Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

What I Learned Today


Recommended Posts

I've been doing a thing on https://twitter.com/Craig_Anderton called "What I learned today." Here are some that got the most retweets, thought you might like 'em:

 

What I learned today: SSDs are more sensitive than hard drives to power outages, abnormal shutdowns, "dirty" electricity, nearby lightning strikes, etc. If you rely on SSDs, run - don't walk - to the nearest place that will sell you an uninterruptible power supply with filtering.

 

What I learned today: If you don't label *every single* AC adapter you own, there will come a day when you regret not doing so!

 

What I learned today: I often use de-essers in front of high-gain amp sims to control excessive high frequencies automatically (faster than rolling a tone control!). The old Waves DeEsser does a *great* job with guitar; their Sibilance is optimized for voice - not the same thing.

 

What I learned today: This is cool! You can get a free vocal doubler plug-in from iZotope. It says "trial version," but it never goes away. Go to http://izotope.com, search on Vocal Doubler, download...start singing. Glad I found this.

 

What I learned today: Just because I sang a vocal with perfect pitch and phrasing didn't mean the performance was compelling. It was actually kind of boring. Turned out I was better off letting loose, even if that meant fixing a few pitch glitches after the fact.

 

What I learned today: With MIDI-sequenced drums, to my ears, using "humanization" algorithms on velocity is **far** more effective than using it on timing (assuming the drums respond to multiple levels of velocity, of course).

 

What I learned today: I don't take full advantage of virtual desktops yet - e.g., have a main project open on one, file exploring or word processing on the other, etc. I'm now finding it *much* faster to switch virtual desktops than to re-arrange windows on the primary desktop.

 

What I learned today: The polyphonic version of Melodyne can pitch-correct blues harp when you're pulling so hard on the reeds to bend them, that they go off-pitch. It saved a blues harp solo! So I used pitch correction. So sue me :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 23
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Today I learned that the Primacoustic Recoil Stabilizer is a goodie. I bought a pair for my Mackie HR824 monitors.

I've had these on squares of thick, dense packing foam for a long time, it's better than having the desktop shelf rumble.

I do remember having these set up in a few different places and rooms and that they used to sound better than they do where they are currently.

Sadly, that could just be hearing damage but not from studio monitors. Bar band, I think it's time to move on.

 

These will cause no harm and may bring a welcome improvement.

 

And, I knew about the Izotope Vocal Doubler, I"ve had it for a good long while. I usually use other tricks (Eventide Micro Pitch for one) but it's a good plugin.

 

Every now and then I will search "best free plugins" and see what's out there, I recommend doing this. You can always throw them away. Do use a "trash" email address though, that saves a bit of torment. I go into mine every once in a while and mostly just delete everything.

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the tip about iZotope Vocal Doubler. While downloading it I found they"re also currently giving away Ozone 9 Elements, so I got two useful plugins for the price of none! :)

Kurzweil PC4, Expressive E Osmose, UNO Synth Pro, Hammond B-3X on iPad, Rhodes Mark II Stage 73, ART 710-A MK4s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been using the Primacoustic Recoil Stabilizers for years. They made a noticeable difference the second I swapped 'em out with my Auralex.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been using the Primacoustic Recoil Stabilizers for years. They made a noticeable difference the second I swapped 'em out with my Auralex.

 

 

That's 2 trusted testimonials from users who have them and like them.

 

Sweetwater was out of stock so I ordered from Pure Wave Audio on eBay and they are out too, expecting in November sometime. I'll just stay where I am and wait, the seller has 3500 feedback more or less at 100% positive.

That seems safe. I'm really looking forward to having these.

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been using the Primacoustic Recoil Stabilizers for years. They made a noticeable difference the second I swapped 'em out with my Auralex.

 

Doesn't seem possible, does it?

 

Today, I found this article. Ethan seems to have done his research. Yikes.

 

http://ethanwiner.com/speaker_isolation.htm

 

On reading the above article, it occurred to me that sandbags would do the same thing, if there is a thing that is done.

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today, I found this article. Ethan seems to have done his research. Yikes.

 

Yes, he did his research :)

 

Mine was if you have speakers set up exactly the same, close your eyes, have someone else flick an A/B switch so many times you have no idea what it's feeding, and can tell the difference with better than 90% accuracy, and so can others, well...

