Jump to content

almikel

Members
  • Content Count

    2,825
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,467 Superstar

1 Follower

About almikel

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Brisbane
  • Country
    Australia
  • First Name
    Mike

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. it was great to see/listen to the gig. I'm wondering how it was done? whether it was really put together "live", or the bits all pre-recorded in stages, ie drum laid down first, then bass etc Latency even over direct links would be an issue, and internet links would be worse There may be specific solutions for this type of "gig", but having tried to jam as a band over solutions such as Zoom, Teams etc, just trying to clap in time turns into applause - the pinpoint timing required to play music as a band just doesn't seem possible with the musicians in different locations? ...we never manage the timing perfectly for "on my mind" even in the same room I'm completely OK if wasn't a true "live stream" - just interested in how it was done Mike
  2. typo check...suspect "shouldn't", instead of "should" - but we get what you meant definitely, or maybe more than 1 Just because your mains get down to 30-40Hz doesn't mean you don't need subs - subs are also about smoothing the "in room" bass response under 100Hz as well as extending the bottom end... ...but achieving good integration between mains and sub/s isn't trivial. give up now - just turn the volume down - you would wreck the sound pulling this freq range out. I know it's annoying - I have several live albums, where the mixer didn't pull the applause down enough - I wouldn't think of pulling that down with EQ agreed - it's about knowing when to apply EQ, and more importantly when not to apply EQ. at a technical level, EQ works when applying it to "minimum phase" issues, as typical parametric EQ is "minimum phase" - a peak or dip in the room response that's "minimum phase" can be fixed by the appropriate opposite cut or boost of EQ a reasonable (not great) explanation of "minimum phase" is here https://www.roomeqwizard.com/help/help_en-GB/html/minimumphase.html broad EQ cut generally works (refer @davewantsmoore's post above about 1/6 octave smoothing) as broad peaks are often "minimum phase" so respond to EQ cut sharp dips are never "minimum phase", so won't respond to EQ boost as per @aechmea's post - SBIR is never minimum phase - never try to boost dips, or cut peaks that are SBIR related. it's OK to boost dips with EQ you know are minimum phase - they'll never be steep, and applying broad EQ boost is fine you can measure where your room is minimum phase - see the REW guide above I use boost and cut below about 200Hz or so, based on where REW measurements show the response is minimum phase. Mike
  3. what do you want it to do? do you want to absorb only the highest frequencies in your room? again, what do you want it to do? what room acoustic issue are you looking to solve? agreed Some rooms have too many reflective surfaces and need absorption in the top end. Nearly every room has issues below 500Hz, and these will do nothing in that region. By the time you've managed your room issues <500Hz, you're looking to cover absorption to reflect higher frequencies back into the room. This looks like a great product for a notice board to pin notices to. Mike
  4. but as an end listener you have no clue what was the original...but maybe other interpretations of the original (LP vs CD, different masters etc) I only listen to digital, and I haven't looked closely via Audacity etc of the amount of compression applied, but I see an indication of the amount of compression based on the input level on my DEQX. Material that's compressed keeps the input levels on the DEQX maxed. What I find more interesting, and I haven't delved deeper yet (via Audacity etc), is that albums like the Killers "Sam's Town" and the Strokes "Is this It", on redbook CD, sound completely shite up loud, but Florence and the Machine albums (as an example) still sound great up loud - even though at an input level, they all pin the DEQX input to max through every song. Obviously there's degrees of compression where it still sounds OK up loud on a decent setup - the Killers/Strokes crossed over it and Florence didn't. It still comes back to how well it was mastered - all recordings have some level of dynamic compression (soft levels increased in volume and loud levels decreased in volume) - take an action movie as an example - compare dialogue with a gun shot - in real life you