#1745945 - 05/04/07 01:13 AM
treating square room acoustically
|
radiotalk
Member
Registered: 05/04/07
Posts: 1
|
Offline
|
|
i need real advise and real fast ! started off making a studio with a console room & a recording room divided by a glass window but both the rooms are taking the shape of SQUARE !
right now sound isolation is quite good , but i am scared on the acoustic of the room ,
please advise
bose
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1746040 - 05/04/07 08:33 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: radiotalk]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12262
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
The shape of the room is one ONE element.
The size and materials used make up the rest.
You have to provide more info....and also you might want to check out the Acoustics Forum for more detailed discussion.
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1746076 - 05/04/07 09:28 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: miroslav]
|
Bill@Welcome Home Studios
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 08/23/03
Posts: 7340
|
|
Offline
|
|
Square is bad.
You can spend a lot of time and money trying to work around that, or you can just build it right to astart with. Ypour choice./
I suggest checking out any books by Alton Everest or Phil Newell, which are affordable and understandable, and cheap. You can also get a lot of info from Ethan's forum above, and his two websites.
Bill
Edited by Bill@Welcome Home Studios (05/04/07 09:29 AM)
_________________________
"...it's easier than hitting the kids, and almost as much fun..."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1769041 - 06/20/07 09:59 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: Bill@Welcome Home Studios]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
Don't bother. There's nothing you can do to a square room except to reconstruct it so it's not square to correct acoustic anomolies.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1770482 - 06/23/07 12:44 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: audiorulez]
|
calmic
Member
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 25
Loc: Shanghai, China
|
|
Offline
|
|
Don't lose hope - Square rooms can still be treated... lots of broadband absorption will be needed though - top it off with diffusion. Do a search in the Acoustic Forum here, this question has been asked more than few times.
Check out Acoustic Forum moderator Ethan Winers' realtraps.com Its a sales site, but the info pages, in plain lingo are some of the best on the web regarding the subject!
calmic
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1773516 - 06/28/07 03:24 PM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: calmic]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
You can treat it all you want, but unless you change the shape of the room, so the dimensions are not square, it's never going to be accurate. Ask, Ethan Winer, he'll tell you the same thing.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1773667 - 06/28/07 07:59 PM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: audiorulez]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12262
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Square is not the best shape for a studio...but I think the size of the square will dictate how difficult (or easy) it might be to treat the room sufficiantly.
Proper absorption and diffusion can do wonders.
Also, from some new/alternative perspectives I've recently read about...if it's a small room, proper diffusion may be more important than just using tons of absorption alone to try and "fool" the room into thinking it's a bigger, live room.
But it could take some work...and some trial and error finding the best combination that will tame/control the bulk of the frequency spectrum.
While building from the ground up using time-tested studio building methods is the ideal approach...it’s not always feasible and it's quite amazing the kind of rooms people are making real good music in these days.
Heck...some of the most productive "project studios" would probably fall pretty short of any acoustic nirvana…and even a lot of “pro” studios are not near perfect.
Build it the best you can…and then focus on getting the most out of the room.
There’s not much more that anyone can really do…is there? 
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1773922 - 06/29/07 09:55 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: miroslav]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
Instead of spending a fortune in time and/or money trying to tune the square rooms to at best will be so-so results, rebuild the room so it't not square. Move the dividing wall, presto, neither room is square anymore. Unless there is a major vertical support hidden in the wall, it's rather simple actually, I've done it a few times. Two guys can do it in an afternoon. Solves the issues in both rooms. Now both rooms can be easily tuned, and the end result will be infinitely better than 2 square rooms.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1774127 - 06/29/07 03:14 PM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: audiorulez]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12262
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Actually...(and we still don't know the size of the rooms)...if I was going to do anything in that situation, I would just take out the dividing wall altogether and run with one large open room, which is what I do now.
I've yet to run into any problematic isolation requirements, as I hardly ever track more than a couple things at any one time...and I just monitor with the headphones during tracking.
