Raymond, not at all...I also treasures opinions and challenges. After putting in the painting, the sound from the left channel is cleaner and I can hear MORE details instead.
Interesting product and no less thought provoking dialogue!
AE has not failed to bring frontline gadgets to the scene. It would be helpful if PT / JLam can provide details on the acoustics aspects of the panel. At least on my part, I like to be an informed adopter.
My only wish is that we can have a choice on the artwork itself. A thematic rendition of a lady's silhouette would be a salivating start withouot causing a riot in the house. Salome is a tempting thought but which could be suicidal. Now I am thinking a more benign Marimekko print. What about having an image of our favorite musician / composer printed on a canvas - that will be so cool although I doubt if I want to stare at Bach / Beet all the time.
They are absorber of mid-range/trebel with an absorption coefficient around 0.5. (1 means total absorption, and 0 means zero absorption).
MatthewC, I have my own studio for recording. I know what you are talking about. Put it this way, the needs of a recording engineer and a music listner/audiophile are different. At times, I am confused about my role too. The misconception should be what exactly is your role. If my role as an audiophile or music listener, I dislike a studio enviornment especially for classical music. Not bad for Jazz and Pop. For recording purposes, the necessity of a professionally tuned studio is a must.
Please don't run too far into this. I am afraid I may sound like an asshole again.
Allow a little voice from Taipei to say something amongst all expert here. I am more in the camp of Raymond. It is all about balance. A studio is built for the purpose of studio, maybe for recording, maybe for other professional sound demonstration. To professional ears, the buzzing sound may not be there at all as they long get used to it. If a studio allows all details to be heard, we don't need Carnegie Hall or La Scala. The world can build concert hall like a studio. Can you imagine Berlin Phil playing in a studio environment? The needs are simply different. I apologize if I say something doesn't make sense.
I was wondering why you have Wavac and Tidal, now I think I understand why :-)
Studio design is another can of worm which I am not qualify to discuss. My place is a semi-studio done by Tom Hidley, using Kinoshita monitors. Quite an experiment, actually.
My theory is that studio sound has a lot ot do w/ studio equipment, not necessary the acoustics. So far, I think I am mostly right, though I mostly listen to Jazz, Pop, especially live recordings.
But my comments stands, in that if one goes past a certain point in attempts to reduce noice, with out doing a studio-like environment, then hell is where one's going.
With all due respect, I think concert halls are for live performances, and "studio" (actually more like control or mixing room), in the discussion here, is for sound recreation. I could be wrong, but I think these concert halls were built for unamplified sound.
And I simply don't believe you can get the same sensation of being in the same concert hall as recorded from CD/LP no matter what kind of room one lives in. You may get the feeling of being in a hall if you listen to hi-fi equipment in a highly reflective space, but not the same hall as where the performance was.
I am not trying to tell people they all should build a studio at home. Quite the contrary. I am saying unless one is trying to exactly that, be careful not to try to make the place too quiet, or pain will ensue.
Keep going. Very good discussion. It is not bad to have some heat. We are grateful of Marvel bro's idea to get us all into this lively and dynamic discussion.
Based on what you have described, this will be very similar to the Binary Absorption Difussion (BAD) Panel from RPG which I have used a while back. The BAD Panel offers increase absorption below 1K Hz and uniformly diffused sound above that cross over point thereby providing reflective control without destroying the room's ambience.
Marvel,
If you are interested to try out the BAD Panel for comparison sake, feel free to give me a call. They are quite light allowing easy deployment but obviously is not aesthetically as pleasing to that of the artwork panel. I personally would be very interested to find out the effectiveness between the two.
They are completely different. The BAD increasingly absorbs the bass under 1K. This art panel does not touches the bass. If the room has problem of excessive bass energy, the BAD will perform well. It will tame the bass witout over absorbing the mid/high. From what Marvel bro described, it seems that the culprit is his horn-loaded mid-range hitting the wall of the cabinet with tremendous energy. Correct me if I am wrong, I believe his Cessaro bass is a back loaded horn. I suspect his bass is just adequate now. Before the treatment, I am skeptical his bass can dive below 70hz. I am afraid we are comparing a apple to an orange.
Marvel, if I describe your sound under my imaginative mind wrongly, please accept my apologies in advance.
I am not using BAD anymore because the Tidal speaker mates quite well in my room with good balance. I do use resonators sparingly to enhance the harmonics though.
Raymond,
The technology behind the BAD panel is a 2-dimensional binary reflective amplitude grating sheet. My understanding is that the semi rigid fibre glass support panel at the back provides the absorption function once sound waves pass through the grating whereas 50% of the incident wave will be reflected / diffused back into the ambience.
I wonder if I took the reflective grating sheet out and stick it to a light weight non-absorptive panel, couldn't I simulate the impact of the art panel by just diffusing the mid range (~1K Hz) energy?
Comments
AE has not failed to bring frontline gadgets to the scene. It would be helpful if PT / JLam can provide details on the acoustics aspects of the panel. At least on my part, I like to be an informed adopter.
My only wish is that we can have a choice on the artwork itself. A thematic rendition of a lady's silhouette would be a salivating start withouot causing a riot in the house. Salome is a tempting thought but which could be suicidal. Now I am thinking a more benign Marimekko print. What about having an image of our favorite musician / composer printed on a canvas - that will be so cool although I doubt if I want to stare at Bach / Beet all the time.
Enjoy your music over typhoon!
They are absorber of mid-range/trebel with an absorption coefficient around 0.5. (1 means total absorption, and 0 means zero absorption).
MatthewC, I have my own studio for recording. I know what you are talking about. Put it this way, the needs of a recording engineer and a music listner/audiophile are different. At times, I am confused about my role too. The misconception should be what exactly is your role. If my role as an audiophile or music listener, I dislike a studio enviornment especially for classical music. Not bad for Jazz and Pop. For recording purposes, the necessity of a professionally tuned studio is a must.
Please don't run too far into this. I am afraid I may sound like an asshole again.
I was wondering why you have Wavac and Tidal, now I think I understand why :-)
Studio design is another can of worm which I am not qualify to discuss. My place is a semi-studio done by Tom Hidley, using Kinoshita monitors. Quite an experiment, actually.
My theory is that studio sound has a lot ot do w/ studio equipment, not necessary the acoustics. So far, I think I am mostly right, though I mostly listen to Jazz, Pop, especially live recordings.
But my comments stands, in that if one goes past a certain point in attempts to reduce noice, with out doing a studio-like environment, then hell is where one's going.
With all due respect, I think concert halls are for live performances, and "studio" (actually more like control or mixing room), in the discussion here, is for sound recreation. I could be wrong, but I think these concert halls were built for unamplified sound.
And I simply don't believe you can get the same sensation of being in the same concert hall as recorded from CD/LP no matter what kind of room one lives in. You may get the feeling of being in a hall if you listen to hi-fi equipment in a highly reflective space, but not the same hall as where the performance was.
I am not trying to tell people they all should build a studio at home. Quite the contrary. I am saying unless one is trying to exactly that, be careful not to try to make the place too quiet, or pain will ensue.
Based on what you have described, this will be very similar to the Binary Absorption Difussion (BAD) Panel from RPG which I have used a while back. The BAD Panel offers increase absorption below 1K Hz and uniformly diffused sound above that cross over point thereby providing reflective control without destroying the room's ambience.
Marvel,
If you are interested to try out the BAD Panel for comparison sake, feel free to give me a call. They are quite light allowing easy deployment but obviously is not aesthetically as pleasing to that of the artwork panel. I personally would be very interested to find out the effectiveness between the two.
Marvel, if I describe your sound under my imaginative mind wrongly, please accept my apologies in advance.
I am not using BAD anymore because the Tidal speaker mates quite well in my room with good balance. I do use resonators sparingly to enhance the harmonics though.
Raymond,
The technology behind the BAD panel is a 2-dimensional binary reflective amplitude grating sheet. My understanding is that the semi rigid fibre glass support panel at the back provides the absorption function once sound waves pass through the grating whereas 50% of the incident wave will be reflected / diffused back into the ambience.
I wonder if I took the reflective grating sheet out and stick it to a light weight non-absorptive panel, couldn't I simulate the impact of the art panel by just diffusing the mid range (~1K Hz) energy?