Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Room Setup
|
|
| Re: Room Setup [message #59059 is a reply to message #59055] |
Thu, 13 October 2005 04:18   |
![John [1] is currently offline](/theme/PARIS_Forum_Template/images/offline.png "John [1] is currently offline")
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ill sound pretty
natural, and not particularly dead, absorbent or weird. To give you an
idea of how I approach this for clients, Iâve included drawings of a
generic âmonitor shellâ I often use. Use it for inspiration!
Standing Waves
Standing waves are the long low frequency waves supported by the room
dimensions. They add a resonant signature to the room, and are
generally problematical at low frequencies. At mid and high
frequencies, standing waves are everywhere in great profusion, and
they donât matter for our purposes here.
Happily, standing waves are dependent on the room walls being reflective
at low frequencies. IF you make the front wall absorptive at low
frequencies, you will pretty much take care of any standing waves that
would be a problem. Further, openings like doors and windows can make
excellent bass traps, if isolation is not an issue â for instance, I
use a big atrium window as a bass trap in my room, and it works very well.
Loudspeaker Placement
Loudspeaker placement is often as important as the choice of loudspeaker
itself in determining the overall sound quality of a system. There are
a couple of principles to get you started, and if youâve done your
homework on the room, above, placement of the monitors is going to be a
lot more benign, not to mention easier.
To begin with, the loudspeakers need to use the same median plane as the
room has â this is a key ingredient for symmetry.
Secondly, the tweeters need to be at ear height, and/or directly aimed
at the ears (unless the manufacturer specifically tells you otherwise).
Third, the speakers need to be either mounted âinâ the front
wall (âsoffitedâ) or be far enough âfromâ the front wall to keep
low frequency response from being seriously disrupted by interfering
reflections from the front wall. Mounting âinâ the wall is a pretty
nice thing to do, and it is moderately easy if you build something like
my absorbent âmonitoring shellâ for the front wall that includes
cutouts for the speakers.
If you want the speakers to be out in the room, it is good to get them
several feet (at least 3 feet, 5 is better) from the front wall, unless
that wall is REALLY absorbent at low frequencies. Similarly, you should
avoid placing the speakers too close to the side walls (Iâd suggest 3
feet as a minimum distance). Finally, you should avoid having the
speakers at the same distance from the front and side walls, if possible.
For the rest of it, there is a common practice tradition of listening to
speakers that are each 30° off the median plane (and we do our serious
listening ON the median plane), so that the two loudspeakers and our
listening position constitute an equilateral triangle. This setup works
pretty well, but the 30° part is fairly informal and so long as the
phantom images and spaciousness are working well, you can have wider or
narrower spreads without much problem. What you definitely have to have
is symmetry, and you must be listening on the median plane.
Loudspeaker Behavior
Ah, yes. The loudspeakers. They are part of the system, arenât they?
What do we need from the loudspeakers themselves? Iâve been working
hard on this question over the past couple of years, and have some
suggestions, as you can probably imagine.
First off, loudspeakers need to have reasonably flat frequency response
on axis. They also need to have pretty benign off-axis response, which
is to say that even though the high frequency output will fall off
dramatically off-axis (except on MY loudspeakers, of course), it needs
to do so smoothly. It would also be nice if it doesnât fall off too
much over +/- 15° at, say, 10 kHz.
Low distortion is another issue for loudspeakers. Transducers, which
are mechanical devices, generally have a pretty narrow range of linear
behavior. Keeping speakers with small woofers out of significant
distortion is hard.
The point here is that you need to pick your speakers with care. âAny
old speakerâ is no longer good enough, particularly once youâve gone
to the trouble to get everything else right. Without a doubt, you will
also need something crass like Auratones to check your mixes on, but you
really do need something better, something really good, with which to do
your tracking, mixing and maybe a little pre-mastering. The
loudspeaker is your musical instrument. It is also a lab instrument.
Yikes! Enough said!!
Where The Rubber Hits The Road
As you can see from the above, it is all actually pretty straightforward
stuff, although you can get into some serious carpentry projects if you
are so inclined. In short, youâve gotta get your room quiet, make it
symmetrical, get the decay time down, buy good loudspeakers and
place âem carefully.
If you do those good things, and are careful and fussy about
maintaining âem, you can actually have really nice sound in your
control room for pretty cheap. The trick comes, of course, in adapting
your particular space to this set of requirements. You will have to
make all sorts of compromises. Thatâs part of the game. The trick is
to make compromises that get you close to where you want to be.
