Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Don Pearce wrote:
Interestingly the peaks of sound are only slightly raised above normal
level - it is the dips that are the big problem, with some frequencies
almost vanishing at some points on the room. If you had a hum problem
at some positions, you had a hum problem, full stop. Just at many
places in the room you couldn't hear it.

Playing a low frequency sine wave is always a revealing way of
assessing a room. Just play it and walk around - very depressing in
99% of rooms.

Last place I had was a large Victorian flat where the living room was near
a perfect cube, and some speakers produced near enough no audible bass.
Worst offenders were a pair of Tannoy Autographs which are massive corner
horn loaded devices. But no bass whatsoever. Go out into the hall, and the
house was shaking with it...

--
*The beatings will continue until morale improves *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.


I have found that a room about 4.6m by 4.6 m with another room behind
it[in my case a kitchen,but an office would work well too] and
seperated by a low wall works really well.This room has a full width
bay window[135 degree ,1.3 metres deep so overall room depth including
this window is 5.9 metres]].My speakers are located just forward of
this window space and I have thick curtains behind.Ceiling height is
standard 2.4 m.Floor is direct glue 12mm hardwood over concrete and the
walls are rough rendered [bagged] not smooth plastered.
This is an excellent room acoustically-especially as regards
imaging.Many people comment on this.
I used to have a pretty good room in another house which was 6m by 6m
with a vaulted ceiling but it was still not a patch on the bay window
room.
I actually built a dedicted room 4.2m by 6m,high ceilings and open at
the long end.This is more of a recommended size but sounds terrible.I
only use it for home theatre but it has so much echo even following
dialogue is hard.

JT