wear hearing protection when firing guns, but you don't wear hearing protection listening/watching movies - that's dynamic compression. Another great example of extreme dynamic range are Tom Danley's fireworks recordings https://www.danleysoundlabs.com/tom-danleys-mic-recordings/ Warning - these recordings can be speaker busters...you hear .nothing...nothing...nothing...turn it up...Bam...soft crackle,... Bam, Bam, Bam, soft crackle, Bam, Bam, BAM, sh!te turn it down, BAM, BAM BAM... quick, where is the remote? The purpose of bringing Danley's tracks into the thread was only to demonstrate extreme dynamic range - you never experience huge dynamic range with typical music, or even movies. Well recorded vinyl will sound fantastic for all music, but the vinyl guys will acknowledge you couldn't put Danley's tracks on vinyl without significant compression. Mike
  5. I can think in feet, but anything I measure is mm or m. I have an old tape measure that has both metric and imperial, but chucked it in a drawer hopefully never needed...I only buy tape measures with mm and m (too many times where a numpty - me included - read off the wrong scale). I use google if I need to convert in more detail than 1 inch = 25.4mm... ...but I also think cm should be banned...I never buy tape measures that have cm. Mike
  6. hopefully someday metric units will be the norm... so your room is approx 3.1m x 6.1m with ceiling 3.7m? Length and width modes are going to bunch up for sure - the "in room" sound won't care that you only use half the room for music listening - it will use all the room...and beyond the room, if the boundaries aren't rigid. Mike
  7. I wouldn't think so agreed mastering onto vinyl will add further limits reduced volume peaks (than could be supported by digital) to prevent the needle jumping out of the groove tracing distortion increasing from outer groove to inner groove, meaning treble needs to be wound back towards the inner grooves as the needle just can't track the accelerations required for higher frequencies towards the inner grooves I see zero benefit in using vinyl as the playback medium, if the recording/mastering is digital. Mike
  8. you're probably sitting in a bass null - which will be deeper due to the rigid boundaries than if the room had lightweight walls that the bass mostly passed straight through - similarly you'll have stronger bass peaks. If you move around the room with music playing, you'll likely find the bass is much stronger in other positions. Mike
  9. Rigid boundaries - that's gonna be a tough room to manage bass, especially if the volume is turned up. I'd be looking to use your budget on a measurement rig and room treatment. mike
  10. in a rigid room, there is a pressure maximum and velocity minimum at each boundary in a corner (say wall/wall or floor/wall) that means 2 pressure maximums (1 for each boundary) in a tri corner that means 3 pressure maximums (all the room axial modes) so corners are a good place to trap bass - especially with pressure traps (membrane, Helmholtz etc)... ...but absorption traps work on velocity, and I mentioned above that you get velocity minimums at boundaries... ...which is why you get best/lower freq performance from absorption when it's gapped/straddling corners - you need to place the absorption away from the boundary so velocity is >0 for it to work. Highest velocity is wavelength/4 @150Hz, wavelength = 2.3m so absorption placed at max velocity is 572mm away from the boundary - you can see why absorption gets large and deep for low frequencies... The upside is that the absorption can be closer to the boundary than wavelength/4...but to get down to 150Hz or so it still needs to be big eg at least 200mm thick and at least 1m wide, preferably floor to ceiling. Mike
  11. it's very room dependant - it's very handy to acquire a measurement rig (microphone, microphone stand, laptop running REW) to measure what's going on in your room in the bottom end. managing a room bass issue below 70Hz would be extraordinarily difficult with room treatment - basically managing anything lower than 125-150Hz gets very big and likely narrowband (eg pressure traps - membrane, helmholtz, limp mass etc) I have a bunch of absorption in my room, with none of it large/deep enough to be effective below 125-150Hz or so - but the improvement to the "in room" sound <500Hz is significant in my "lightly constructed" room, where low bass just passes through the walls. The bass issues remaining in my room under 150Hz are easily dealt with using a few bands of EQ cut. My scenario would be very different if my room boundaries were rigid (eg besser block or double brick) reflecting bass back into the room instead of lightweight gyprock/stud/blueboard allowing low bass to pass through. cheers Mike
