Guest Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 2 hours ago, scumbag said: That looks a lot better than mine! Have you got the "before" waterfall by any chance? No sorry, but before the room was made into a lounge it had a dirt floor and was a concrete box, still is a concrete box but treated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marten Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 At 40Hz wavelengths would be around 8 metres. If the microphone moved (say) less than 1 centimetre, would that be enough to make a big impact at those frequencies? The wave peak/trough interference effect distances would also be in the order of metres, so one would think you'd need to move the mic by something like a foot or so to have a big impact that low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scumbag Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 On 2nd thoughts, the 8 measurements are sufficiently consistent to lead me to discount any issue of there being anomalies in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jventer Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 @scumbag I started with a makeshift tool for the microphone. Then went to the local music shop and bought a microphone stand, less than $30 and really worth the long term effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scumbag Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 7 minutes ago, Jventer said: @scumbag I started with a makeshift tool for the microphone. Then went to the local music shop and bought a microphone stand, less than $30 and really worth the long term effort. I have a mic stand and a reference mic'. I use them to design speakers amongst other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niss_man Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 I can vouch for the quality of speakers scumbag produces. Sent from my C6903 using Tapatalk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marten Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 @scumbag Was electronic EQ part of the treatment you applied between Before and After snaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scumbag Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 No EQ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jventer Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 48 minutes ago, scumbag said: I have a mic stand and a reference mic'. I use them to design speakers amongst other things. Sorry, I thought you said you had the mic in your hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scumbag Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 17 minutes ago, Jventer said: Sorry, I thought you said you had the mic in your hand. Only whilst doing Karaoke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almikel Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 8 hours ago, scumbag said: I kept the mic' as still as I could. I guess I might have at some point moved it a tiny amount so that would perhaps account for a small change. Hi SB, have just scanned the whole thread when I do before and after measurements, a bump of the mike trashes the measurement - hard if you're moving treatment in/out of the room - the mike cannot move, or speakers - if you want to compare measurements. That said, your measurements are very consistent - looks like the mike didn't move Your 1st RT60 graph has far too much change in the before/after for the amount of treatment applied (IMHO) - something funny happening there Your waterfalls posted 30 July (Once upon a time there used to be numbering on posts @Marc) - show good damping from treatment above 100hz or so - as expected. I'm assuming there's no sub involved here? The dip between 40 and 90 Hz may be improved with speaker positioning or perhaps adding a sub (or 2) - it won't be fixed by absorption. You could try some eq as a no cost option - just be careful of amp clipping and driver excursion - yes most recommend not attempting to fill dips using EQ, I say try it within the limits of speakers and amps - it can help...but make things worse elsewhere in the room - EQ is like that. I'm a firm believer that treatment is the best "bang for buck" upgrade possible - especially when applied with measurements along the way. IMO some more absorption focussing on the low end would help - perhaps cover the existing "bass traps" with a membrane (eg builders plastic) to reflect higher freq - but don't expect much effect < 100Hz cheers mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scumbag Posted August 15, 2017 Share Posted August 15, 2017 21 hours ago, niss_man said: I can vouch for the quality of speakers scumbag produces. Sent from my C6903 using Tapatalk Welcome to drop in any time to listen to them fed by my Pass Labs and DirectStream Junior Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts