Thread: Good Acoustic Room Treatment

Originally Posted by MadMax

"Technically", what I posted was an attack - on ignorance, lack of accuracy, misconceptions or whatever you want to name it... but not totally a personal attack on John, per se.

That was what I meant Max. It wasn't just some guy venting waving a knife, it was some guy raving because he is TIRED of seeing these kinds of posts from well intentioned but ill-equipped persons, all over the Internet, go unchecked.

So check and mate...mate ;)


edit: "all health issues aside or maybe in spite of,"

Yea, I covered the lunatic thing, just put a hi-pass filter on it ;)

HA! Me LIKEY the hi-pass filter comment... makes a lotta sense too! I'll concede the mate, mate!

I just hope that Steve will jump back in here... or over in the Acoustics Forum (and anyone else that's trying to tame their room, for that matter) so he can get pointed in the right direction.

... and just as a "slight" aside...

It really doesn't cost that much to improve almost any room's response. It mainly just takes a bit of digging into the math, and learning the basics of what is known to be accurate and proven principles of enclosures and their optimization for music and/or vocal recording.

"It really doesn't cost that much to improve almost any room's response. It mainly just takes a bit of digging into the math, and learning the basics of what is known to be accurate and proven principles of enclosures and their optimization for music and/or vocal recording."


I know that from first hand experience. It costs less to do the job right, one time, then it does to do it wrong one time.

With the great proliferation of home recording, I have this to add. Home recording is a kin to ON LOCATION RECORDING. And with on location recording such as, nightclubs, or personal spaces, churches, rehearsal rooms, outdoor festivals, etc., you don't get ideal acoustics. You can't change the acoustics. You have to use the acoustics to your best advantage. Bad acoustics can & have to be utilized when you can't change them. In home recording, it's a matter of trial and error to obtain a good workable, listenable product. Much of the bad acoustics that people talk about in home recordings is largely due to a misunderstanding of how to properly mix and/or record and excessive use of dynamics processing such as compression/limiting. This over enhances bad acoustics. So less is more. And some troublesome acoustics can actually be minimized through the proper use of fast & variable downward expansion. Sometimes people refer to that as a gate. Gates are fine for on and off, such as gating toms/snare/bass drum but gating is generally not good on vocals and any other instruments that have any kind of sustain to them. Whereas " downward expansion" is a smooth downward transition of level to a predetermined lower level. Like compression & limiting attack and release times have to be tailored to the specific singer or instrument. And with some particularly bad acoustical spaces, it might be more advantageous to properly over exaggerate it than to try and minimize it. This is what experience brings. This strange mindset of mine comes from a background in live broadcasts for radio & TV & on location and is not quite the same concept in the creation & construction of an actual purpose built recording studio. Most folks that come to this forum just don't have that kind of money to blow in their residence nor is that practical. It's an extravagant application & job to try and turn the average living space into a luxurious acoustic environment. Generally, most home studios in small spaces do not possess the cubic area necessary for any real kind of acoustic environment other than dead. And dead is dead as in disco is dead which pretty much dictated the sound in the 1970s to an environment full of a health risk of excessive pink fiberglass. And that scenario was even true at George Massenburg's ITI studio in the 1970s. We don't go there anymore (ultra dead spaces). Unfortunately, most folks just want to make a fun & nice recording at home without a real budget & a few pieces of recording equipment plugged into their laptop. Now if you were constructing a home studio and you had a space of say, 50 feet by 100 feet with 15 foot high ceilings, you'll have to shell out a few dollars but that's a warehouse not a home. So while the desire to put up some carpet or pretty acoustic foam appeals to many and you believe that will solve the sound of your recording problems, you're wrong. You're going to still have acoustic aberrations that can't be dealt with effectively in a small space without an appreciable amount of investment. So you folks should all think about home recording as an "on location" Event not a studio event and that's what separates the pros from the I don't knows.