 

Note that Ethan is very good at myth-busting. And I certainly think anyone who said the Recoil Stabilizers eliminate the need for bass traps is clueless. It was only after testing the Recoil Stabilizers that my suspicions were confirmed that most isolations pads did nothing of significance, so I'm with him on that one, too. But, bear in mind top engineers were asked for their opinions of the Recoil Stabilizers, although they were not told what to expect so there wouldn't be bias confirmation. They were simply asked to "see if this makes your speakers sound any better." Yet they all noticed the same qualities. (To be fair, note that "top engineers" thought the CBS Copycode protocol was okay, too...gold records don't necessarily translate to technical expertise, let alone objectivity.)

 

On reading the above article, it occurred to me that sandbags would do the same thing, if there is a thing that is done.

 

Primacoustic pretty much agrees with you. From Primacoustics' FAQ:

 

Will placing my monitors on a granite block work just as well?

Yes. We looked at granite and the cost of cutting it and then polishing the edges ended up being much more than the laser cut steel. But granite certainly looks nice too.

 

Will placing my monitors on a sand bag work as well?

Maybe. Sand is a limp mass so theoretically, it should work.

 

Will placing my monitors on a concrete slab be just as good?

Possibly. A large concrete block is heavy so this is good. The problem with concrete â something we also tested â is that to get sufficient mass, it has to be huge. A thin wafer of concrete is in fact quite light. The other problem is that concrete dusts for ever. Not a good thing to have around mechanical faders, switches and potentiometers.

 

I'm pretty sure they did their research, too...

 

I'm currently involved in quantifying the Line 6 Helix parameters using spectrograms and FFT analysis. They have so many aspects that simply cannot be quantified with any degree of certainty.

 

Wendy Carlos did a famous demo at AES once where she showed several different waveforms that all looked completely different, yet they sounded all the same. No one could tell the difference. And I don't just mean a waveform and the same thing 180 degrees out of phase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today, I found this article. Ethan seems to have done his research. Yikes.

 

Yes, he did his research :)

 

Mine was if you have speakers set up exactly the same, close your eyes, have someone else flick an A/B switch so many times you have no idea what it's feeding, and can tell the difference with better than 90% accuracy, and so can others, well...

 

Note that Ethan is very good at myth-busting. And I certainly think anyone who said the Recoil Stabilizers eliminates the need for bass traps is clueless. It was only after testing the Recoil Stabilizers that my suspicions were confirmed that most isolations pads did nothing of significance, so I'm with him on that one, too. But, bear in mind top engineers were asked for their opinions of the Recoil Stabilizers, although they were not told what to expect so there wouldn't be bias confirmation. They were simply asked to "see if this makes your speakers sound any better." Yet they all noticed the same qualities. (To be fair, note that "top engineers" thought the CBS Copycode protocol was okay, too...gold records don't necessarily translate to technical expertise, let alone objectivity.)

 

On reading the above article, it occurred to me that sandbags would do the same thing, if there is a thing that is done.

 

Primacoustic pretty much agrees with you. From Primacoustics' FAQ:

 

Will placing my monitors on a granite block work just as well?

Yes. We looked at granite and the cost of cutting it and then polishing the edges ended up being much more than the laser cut steel. But granite certainly looks nice too.

 

Will placing my monitors on a sand bag work as well?

Maybe. Sand is a limp mass so theoretically, it should work.

 

Will placing my monitors on a concrete slab be just as good?

Possibly. A large concrete block is heavy so this is good. The problem with concrete â something we also tested â is that to get sufficient mass, it has to be huge. A thin wafer of concrete is in fact quite light. The other problem is that concrete dusts for ever. Not a good thing to have around mechanical faders, switches and potentiometers.

 

I'm pretty sure they did their research, too...

 

I'm currently involved in quantifying the Line 6 Helix parameters using spectrograms and FFT analysis. They have so many aspects that simply cannot be quantified with any degree of certainty.

 

Wendy Carlos did a famous demo at AES once where she showed several different waveforms that all ooked completely different. Yet they sounded all the same. No one could tell the difference. And I don't just means a waveform and the same thing 180 degrees out of phase.

 

Since they were out of stock, they offered me a refund. At that point I said I would wait and they offered the the Isoacosutics ISO-200 and partial refund, claiming that those were superior.

