acoustical engineer; it's rare that I walk into a room and believe that it couldn't sound better. (Much to my wife's dismay, sometimes...)

But sound is just as much art as science, just as much subjective as objective, just as much fruit as fiber. I am always hesitant of suggesting this "bass trap" or that diffuser just because someone has been subjecting themselves to a dose of e-peer pressure via forums like this one. Someone who says, "I have great loudspeakers that don't sound good in my room," has a different problem than someone who asks, "Do you guys think I need acoustical treatments?"

Rest assured, I will always volunteer to be lead drum-banger for the proliferation of good sounding rooms.

Well...let's put it this way......... It's true one can live on foraged roots, & bread & water, and be quite happy and content providing they've never experienced better. But.........as soon as you prepare them a juicy steak dinner and give them a taste of what they've been missing....... they'll soon learn foraged roots and water aren't so great

Unfortunately, I'm not able to feed mpompey that steak, but at least I can tell him what he's missing

And, analogous to audio and acoustics, what about the person that, even after having eaten the steak dinner, does not care for the taste, regardless of the caliber of the meat and potatoes? That person will think the steak-dinner-lover has screws loose...

 

[Glenn Kuras]

But sound is just as much art as science, just as much subjective as objective, just as much fruit as fiber. I am always hesitant of suggesting this "bass trap" or that diffuser just because someone has been subjecting themselves to a dose of e-peer pressure via forums like this one. Someone who says, "I have great loudspeakers that don't sound good in my room," has a different problem than someone who asks, "Do you guys think I need acoustical treatments?"

Hard to argue with a statement like that, but maybe what you need to be careful of is 99.99% of people out there have not had the opportunity to listen to music in a well treated room. You and I have and know how great it sounds. So your statement could build false hope for someone in thinking it is "as good as it can get" or like you said at the start.

Flying in the face of conventional wisdom (and quite probably completely contradictory to some of the things I've written in the past! ), I don't believe all rooms need acoustical treatment.

I will say that set up alone does help quite a lot and if someone can not treat there room then they should not just give up.

Glenn

 

[Savant]

Hard to argue with a statement like that, but maybe what you need to be careful of is 99.99% of people out there have not had the opportunity to listen to music in a well treated room. You and I have and know how great it sounds.

I think 99.99% (or more ) of people out there know exactly what "bad acoustics" sound like. A person does not need a physics degree to know what "bad acoustics" sound like. I have asked many a non-acoustician what they think of the acoustics in a room. The answers I get usually start with, "Pretty good, but..." or "I like the way the room sounds except for..." or (not as uncommon as you'd think) "I think it sounds great in here!"

So your statement could build false hope for someone in thinking it is "as good as it can get" or like you said at the start.

This is similar to Buckeye's "steak dinner" argument above. I seek neither to mislead people, nor to build false hope. But I take issue with attempts to convince someone of their "need" for acoustical treatments when they already believe the room/system to be acoustically exceptional. (Granted, that appears not to be the case here, with mpompey.) If acoustical treatments were free, I might be even more dedicated to the aforementioned drum-banging. But even the best DIY treatments take time and money to put together. Why put someone through all that effort and cost if they don't think they need the treatments to begin with?

I realize the arguments:

Will the person who already believes they have an exceptional sounding room/system hear a difference after treating the room?

In most cases, yes.

But the often overlooked follow-up to this question is:

Will the same person now believe that the effort and cost of treatment was worth it based on the difference they are hearing?

I think it's important that acoustical professionals (present company included) do their best to gauge a person and try to determine in advance whether this person will (a) benefit from the treatment and (b) believe it to be worth the effort/cost. The answer to (a) will almost always be, "Of course." The answer to (b) is much more complex. Suggesting a boatload of acoustical treatments to a person who is, in the end, unable to arrive at the justification for the effort/cost is equally as bad as under-treating a room for a person who does see the worth. In either case, people will feel like they've been had...