  12. curtains soak up treble and not bass, so curtains will change the room sound. The best example of too much treble absorption and no bass absorption is typical bad rehearsal rooms - block walls with egg crate foam everywhere - boomy bass and chopped out treble. You won't know until you try it - but a measurement rig would help you quantify what the curtains did to the room sound. Mike
  13. the problem with headphones is you'll never get the visceral impact (eg punch you in the chest type feeling), but I get fantastic bass from my Etymotic ER4Ps that are well over 10 years old now. 👍 The media of the recording (vinyl/CD/hi res down load/even MP3) is less important than the quality of the recording. I've got plenty of commercial CDs that were poorly mastered that are OK in the car, but are un-listenable up loud on my main rig...but plenty of 256K and 320K MP3s that were ripped from good recordings that sound fabulous on my main rig - mere mortals like myself couldn't tell they were MP3s... But I would never rip a CD to MP3 - always FLAC - I burn MP3s onto CD from my FLAC collection for listening in the car. FLAC is a lossless compression algorithm that can support higher resolution and more channels than CD (44.1kHz / 16bit stereo) - but as eltech says, a FLAC version of a CD will sound the same as a CD. The vast majority of my music library are FLAC rips from my CD collection. When I buy a CD these days I rip it to FLAC on my music laptop immediately, flip through the booklet a few times and put the CD away. I have a small collection of vinyl (<100), which at some stage I'll get around to acquiring a decent vinyl rig to play...but I'm very unlikely to start buying vinyl again as it's become prohibitively expensive. CDs will be available for a while longer, but will get phased out eventually - my crystal ball says no greater than 10 years as mentioned above MP3 is a lossy format - the compression algorithm discards data based on what the ear/brain won't hear based on psycho-acoustic research/models. For example a loud sound at the same time as a soft sound - the MP3 algorithm will discard the soft sound and that data is lost. For serious listening MP3 would generally be regarded as inferior to other formats - but due to the data compression has much lower data storage requirements - and as I said above, "reasonable" bit rate MP3s (say 256K or 320K) ripped from decent source material (ie well recorded) can sound great. FLAC (Free Audio Lossless Compression) is as the acronym states lossless compression. FLAC has become the format of choice for ripping CDs, and for those that can be bothered and have the kit, ripping digital copies of their vinyl...I won't comment on whether they sound the same. FLAC can support higher resolution (sampling rate and bit depth) and more channels than CD, but think of FLAC as a storage container of flexible size that compresses data without losing any. It's not a music format, it's a compression algorithm to store music without loss. This question could lead down many rabbit holes. The easiest answer is what @audiofeline said - both CD and vinyl will sound fabulous if recorded well. But it would be incorrect to say that treble and bass is narrower on CD than a "quality vinyl LP of the past" Flame wars will no doubt ensue, but : CD can support frequencies up to 22kHz and all frequencies below that down to roughly DC (not that our speakers could reproduce that) CD can support higher dynamic range than vinyl across the audio spectrum (say 20Hz - 20kHz) tracing distortion with vinyl increases from the outer groove to the inner inner groove, meaning treble is typically backed off towards the inner grooves as the needle struggles to track the acceleration required to reproduce higher frequencies towards the inner grooves dynamic range on vinyl needs to be reduced in the bass region to stop the needle jumping out of the groove Suffice to say that IMHO CD is in no way inferior to Vinyl - it comes down to how well the music was recorded, not the medium (CD/Vinyl/Streaming/SACD etc etc) Mike
  14. Hi Dan, just build a 1D using timber slats - no code required, just a random sequence Mike
  • Classifieds Statistics


    Currently Active Ads

    Total Sales (Since 2018)

    Total Sales Value (Last 14 Days)

    Total Ads Value (Since March 2020)
×
×
  • Create New...