Chris...first, congrats!!

Second...  just introduce her to Christy...  hmm...  maybe on second thought we don't need a contingent of women here "monitoring" us guys, doing our thing?  We already got Amy (and she's pretty cool)....  then Christy  (she's pretty cool too)...  hmm... JC's wife has chimed in... (also pretty cool)  maybe there is a pattern there? 

Ya...I say bring her on!

Mike B: I've just now taken the time to munch on your EQ vs. room acoustics reply. 

1) I don't mind anyone being rough in their responses as long as it isn't ad hominem/childish stuff.  My wife reads some of these posts, and I didn't want to turn her off after the first posting on the Jubs.  Roy recommended that I go the forums, which I happily obliged.

2) Some of your reply addresses Haas effects (for others on the forum, this is the loudness-integrating effect of the human ear and the selection of the direction of the first arrival for multiple-source delays of less than 50 ms).  Everything else connects the dots on my understanding of the physics of matter.  Have you ever wondered if the RTA/EQs are doing some sort of cross correlation on the input pseudo-random noise generator as reference?  That would change our understanding of the behavior of RTA/EQs if true.  I look at how the unit sequentially adjusts the bands and wonder if the unit is doing something like this.  This would preserve phase/time-of-arrival information. However, the RTA/EQ information from Behringer doesn't say enough to really understand what it is doing.  RTA/EQs typically don't consider Fletcher-Munson, Haas, etc. effects because, first cut, machines don't integrate listening like humans do.  

3) Both of my "stupid questions" I asked are actually connected to each other .  I believe that your whole argument on room acoustics really points out that we must deal with early reflection and "mode" problems at their source. 

4) Source material (i.e. CDs, SACDs, vinyl, whatever) mixing/EQ problems are horses of different colors, I think.  These issues are hard-coded into our source bit streams/RIAA pathways, and I was wondering what the membership of this thead does about those problems.  Generally speaking, I just don't listen to poorly mixed music for very long before I hit the eject button.  This is a sad situation, really. If the problems are induced via "sound engineer signal processing" or mixing room acoustics issues then I believe we are basically out of luck.  

Cask05:

I believe that your whole argument on room acoustics really points out that we must deal with early reflection and "mode" problems at their source because EQ just rotates the early reflection problems to other parts of the room, and standing waves really wreak havoc on listening position selection. 

I think (seriously) that you & MAS would probably enjoy a conversation.  I realize you might not (yet) necessarily know who he is.

too much coffee?

Got me

DrWho:

mikebse2a3:

I must say personelly I have no problem taking an obviously poor recording that responds to some reasonable EQing and making it more listenable/realistic.

Nothing wrong with that! I've just found that I would rather just listen to the music than try to tweak the music.

I've also got this stupid idea about preserving the art of the sound engineer (no matter how bad I think the engineer was) - much like I wouldn't paint a mustache on the Mona Lisa, even though I think it would make it far far more interesting. It's just a different kind of listening (certainly not better), but it's why I don't bother with fixing the mix. I guess you could say that when I'm listening for enjoyment, I bust out the cheaper speakers that make everything palleteable...no need for hi-fi when you've got good music.

i am not trying to tweak the music....i am trying to tweak the bonehead that did a bad job of recording the music.  that is a big difference.....of course, i would be guessing what the music sounded like to begin with......

in Christ, because of God's grace,

roy

Coytee:

Cask05:

I believe that your whole argument on room acoustics really points out that we must deal with early reflection and "mode" problems at their source because EQ just rotates the early reflection problems to other parts of the room, and standing waves really wreak havoc on listening position selection. 

I think (seriously) that you & MAS would probably enjoy a conversation.  I realize you might not (yet) necessarily know who he is.

Coytee,

I'll take that as a term of endearment.  I've only seen a couple of posts from "MAS" but I can't say that I know that person.

What I really want is this: practical and effective solutions to problems that I've run into listening to sound reproduction systems.  

It was a serious comment (about MAS).  He can get a little detailed and for a dummy like me, get WAY over my head real fast...  but he's got some experience, at least a weeks worth , and is willing to share what he knows with those who have the interest to learn.

Might I impose to ask you to tell us a bit more about yourself and how you came to get the Jubilee?  and of course, obligatory pictures??  How'd you hear about them, what are you replacing with them? How you meet your wife...  oops, skip the last one!

Well, I've had an itch for audio since - well I can't remember.  We had a Khorn clone in the house growing up. I built acoustic suspension speakers in high school and college.  Much more recently, I acquired a pair of Khorn clones. I then learned about Jubs on this forum. Well, you know the rest.

Cask05:

with son David counterbalancing

I simply did the double fulcrum pittman arm cantilever over the ducted bearing trick...and they popped right out!

(ok, I just now made that up to intimidate you!!!  I actually used a box knife )

Roy,

Commercialization of music can be a terrible thing.  The whole rush toward vinyl today is sometimes justified based on commercialization of "loudness compression" in CDs.  I really don't understand this but there it is.  Anyone that would change the music of the artist (i.e., the musician/composer, not the guy pushing sliders) seems pretty brazen, but who am I.

Chris 

If you'd like to hear Jubilees at a dealer, just stop in at our loyal dealer Walter Novak in Eindhoven, Holland.  He's a great guy!

Mike TN: Sounds like you have been doing the room treatment thing for a while.  I'd be interested in any insights you have with moving your panels around.  I'd also like to have an idea of your relative room dimensions so I can understand if your setup is applicable to mine. 

Hey Chris

My setup and room dimensions are much different compared to yours but the basics(goals) needed in treating a domestic sized room would be similar.

If you aren't familiar with these sites I would encourage you to explore and read their articles/papers (especially the RPG site).

I also feel if someone is going to spend money and effort treating a room then economical software like Mike(Dr Who) mentions or ETF(RPlusD) is an absolute necessity to explore/verify what needs to be done when acoustically treating the room. To Much, To Little, or Wrongly Placed room treatments can have negative effects on sound reproduction in the room and this is where testing each room/setup is a must IMO if at all possible for someone.

Main RPG site:

http://www.rpginc.com/

Important info on application of diffusers:

http://www.rpginc.com/news/library/TechBullDiffCritList.pdf

RPG acoustic library(the RPG Book contains information from these papers so they are well worth reading. 

http://www.rpginc.com/news/library.htm

Two of the best books on acoustics and acoustical treatments I've read:

http://www.rpginc.com/book/

http://www.soundsystemengineering.com/

Another excellent site with articles:

http://www.acousticsciences.com/index.htm

ETF(RPlusD) site: Very Informative

http://www.etfacoustic.com/

mike tn