Which set me off to trying to find out exactly what is better about the Isoacoustics stuff. I did a search for a comparison and found the article I linked above.

 

And as Ethan mentioned, I could not find any scientific test results on either product. The Isoacoustics video I watched on YouTube came across as pure snake oil, maybe they just hired the wrong agency?

 

I've no doubt at all that the time I accidentally had my monitors up way too loud for my relatively small space, my 3/4" particle board shelf that my speakers were on resonated big time. That isn't science either, I made no measurements, just shut things down quickly.

 

So, like you, I've heard differences. I worked in aerospace years ago and brought home a piece of heavy duty foam that protected a $10,000 part on it's way to our facility. I cut two pieces of that, put the speakers on there and they did sound better (or maybe I should say "less worse"?). That's what I have now. Maybe I should cut some sections of bed frame and bolt them to the shelf underneath to stiffen it. Worst case that would tend to drive the resonant point to a much higher frequency, which would probably clear up the bass response a good bit. Easy to do and just a few bucks.

 

All this got me thinking about possibilities. Rolls of soft toilet paper have little or no resonant qualities and probably do not transmit vibration unless severely activated. Not saying I would use toilet paper for speaker beds, just that there are probably all sorts of great things out there that could be found inexpensively and make great speaker beds. Those hateful styrofoam peanuts used for packing probably don't transmit vibration to any extent either. I dislike them too much to consider it and a 30+ pound speaker like the Mackies would crush them down to a solid anyway. I've seen some very substantial yoga mats at thrift stores for a couple of bucks. I've also seen some soft, pliable ones that probably aren't very good for anything.

 

So I'll get my $250 or so back and see what I can come up with. I don't have test equipment or any inclination to get into that aspect. An inert mass of some sort is one ideal. Reducing the contact points could make a big difference as well. More than one way to skin a cat and more than one cat needs skinning. :)

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I don't think it's just the isolation aspect/transmitting vibrations that matters here. It may even be the least of it. I think what makes the Recoil Stabilizers unusual is the steel plate, covered with the non-skid neoprene pad, that prevents the speakers themselves from moving.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I don't think it's just the isolation aspect/transmitting vibrations that matters here. It may even be the least of it. I think what makes the Recoil Stabilizers unusual is the steel plate, covered with the non-skid neoprene pad, that prevents the speakers themselves from moving.

 

It could be that. Another cat to skin!!!!

Immobilizing a heavy speaker should not be terribly difficult, complicated or expensive.

 

I suspect at the very least it is both. If you prevented speakers from moving on a piano soundboard there would probably be considerable resonance.

 

I played an open G on a bass guitar through an amp once and it made the acoustic guitar 25 feet away ring out like it had been whipped. That is just air moving a resonant object. Speakers move air.

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is just air moving a resonant object. Speakers move air.

 

What I learned 50+ years ago: mute the snare wires before overdubbing bass :)

 

Yep, I'm guessing about 43 years ago, same lesson. We were recording my band live in the garage, the engineer ran a snake into the back bedroom and went straight to Ampex half track at 15 ips.

It sounded good but overly compressed as was the fashion back then in Fresno and with bonus "mystery snare" parts.

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I don't think it's just the isolation aspect/transmitting vibrations that matters here. It may even be the least of it. I think what makes the Recoil Stabilizers unusual is the steel plate, covered with the non-skid neoprene pad, that prevents the speakers themselves from moving.

 

It's fascinating to ponder the physics of sound/pressure waves and transference of energy. The purpose of the neoprene is clear but how does the metal plate factor in? Is the idea is to pre-compress the underlying foam somewhat?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I don't think it's just the isolation aspect/transmitting vibrations that matters here. It may even be the least of it. I think what makes the Recoil Stabilizers unusual is the steel plate, covered with the non-skid neoprene pad, that prevents the speakers themselves from moving.

 

It's fascinating to ponder the physics of sound/pressure waves and transference of energy. The purpose of the neoprene is clear but how does the metal plate factor in? Is the idea is to pre-compress the underlying foam somewhat?