Time-sharing the AC for lower noise floor, re-arranging the furniture
for symmetry, sealing up a window for isolation and symmetry, fiberglass
or foam on the front wall to knock down early reflections and shorten
decay, moving the speakers around to different positions for symmetry
and bass response.
Make a dual check list showing these principles in one column and how
your room stacks up in the other. From this derive a list of the things
you can do to get your room closer to these principles. Estimate the
cost of each thing. Do the cheap ones first! Do one at a time and
evaluate the improvement youâve gotten. Nibble away at it. Keep in
mind, itâll never be perfect, but that doesnât matter â nothing
ever is! The trick is to get the most performance for the least bucks.
Happy nails!
Dave Moulton is trying to build the perfect loudspeaker. You can
complain to him about anything at www.davemoulton.com.
Mike wrote:
> Has anyone analyzed their control room and had success with adjustments? Ive
> never done this and not sure if its for me.
>
> 1) What did you use to analyze it?
> 2) How did you know what to do to fix problems?
> 3) What did you do to fix the problems?
>
> I guess Im wondering if it is worth it to buy an analyzer like the Rane RA27
> or something - or - would I be better off just learning my room as is.
>
>The best thing anyone can do is control and tame the low end refquencies.
This summer I built two DYI bass traps (based on Ethan Winer's Real Traps,
and the DYI SuperChuck designs). T he results were outstanding!
I've detailed the project and results at http://www.radford.edu/~shelm/acoustics/bass-traps.html
Hope this helps.
Steve
Mike" <spamthis@alltel.net> wrote:
>Has anyone analyzed their control room and had success with adjustments?
Ive
>never done this and not sure if its for me.
>
>1) What did you use to analyze it?
>2) How did you know what to do to fix problems?
>3) What did you do to fix the problems?
>
>I guess Im wondering if it is worth it to buy an analyzer like the Rane
RA27
>or something - or - would I be better off just learning my room as is.
>
>Sorry for the typo. That should have been low end frequencies.
"Steve Helm" <shelm@radford.edu> wrote:
>
>The best thing anyone can do is control and tame the low end refquencies.
>This summer I built two DYI bass traps (based on Ethan Winer's Real Traps,
>and the DYI SuperChuck designs). T he results were outstanding!
>
>I've detailed the project and results at http://www.radford.edu/~shelm/acoustics/bass-traps.html
>
>Hope this helps.
>Steve
>
>
>Mike" <spamthis@alltel.net> wrote:
>>Has anyone analyzed their control room and had success with adjustments?
>Ive
>>never done this and not sure if its for me.
>>
>>1) What did you use to analyze it?
>>2) How did you know what to do to fix problems?
>>3) What did you do to fix the problems?
>>
>>I guess Im wondering if it is worth it to buy an analyzer like the Rane
>RA27
>>or something - or - would I be better off just learning my room as is.
>>
>>
>Hey,
I just spent the last 2 months re-building my studio. The original
layout/design were giving me tons of problems in the low end, and
nothing seemed to make it better. It's just the problem inherent in a
smaller room.
So, what I did was knock out a couple of walls (that were part of the
studio not the house) so I could turn the gear 90 degrees so the room is
now wider than it is long. I have 4" wedge foam in 6'x2' panels a foot
apart on the rear wall and just drywall on the front, for the "live
end/dead end" effect. Sounds great in the mix position but is just a tad
boomy outside of that.
I used the software SMAART to anylize the room but the traps I'd need
would take up too much space. The problem is that the boom goes up as
you get close to the foam wall.
For me an eq won't help because the mix position is fine, so I think
I'll do some mixes there over the weekend and if they sound fine. Still,
I don't know what I'll do if they are bass-wonky.
jef
Mike wrote:
> Has anyone analyzed their control room and had success with adjustments? Ive
> never done this and not sure if its for me.
>
> 1) What did you use to analyze it?
> 2) How did you know what to do to fix problems?
> 3) What did you do to fix the problems?
>
> I guess Im wondering if it is worth it to buy an analyzer like the Rane RA27
> or something - or - would I be better off just learning my room as is.
>
>Which is now owned by Loud Technologies... AKA Mackie.
David.
Aaron Allen wrote:
> this may sound completely ridiculous, but have you contacted Peavey online?
> I've had several of their old 70's amps that may have the big chrome switch
> I think you are looking for dude.
> Ampeg would be another viable source for this. Ask for replacement parts.
> Ampeg is owned by St Louis Music now, fyi.
>
> AA
>
>
> "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:434e00fb$1@linux...
