I've had a quick look. Initial thoughts;
Hey Jennifer! I owe you a debt of gratitude for taking the time to look at my REW data and ESPECIALLY for alerting me to Stuart’s “String Trick” method. It got me out of a stalemate big-time! THANK YOU!
I hadn’t understood anything about impulse data and didn’t even know about the 20ms / -20dB rule (and now understand Stuart’s handle). That was EXACTLY what I needed to hear! I went to work on it and identified the reflection sources. This string method is so simple that it’s genius!!
I went ahead and set up temporary materials and retested.
Here is an Excel spreadsheet listing the points of concern with original readings and after-treatment readings.
Example: Before treatment – left speaker
Example: After treatment – left speaker
I was so jazzed to see how well this method nailed these places!
Here is the new REW data after treatment.
I think I can improve the borderline reflections from the cloud by tilting it further. It is only tilted about 4.7 degrees if my memory serves me correctly.
You have some reflections in the first 20ms of the impulse response that require dealing with. They are present in both L and R sweeps. Within the first 20ms or so these should be less than -20 dB. Above that and they will interfere noticably with the direct sound from the speakers reaching your ears at the mix position.
I should first point out that the left and right first reflection RFZ panels were not present in the data you looked at, so that isn’t a big surprise. I just didn’t know how to test for it, but now I do. I had been wondering if the wall/ceiling corners would need treatment and this test answered my questions well. The interesting thing is that the wall/ceiling corner above the right RFZ panel is 90 degrees….,
…but the Left side is at 109 degrees (sloping ceiling) with a heat pump in the area. The left ceiling didn’t present any reflection problems and I can now see why.
Question: The spikes seen at 180 µs, to 1080µs on either side are traced to the desktop. Would I be correct assuming that the human ear cannot detect that short of a delay and I can disregard it? If my memory is correct, I thought I had heard in the past that anything below 2ms is undetectable. There isn’t much I can do for these reflections unless I want to cover the desktop with Knauf Ecose!. I actually did that as an experiment and it really worked. It’s added into the data I just posted today.
Another thing that immediately struck me is the weedy bass response from 40Hz to 95Hz. Any idea what might be causing this? there doesn't seem to be anything out of sorts with the phase in that region. Are you missing a sub woofer or something
Or is a low shelf cutoff engaged?
By “weedy” I believe you mean low level, right? I have no sub woofer and there is no low shelf cutoff engaged. I have been ringing the room at each step of the way while adding acoustics and have noticed this frequency range dropped as soon as the console desk was installed. I’m sure that is the culprit but don’t have any ideas of what to do about that. Suggestions? Is actually RAISING the bass shelf on the monitors a stupid idea? They are at center now, of course.
They got a “consultant” in recently to look at our three live rooms. He didn’t seem to be interested in talking about data – only had advice to cover as much of the walls and ceiling as possible with 2” of Knauf and Guliford of Maine fabric (we already have the corner bass traps in). I’m very skeptical about that approach! First of all, it would be more expensive and ugly in my opinion. It reminds me of an adage about young girls trying makeup: “If a little is good, then a LOT would be better!”
I am picturing more like spreading multiple panels in attractive shapes around the walls and ceiling. What do you think? I would like to have something to counterpoint with here. Do people actually RING live rooms using REW?
I still can’t get over how quickly these reflections were dealt with as a result of your advice. Thanks so much!
Cheers,
Ron