Unless we are talking about fairly large rooms...taking a small/medium space and dividing it into two even smaller "boxes" doesn’t create a very comfortable working environment...
…never mind the acoustic issues.
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1774444 - 06/30/07 09:52 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: miroslav]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
Size doesn't matter, we know they are square. Square=acoustic nightmare. You can't "nevermind" acoustic issues and have them not exist. A small acoustically sound space is going to be much easier to work in, given you'll hear accurately and translate to the real world than a square acoustic nightmare that will never, no matter how much treatment you put in it (unless you put so much the room isn't square anymore, inwhich case you've spent enough time and money to rebuild the room anyway) will never be anything but inaccurate.
Yes removing the wall entirely is another option, the downside is you cut your # of rooms by 50%.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1774461 - 06/30/07 10:39 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: audiorulez]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12262
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Well...I think size actually DOES matter.
A 10'x10' square room is not going to behave the same way as a 30'x30' square room...and heck, if you go out even further from there in size, the acoustic "response" will change even more as the sound wave energy becomes increasingly dissipated over the greater room size and space between the walls.
Also...in any shape room...it is never JUST the “sound” and the walls it interacts with. It’s never an empty room.
Most studios will end up with all kinds of gear, furniture, reflective/absorptive surfaces...BEFORE you even consider any actual acoustic treatments.
And all that will have a great impact on how those sound waves move in the room...and how fast they dissipate over time…and how big that room is.
But yeah...square is not the ideal choice at all, so there's no argument there, though I would like to know that actual size of the room(s) we are talking about here before considering just how bad/difficult the acoustics might be…?
On the one-room concept...
Yeah...if you NEED 2 rooms, then obviously, removing the wall is not a good solution. I'm just suggesting that for a lot of recording you really DON'T need that old-school approach of having a dedicated "control room" and a closed-with-glass "tracking room". But it depends on what you want/need to do and how you like working...so no real right/wrong there.
I just think having two very small rooms is less conducive to good recording than just knocking out the wall and having one nice open space (but again...we still do not know what is the size of the room(s)...?).
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1775491 - 07/02/07 02:53 PM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: miroslav]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
While you may not need the separation of a dedicated control room, you need a properly acoustically tuned room to track and mix in or you will never know what you are listening to sounds like, the room will be lying to you.
I'd rather have a tuned small control room and a second studio room than one big room to do everything. It is impossible without recording and playback to know what you are monitoring if you are in the same room as acoustic instruments. I've done it, and IMHO it sucks.
Subsequently, you also don't need the glass window to see everyone either. I find it often better, as the musicians are in their own "space" so to speak, not under the microscope of the people behind the glass.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1775606 - 07/02/07 07:38 PM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: audiorulez]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12262
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
It is impossible without recording and playback to know what you are monitoring if you are in the same room as acoustic instruments. I've done it, and IMHO it sucks.
[shrug]...
I do it all the time, and I don't have any problem with it at all. It's one large room, tuned well and easy to work in.
I think when you've worked in a room for awhile...there's little need to record/playback at every step in order to know what you are getting.
Usually...you know what you WILL get just by what it sounds like in that room.
But I would hate to bounce in and out of unknown rooms and try to work that way...
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1775808 - 07/03/07 08:09 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: miroslav]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
Tell me, how do you know what the mic'd snare drum that's 120db 30 feet from you sounds like through your CR monitors? Or a marshall cranked up, or a trumpet.
That's right, you don't without recording it and then listening back, wasting the artists time and money.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1775868 - 07/03/07 09:16 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: miroslav]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
So you got some magic ears that only hear what comes out of your monitors and not the 120db snare drum?
SOP in a real studio is a control room and separate rooms for recording. Look at or read and educate yourself on studio design. It all starts in the control room.
Hearing some playback before tracking and having to setup, record, playback, adjust, record, playback, adjust is a massive waste of time for everyone. But since you're little one room basement studio probably can't get paying clients anyway, it's a moot point.
