Studio Pics

Ok, so if what I'm hearing in my headset and what's coming out of my monitors sound pretty darn similar, even though I've got diffractions up the wazzoooo, is that just my imagination, or are should I buy new ears?

  On 12/10/2011 at 5:05 PM, Gocab said:

Ok, so if what I'm hearing in my headset and what's coming out of my monitors sound pretty darn similar, even though I've got diffractions up the wazzoooo, is that just my imagination, or are should I buy new ears?

check your warranty, you might get new ones for free. just make sure you're buying a factory matched pair. ;)

seriously though why did you hi-jack this thread elusive? this really has nothing to do with studio pics.

someone bought a lifetime supply of snake oil

  On 12/10/2011 at 9:48 PM, Awepittance said:

someone bought a lifetime supply of snake oil

yes, snake-oil provided by Leo Beranek, Dr. Manfred Schroeder, Carolyn and Don Davis, Peter D'Antonio, Jens Blauert, et al.

you're only about 4-5decades behind - what's clear is you lack the understanding of physics of that of a high school level.

it's also clear you have zero understanding of the acoustic models for control/mixing rooms, and the psycho-acoustics there-of incorporated into each.

simple flatlander -

  On 12/10/2011 at 10:24 PM, elusive4 said:

  On 12/10/2011 at 9:48 PM, Awepittance said:

someone bought a lifetime supply of snake oil

 

yes, snake-oil provided by Leo Beranek, Dr. Manfred Schroeder, Carolyn and Don Davis, Peter D'Antonio, Jens Blauert, et al.

 

you're only about 4-5decades behind - what's clear is you lack the understanding of physics of that of a high school level.

it's also clear you have zero understanding of the acoustic models for control/mixing rooms, and the psycho-acoustics there-of incorporated into each.

 

simple flatlander -

or he, and i for that matter, consider most of what you are talking about to be common knowledge and don't really need to try to flex our intelligence in a thread dedicated to something totally different all together. what's extra annoying is that you are massively over complicating things trying to make yourself sound superior. really everything you are talking about could be summed up like this:

1. Sit in your chair at your mixing desk.

2. Have a friend walk around the studio with a mirror.

3. Look at the mirror, any position where you can see your monitors in the mirror would be ideal for acoustic treatment.

4. Same applies to ceiling/floor

5. Consider treatment behind your monitors and on the wall behind where you are sitting.

And one more thing, if you say "Specular" one more time I'm going to punch you in the throat.

  On 12/10/2011 at 11:27 PM, ryanmcallister said:

  On 12/10/2011 at 10:24 PM, elusive4 said:

  On 12/10/2011 at 9:48 PM, Awepittance said:

someone bought a lifetime supply of snake oil

 

yes, snake-oil provided by Leo Beranek, Dr. Manfred Schroeder, Carolyn and Don Davis, Peter D'Antonio, Jens Blauert, et al.

 

you're only about 4-5decades behind - what's clear is you lack the understanding of physics of that of a high school level.

it's also clear you have zero understanding of the acoustic models for control/mixing rooms, and the psycho-acoustics there-of incorporated into each.

 

simple flatlander -

 

or he, and i for that matter, consider most of what you are talking about to be common knowledge and don't really need to try to flex our intelligence in a thread dedicated to something totally different all together. what's extra annoying is that you are massively over complicating things trying to make yourself sound superior. really everything you are talking about could be summed up like this:

 

1. Sit in your chair at your mixing desk.

2. Have a friend walk around the studio with a mirror.

3. Look at the mirror, any position where you can see your monitors in the mirror would be ideal for acoustic treatment.

4. Same applies to ceiling/floor

5. Consider treatment behind your monitors and on the wall behind where you are sitting.

 

And one more thing, if you say "Specular" one more time I'm going to punch you in the throat.

sorry but this is all entirely incorrect - and shows your true lack of understanding on the topic ... and on top of it, you mock me for "over-complicating" it; when in reality, everything i wrote was fairly dumbed-down such that it could be explained to a novice.

the mirror trick is not a measuring tool - it is only used solely as a way to show novices how specular energy behaves within the room (angle of incidence = angle of reflection).

the mirror does not detail to you:

-arrival time of specular energy

-gain of specular energy (determined by polar response of speaker + acoustic impedance of boundary)

-attenuation of specular reflection once treatment (reflector/redirector, absorber, diffuser, etc) has been placed for verification that the specular reflection has been attenuated to the appropriate gain as set by the user's design requirements

-specular energy impeding the listening position by any other "non-obvious" surfaces or edge diffraction from objects within the room.

-2nd order early reflections that impede the listening position.

absorption is not ideal as you will quickly create a dead room and not be able to adhere to particular acoustical models (eg, termination (haas trigger) as well as laterally arriving, exponentially decaying diffused soundfield).

nice try, but you've only shown you have some "vague" understanding of how to treat a small acoustical space without actually understanding the what and why of why you are doing it.

i gather from such information you have never objectively measured your room to verify what you have done is indeed solving your original (measured) problem.

one may want to study the acoustic models a bit further before speaking down in such a tone.

less talk, more music making! show those studio pics!