>
>>"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>>
>>>www.partsexpress.com might have something
>>>www.mcmelectronics.com might have something as well
>>>www.markertek.com usually has it or can get it
>>
>>A fantastic list of stores which are going straight in my favourites for
>>future reference, however I still can't find what I'm looking for.
>>
>>I'm wondering if I should look into the option of removing the latching
>>mechanism
>>from the latching switches to make my own non latching variety...
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Kim.
>
>
>I'm installing Paris 3.0 software on a Mac G4 computer and seeking the necessary
Pace Key Authorization.
Over 36 hours ago, I e-mailed all pertinent data (original order number,
key number, original response code as well as the S/N from my EDS 1000 Card
and the new Challenge Code for my new installation on the G4) to support@intdevices.com,
but have heard nothing back. I'm starting to get a little worried. Has anyone
recently obtained their Pace Key Authorization through support@intdevices.com
and, if so, how soon did you hear back from them? Also, is this the only
way to obtain Pace Key authorization? If you've recently obtained Pace Key
authorization for Paris 3.0, could you share with me the process?
Thanks for your help.
Best wishes,
Richard Faylor
RichardFaylor@aol.comDoes anyone know of some room analysis software for a mac?
Dale
jef knight <thestudio@allknightmusic.com> wrote:
>Hey,
>
>I just spent the last 2 months re-building my studio. The original
>layout/design were giving me tons of problems in the low end, and
>nothing seemed to make it better. It's just the problem inherent in a
>smaller room.
>
>So, what I did was knock out a couple of walls (that were part of the
>studio not the house) so I could turn the gear 90 degrees so the room is
>now wider than it is long. I have 4" wedge foam in 6'x2' panels a foot
>apart on the rear wall and just drywall on the front, for the "live
>end/dead end" effect. Sounds great in the mix position but is just a tad
>boomy outside of that.
>
>I used the software SMAART to anylize the room but the traps I'd need
>would take up too much space. The problem is that the boom goes up as
>you get close to the foam wall.
>
>For me an eq won't help because the mix position is fine, so I think
>I'll do some mixes there over the weekend and if they sound fine. Still,
>I don't know what I'll do if they are bass-wonky.
>
>jef
>
>
>
>
>Mike wrote:
>> Has anyone analyzed their control room and had success with adjustments?
Ive
>> never done this and not sure if its for me.
>>
>> 1) What did you use to analyze it?
>> 2) How did you know what to do to fix problems?
>> 3) What did you do to fix the problems?
>>
>> I guess Im wondering if it is worth it to buy an analyzer like the Rane
RA27
>> or something - or - would I be better off just learning my room as is.
>>
>>I re-authorized PACE through them earlier this year and they got back to me
in about a week. I was a little concerned also, but they came through. The
system will run 7 days without authorization.
"Richard Faylor" <RichardFaylor@aol.com> wrote in message
news:434e7b0e$1@linux...
>
> I'm installing Paris 3.0 software on a Mac G4 computer and seeking the
necessary
> Pace Key Authorization.
>
> Over 36 hours ago, I e-mailed all pertinent data (original order number,
> key number, original response code as well as the S/N from my EDS 1000
Card
> and the new Challenge Code for my new installation on the G4) to
support@intdevices.com,
> but have heard nothing back. I'm starting to get a little worried. Has
anyone
> recently obtained their Pace Key Authorization through
support@intdevices.com
> and, if so, how soon did you hear back from them? Also, is this the only
> way to obtain Pace Key authorization? If you've recently obtained Pace Key
> authorization for Paris 3.0, could you share with me the process?
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> Best wishes,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Room Setup [message #59065 is a reply to message #59062] |
Thu, 13 October 2005 08:46 |
Dale
Messages: 77
Registered: September 2005
|
Member |
|
|
/>
task of being kicked around. It doesn't mention foot use in the description.
Cheers,
Kim.
"simmo" <simmo@bigfoot.com.au> wrote:
>
>Kim, try Jaycar Electronics, part no. SP-0732 or SP-0755 for the
>momentary, page 86 and 87 of their current catalogue. They look
>a bit weird but they work. www.jaycar.com.au >simmo
>
> "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>Yehy, can't seem to see anything there either. This seems to be one of
those
>>items that you'd think you could get easily, but when you go looking they
>>seem near impossible to find.
>>
>>Thanks for the suggestions... actually I haven't checked out the Roland
>>products yet so I'll do that now, but I really wanted to build my own so
>>I could do several keyboards on a single unit...
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Kim.