I have a big nose & knows
Mx. Remy Ann David

Originally Posted by MadMax

I just hope that Steve will jump back in here... or over in the Acoustics Forum (and anyone else that's trying to tame their room, for that matter) so he can get pointed in the right direction.

Unfortunately, there isn't a dedicated Acoustics forum listed here at RO anymore. Although, someone can still find lots of the archived threads if they use the right search terms.

If you're feeling lucky, there are still loads of acoustics threads here worth reading just by using 'Ethan Winer' and/or 'Eric Desart' as search terms. Some of them are beginner friendly, and some of them are highly technical discussions between peers and engineers that will make a beginner's head explode.

5 years ago that almost happened to me. My head almost exploded. I had a hydrocephalic condition that nearly killed me. Probably all of that rock 'n roll? Acoustics are just for people that don't know how to make good recordings to begin with. With good acoustics you almost can't make a bad recording. And that's why most of the novices here should learn how to make a good recording under less than ideal conditions. How else are you going to learn how to do things if everything is perfect to begin with?? When we were younger, we didn't go to school to pass our tests before we were taught. There is a logical progression to what I am talking about. I worked with plenty of recording students from universities that could do things right, since everything else in place was correct. You're not going to learn about acoustics until you have to deal with the lousy acoustics first. We all have to grow up through this process to get to the other side. You don't just walk into Oceanside Studios out of high school to learn recording. Although, I've told plenty of people in a sense to do just that. You want to learn how to record well? You take your band to the best studio you can find, to the best engineer you can use and then you pick their brains throughout the entire session. After all, you're paying for it. This is a different way to go than enrolling in a school for it and actually a lot less costly. Plus, you'll probably come away with a quality product you can be proud of while you learned something. I mean $40,000 for a degree in moving volume controls?? That's nuts. It's crazy. It's fraud! Of course we all need teachers & mentors of some kind along the way. This is the same as learning how to sing or play violin. Generally, you get it from a single teacher over a long-term. Sometimes, in the land of academia, all this unrelated crap is also necessary to get your fraudulent piece of paper. Not everybody needs that piece of paper. Of course today, we have been over encumbered with the plethora of complexities. Everybody wants to try and out complex the other. This isn't necessary either. Simplicity and technique produces music. Whereas math, science, history creates a clinical technician. A clinical technician may also be able to produce music that I've found that some of the most talented have the least credentials. Even George Massenburg didn't finish his electrical engineering degree at Hopkins because he used to argue with all of his professors. He knew better. HE KNEW BETTER. And when he wanted something properly designed he employed an electrical engineer that could work things out to his specifications. I work the same way. There is theory and then there's practice. The two don't necessarily mathematically work out. I appreciate the well educated folks who we rely upon to enable us to make recordings. But when their circuits don't sound quite right, we have to modify them in a way that may not be mathematically accurate. You can't argue this with me because I've worked on the manufacturing end of professional audio equipment. But the college educated can help to guide us in the general direction we want to go. And after you've spent a good chunk of your life at honing your skills, you effectively have a degree without the piece of paper. Of course a lot of people want to see that piece of paper because they have no vision, no insight, no talent. Unfortunately, you can't really teach talent. It's one of those things in life that you either have or you don't. And I know some folks that have been extremely frustrated by that because they thought they had the talent for something. It's okay to make mistakes. To err is human and correct. In the wrong kind of right way.

What the heck did I say? I don't know?
Mx. Remy Ann David

Originally Posted by dvdhawk

Unfortunately, there isn't a dedicated Acoustics forum listed here at RO anymore. Although, someone can still find lots of the archived threads if they use the right search terms.

OK... you got me... The Studio Construction Forum.... (A whole lot easier to say Acoustics... but not accurate.)

I miss having a forum to read just on the topic of Acoustics, but I would imagine it's hard to keep such self-less and prestigious moderators - especially considering that giving DIY advice takes a bite out of their livelihood. But, it was great while it lasted.