I wouldn't be saying this unless I'd experienced it firsthand on numerous occasions. Once, in particular, a customer who was reluctant to treat his new HT was talked into how much better it would sound by the HT installer. With treatments installed in the room, the customer thought it sounded worse than it had before; he felt like he'd been had. Even after testing the room and illustrating scientifically the "goodness" of the room's sound, he remained unconvinved. Eventually, all treatments were removed and the customer was much relieved to have "good acoustics" back in his HT.

Did I think the guy was wrong? No.

(Of course, I found it frustrating that he couldn't hear how much better I thought the room sounded with the treatments... )

What I do think is that the customer should not have been talked into treatments in the first place.

 

[Johnd]

What I do think is that the customer should not have been talked into treatments in the first place.

I do agree with this comment in one respect Savant.

Too many people stick equipment into a room, plug it all in, and then ask why is it lacking. Equipment and a room does not a theater make (imho).

One needs to first start with good speakers, in a good acoustical room, followed by some good power and a source...and voila!

Treatments ought to be the last resort after all other considerations (a proper room with proper placement) have been exhausted. This goes without saying that many of us unfortunately must use a less than ideal room as a theater/listening room. This is where treatment can prove quite useful.

 

[Glenn Kuras]

I think it's important that acoustical professionals (present company included) do their best to gauge a person and try to determine in advance whether this person will (a) benefit from the treatment and (b) believe it to be worth the effort/cost. The answer to (a) will almost always be, "Of course." The answer to (b) is much more complex. Suggesting a boatload of acoustical treatments to a person who is, in the end, unable to arrive at the justification for the effort/cost is equally as bad as under-treating a room for a person who does see the worth. In either case, people will feel like they've been had...

Of course and that is more about the ethics of an acoustic company then anything else. If a customer contacts me and I feel as though for some reason they can not properly treat the room then that is the first thing I point out. Just the other day I got a email from a customer that there "HT" room was actually just a HUGE open room, connected with a dinning room and kitchen. Sure he could treat "THE WHOLE THING" but that was totally out of the question. Instead we recommended a few pieces, but also warned him that the results may not have that "WOW" factor he may be hoping for. Hell there are times that I try to talk people out of treatment all together. The last thing I want is someone to jump up on the web and start bad mouthing us.

On the other hand we always recommend treating a room in stages. There is nothing wrong with starting with a few pieces and moving forward.

Glenn

 

[Savant]

John:

Treatments ought to be the last resort after all other considerations (a proper room with proper placement) have been exhausted.

In possible contradictory fashion, I would say that the room acoustics always need to be a primary consideration. My comments in this thread pertain more to the person who, like Glenn has mentioned, is stuck with what they have and is happy with the results. For dedicated HT design, I would never condone ignoring acoustics until the very end. This inevitably leads to added (and unplanned-for) cost on the back end.

Glenn:

On the other hand we always recommend treating a room in stages. There is nothing wrong with starting with a few pieces and moving forward.

Well put. An admirable and often extremely effective approach.

Adam: You're welcome!!!

 

[ParadigmDawg]

I think that was me

Of course and that is more about the ethics of an acoustic company then anything else. If a customer contacts me and I feel as though for some reason they can not properly treat the room then that is the first thing I point out. Just the other day I got a email from a customer that there "HT" room was actually just a HUGE open room, connected with a dinning room and kitchen. Sure he could treat "THE WHOLE THING" but that was totally out of the question. Instead we recommended a few pieces, but also warned him that the results may not have that "WOW" factor he may be hoping for. Hell there are times that I try to talk people out of treatment all together. The last thing I want is someone to jump up on the web and start bad mouthing us.

On the other hand we always recommend treating a room in stages. There is nothing wrong with starting with a few pieces and moving forward.

Glenn

 

[Glenn Kuras]

I think that was me

Watch that golf swing Greg.

Glenn

 

[ParadigmDawg]

lol...I am playing everyday this week!

Watch that golf swing Greg.

Glenn