  On 12/10/2011 at 11:50 PM, elusive4 said:

sorry but this is all entirely incorrect - and shows your true lack of understanding on the topic ...

 

nice try, but you've only shown you have some "vague" understanding of how to treat a small acoustical space without actually understanding the what and why of why you are doing it....

 

...more pointless bullshit...

 

...i gather from such information you have never objectively measured your room to verify what you have done is indeed solving your original (measured) problem.

 

one may want to study the acoustic models a bit further before speaking down in such a tone.

Let me hear your music man. I'm not going to say mine's better, but I can guarantee you I've probably heard better produced stuff from people who have used said mirror trick, and even some that came from a room with no treatment at all. Some of my favourite artists produce on piece of shit KRK's, and trust me production quality is held in high regard for me. At the end of the day you've got far bigger fish to fry than:

  On 12/10/2011 at 11:50 PM, elusive4 said:

-arrival time of specular energy

-gain of specular energy (determined by polar response of speaker + acoustic impedance of boundary)

-attenuation of specular reflection once treatment (reflector/redirector, absorber, diffuser, etc) has been placed for verification that the specular reflection has been attenuated to the appropriate gain as set by the user's design requirements

-specular energy impeding the listening position by any other "non-obvious" surfaces or edge diffraction from objects within the room.

-2nd order early reflections that impede the listening position.

I don't know much about you but you are insulting some of the EKT heavies when you call someone like Awepittance a simple flatlander. Dude knows his stuff. I like to think I do too, I've read the psycho-acoustic books, and I fully comprehend what you are saying. I'm just telling you that in my experience that stuff hasn't really put me ahead at all.

Music is an artform, not a science. You want to preach, go preach to some recording engineers @ gearslutz. Most people 'round these parts are artists, and you won't get too far spamming that stuff here.

the fun thing is that what makes a music interesting is not the subtlety of timbres or the exact relations of phasis or spatialization or volume or anything, i think it's more on an abstract level, the one of music theory. well that's just my opinion but it's also the truth.

I like to imagine this thread as a fight circle in the parking lot outside a dive bar

"LET'S SEE YER FUCKIN NULLS MAN! LET'S SEE SOME FUCKIN NULLS!"

fnord

ffs stay on topic... post pictures of your studio.

im gona post some new additions 2 my studio im really excited 2 use these new synths

dangit the batteries run out on my camera sorry

Less talk, more gear porn!

  On 12/11/2011 at 1:49 AM, ryanmcallister said:

I like to think I do too, I've read the psycho-acoustic books, and I fully comprehend what you are saying.

i disagree.

  On 12/11/2011 at 11:54 PM, elusive4 said:

  On 12/11/2011 at 1:49 AM, ryanmcallister said:

I like to think I do too, I've read the psycho-acoustic books, and I fully comprehend what you are saying.

 

i disagree.

you're a bit of a twat aren't you. i didn't know it but i looked you up and apparently this shit is a bit of a trend. i'm not going to feed the troll anymore.

Fat shakeup for Poly800, Cloud Capture

  On 12/12/2011 at 2:56 AM, ryanmcallister said:

  On 12/11/2011 at 11:54 PM, elusive4 said:

  On 12/11/2011 at 1:49 AM, ryanmcallister said:

I like to think I do too, I've read the psycho-acoustic books, and I fully comprehend what you are saying.

 

i disagree.

 

you're a bit of a twat aren't you. i didn't know it but i looked you up and apparently this shit is a bit of a trend. i'm not going to feed the troll anymore.

you've proven youcannot actually refute any information ive presented and instead spew distractions (what did 'musical talent' have got to do with acoustics).

maybe next time you will take a brief moment to intterogate your own knowledge on the subject before rushing in to jump down another member's throat and placing your ignorance re: the topic on display for public showcasing.

sink your heels in - keep telling yourself a mirror is an objectionable measuring tool; don't cave in an attempt to learn something new.

you've proven youcannot actually be an admirable member of this forum and instead spew distractions (what does any of your acoustic rants have to do with post a picture of your studio).

maybe next time you will take a brief moment to intterogate your own trolling behaviors on this board before rushing in to annoy the shit out of members of this forum and placing your sense of superiority on display for public showcasing.

sink your heels in - keep telling yourself that people here care about information that is off topic, and is obviously being used as a sock in your underwear; don't cave in an attempt to be someone that anyone else on this board would take seriously, or even like.

calm down u guys lol

  On 12/12/2011 at 12:28 AM, cloud capture said:

Nice to see a JV 1080 in your studio. I have a JV 1080 which is a lot bigger. Has good presets but is tough to program! :(

  On 12/12/2011 at 3:38 AM, Kcinsu said:

(what does any of your acoustic rants have to do with post a picture of your studio).

my main commentary was in response to a question presented by Jonas - try and keep up.