 

According to their web site:

 

The Recoil Stabilizer is a loudspeaker platform that combines three basic components: a high-density urethane foam base to isolate the speaker from the shelf, monitor-bridge or stand; a heavy ¼' laser-cut steel plate; and a thin neoprene top surface. The foam effectively decouples the loudspeaker to eliminate vibration-borne resonance that invariably introduces phase anomalies, while the steel plate introduces significant mass to the structure, stabilizing the speaker. The no-slip surface coats the top to ensure the monitor stays firmly in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

the steel plate introduces significant mass to the structure, stabilizing the speaker.

 

Yes this is the part I'm having trouble with. A "significant mass" metal plate on top of the speaker would certainly help stabilize the speaker with the assistance of gravity but what in the heck can it do from underneath?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

the steel plate introduces significant mass to the structure, stabilizing the speaker.

 

Yes this is the part I'm having trouble with. A "significant mass" metal plate on top of the speaker would certainly help stabilize the speaker with the assistance of gravity but what in the heck can it do from underneath?

 

It is a solid foundation, no? A hefty chunk of metal sandwiched between foam and rubber gives a speaker a firm resting place. The foam and rubber dampen any vibration the steel plate may have had and turn it into mass-weight.

A vibration resistent platform. Putting the weight on top won't affect what the bottom end of the speaker cabinet does.

 

The whole thing looks pretty easy to make to me. The hard part would be that curved front with the brand name on it. If you cut that off I doubt the sound would change, that is just marketing - which is fine but I don't need it.

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my pursuit of speaker stabilization/isolation, I stumbled across Sorbothane, a material that is widely used where ever vibration needs to be controlled.

They show many colorful and meaningful charts and graphs representing test results comparing Sorbothane to other products, including neoprene.

 

It looks like good stuff and audiophiles do use it. In particular, an acrylic block with Sorbothane feet is apparently popular for turntable stabilization.

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_nkw=sorbothane&_sacat=0&_sop=16

 

I am going to learn more about it and also materials that can be used as the "plate" for the assembly.

 

No affiliation but these look interesting. 4 of them on the bottom of a studio monitor might be all that is needed.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/251438315657?hash=item3a8ae43889:g:UA8AAOxy4dNS6cB0

The material is a bit sticky so the speaker will not go anywhere. Reducing contact with the surface below to just 4 points can only reduce resonance. I'm still pondering a slab of plastic kitchen counter material and strips of Sorbothane along the front and back for the speaker to rest on. That puts resonance absorption, stabilization and isolation all in on unit. You could even go faux marble and look fancy.

 

I found a deal on 8 of the 2.50 diameter hemispheres with self adhesive already attached. Well under $50 including tax - free shipping. I pulled the trigger and will evaluate those before I proceed. I haven't decided if those go on the bottoms of the monitors or on the bottoms of substantial inert platforms with a thin rubber top coating - possibly Sorbothane for that too. The extra height would be welcome, I've got the monitors up about 2" right now and the tweeters line up well with my ears.

 

What I learned this week and maybe for the next 2 or 3... :)

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today I learned that the cutting boards I bought to use for platforms with my project are perfect for the job. Except, the 3x Locktite "three times stronger than any other adhesive" that I used to glue foam to the platforms does not stick to non-stick cutting boards. I have plenty of foam and a another idea that does not require adhesive. I will also test "crazy glue" in the event it becomes useful for a smaller aspect of the proceedings.

 

Gah!

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I used the Locktite adhesive, I cleaned the boards first with 99% isopropyl alcohol, I also cleaned the foam. I let the both dry.

 

Last night, I sanded a spot on a scrap from one of the boards, cleaned it with alcohol and tried crazy glue, Scotch Super 77 spray adhesive and epoxy. All of those joints worked, the foam is firmly adhering to the board material.

The Scotch Super 77 would be my choice by far, much easier to get even coats on the foam.

 

I'm back in the game, a minor setback and a small additional cost to proceed.

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today I learned that there are ferrous metals in the composite used to make my cutting boards. I was sanding the surfaces to prepare them for adhesive and foam, the sanding dust is adhering to the magnetic strip I've put around the edge of my work bench to catch stray screws and such.

 

One of the reasons I chose plastic was to avoid any disturbance to the magnetic fields that speakers generate. Later today I'll get a magnet and see how much it is attracted to the cutting boards. I guess if the Recoil Stabilizers can use a steel plate then I can do something that isn't too far off from that.

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...