>>
>>"Mark McDermott" <mark@stateofwail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Hi Kim,
>>>
>>>Try this link:
>>>
>>>http://www.digikey.com
>>>
>>>They have just about everything you could ever need in electronics supplies.
>>>
>>>Also, Roland makes a couple of very nice foot switches. I don't think
you'd
>>>be able to customize them very easily but they are very heavy duty pro-quality
>>>devices. Try this link:
>>>
>>> http://www.rolandus.com/products/subcategory.asp?CatID=1& ;Su
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Room Setup [message #59071 is a reply to message #59067] |
Thu, 13 October 2005 16:33 |
Cujjo
Messages: 325
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
nce, however I still can't find what I'm looking for.
>>>
>>>I'm wondering if I should look into the option of removing the latching
>>>mechanism
>>>from the latching switches to make my own non latching variety...
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>Kim.
>>
>>If you have to pull it apart, you may find this useful.
AA
"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:434f0010$1@linux...
> Swen has a couple sticky C-16 mute buttons. They work, but they're sticky.
> I
> think a very small amount of splashed beer may be the culprit. It's a
> bizarre tale involving a beer that was dropped onto the floor 4-6 feet
> away
> from the mixing area. The beer landed upright, but shot a stream of beer
> up
> into the air, and a few drops landed on the mute buttons on channels 15 &
> 16.
>
> Any way to easily clean? Spray a little contact cleaner in there?
>
> Jimmy
>
>
We'll try it.
Deej, you're a gentleman.
Jimmy
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:434f0980@linux...
> Make sure the inputs and outputs are both patched. also, If it's s/pdif,
> chances are that he won't see a thing on the meters. None of my spdif
> devices show signal on the Paris aux meters. Have him set the device to
full
> wet and solo the return. That will tell him if anything is happening.
>
> Deej
>
> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:434eff73$1@linux...
> > Hi, all.
> >
> > My buddy Swen abd I have both succesfully clocked our Paris rigs to
Lucid
> > clocks. Yay!
> >
> > I have not yet tried to route digital signals to external FX boxes, but
> Swen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Room Setup [message #59090 is a reply to message #59084] |
Fri, 14 October 2005 06:41 |
Dale
Messages: 77
Registered: September 2005
|
Member |
|
|
ms therefore that the Apple display with the DVI connection
will be superior in quality to any typical PC-world display with a VGA connection.
My question: Which is better for monitoring Paris--two 17" or 19" displays
(costing $1,000 or so together) of decent quality or one 20" display (costing
$800) of marginally better quality?
Many thanks,
Richard Faylor
RichardFaylor@aol.com
(208) 343-7681This is better!
https://www.bestbuyplasma.com/Plasma/Product.asp_X_sku_Y_LT3 2HV
I just got one and all I can say is WOW! Especially with the DVI!
Then I have an 18" flat panel over to the side for displaying plug-ins
though really not required.
Mike
"Richard Faylor" <RichardFaylor@aol.com> wrote in message
news:434fc1ba$1@linux...
>
> Richard,
>
> I've bought a used Mac G4 to use with Paris that has more horsepower than
> my previous Mac G3. Now I have to make a decision about displays. The G4
> has two video cards so it can support two monitors. But one of the video
> cards provides a DVI digital connection that, according to Apple, works
> better
> with the newest Apple displays, such as their 20-inch $800 display. My
> local
> Apple salesman claims therefore that the Apple display with the DVI
> connection
> will be superior in quality to any typical PC-world display with a VGA
> connection.
>
> My question: Which is better for monitoring Paris--two 17" or 19" displays
> (costing $1,000 or so together) of decent quality or one 20" display
> (costing
> $800) of marginally better quality?
>
> Many thanks,
> Richard Faylor
>
> RichardFaylor@aol.com
> (208) 343-7681
>I'm running two 17" flat screens on my G4. The DVI will give you better
quality into a DVI equipped monitor, but for PARIS, it won't make much
difference. You'd only notice a dramatic difference if you were working with
really high resolution graphics, etc. My advice would be to go with two 17"
or 19" monitors (the bigger the better) and use a DVI to VGA adaptor if
needed. It will be more total screen area than one 20". Also, check the
specs on the monitors and look for a high contrast ratio, 500:1 or higher,
pixel pitch (.264 is better than .297), and response time (faster is
better). I'm sure you know all that already. Sorry to ramble.
Tony
"Richard Faylor" <RichardFaylor@aol.com> wrote in message
news:434fc1ba$1@linux...
>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun Dec 01 21:59:01 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01651 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