Professional studios have control rooms separate from recording rooms, isolated for the purposes of accurately hearing what is being recorded without having to first record then playback, and charge money to their clients, who are typcially concience of NOT wasting time/money on such foolishness.
Oh, and they have complete communication between the rooms, so no one is "out of the loop".
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1775900 - 07/03/07 10:14 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: miroslav]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
Pros record in pro facilities, and there is nothing "modern" about recording in a single room. As noted it's impossible to know what the recorded sound will be unless you record it and then play it back, since you cannot hear what the mic captures without also hearing the source since you are only a few feet from it.
I never said it didn't work in one room, but anyone with a clue knows you cannot hear what's being captured until you record and play back.
What's next, you tell me you invert the phase of your monitors so you cancel out the acoustic sound?
Here's a dollar go buy a clue.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1775950 - 07/03/07 11:19 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: audiorulez]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12262
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
If you want to talk shop...fine, we can proceed.
But if you want to continue with personal shots, I will not bother after this post…
What is "modern" about the one-room approach is that for many years...60's/70's/80's...the traditional studio approach ruled, since most recording was only done in big, pro facilities. Very few people had a personal studio.
Came the 90's...and digital brought us a new type of studio...the so-called "project" studio.
And for many people, project studios were usually in-the-home studios, and there was often little chance of having huge live rooms with comfortable, good size control rooms...so the one-room approach become quite common out of necessity, but then, many found it to be a very cool way to record, as it removed the glass between the musicians and engineer/producer.
Of course, these days, "project studio" can mean many things...and for those who have the ample finances, a project studio can also be a personal, private studio that is built as a traditional large studio, with multiple large rooms.
But...the one-room approach gained a lot of converts, especially when having multiple rooms is not possible (for whatever reasons).
Also...most high-end pro studios have fairly large control rooms (when you take into account the “invisible” baffles and bass traps) and they have even larger live room(s).
My earlier point was that we really do not know the size of the room(s) the original poster has...and IMO...if you are taking a small space and ending up with two even smaller, divided rooms (say, 10x10 up to 14x14) it is NOT as comfortable or "accurate" as having one large room (say, 10x20 to 14x28).
Regardless if they are perfectly square or not…a small room is still a small room.
As far as the SOP of how you go about recording and setting up mics in that one-room space…well, for those people that do it on a regular basis (and there are many, pros included)…it’s really NOT as complicated or as time-consuming/time-wasting as you seem to think it is.
Maybe you personally do not find it comfortable or easy to work that way…and that is fine…we all have our preferences.
But I’ve been working that way for quite a few years…and even though I have the option of using a second or third room any time I like…I still do not unless I have a full house and need to simultaneously track more than 2-3 instruments…which is rarely the case.
One of the first things most people learn about recording is that most anything goes, and good recordings can happen in MANY different types of spaces and under MANY different types of circumstances.
So let’s not get too hung up on reading and adhering to only the purest theoretical approaches to recording.
Every time someone has tried to lay down some “rule” about the right way to record…a hundred guys come along and break that rule…and end up with great results! 
And I still say…[PLAYBACK] is not something you just do AFTER the musicians have finished playing and/or gone home for the day…rather, you do it as you work your way through the session as it does provide very positive feedback that is of great benefit to the musicians. So I do not see how that could be called “wasting time”…
…but then that’s my SOP, yours may be different and that’s fine too.
There is room for many different recording approaches….all valid…all good.
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1776081 - 07/03/07 02:31 PM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: miroslav]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
No need to record and playback when dialing in sounds if you have a control room as all pro studios (you might try visiting one sometime and educating yourself btw) like there is with the one room method.
I am personally associated with many of todays and yesterdays top engineers and not one of them prefers to work in one room.
In addition, many studios today are opting for not having the man behind the glass, and removing that factor, giving the musicians a more intimate, not under the microscope feeling even in the big rooms. You don't need to see the musicians to get a great recording, nor do they need to see you.
Bottom line is, yes the one room scenario can work, but it's far from ideal or the choice of pros.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1776172 - 07/03/07 05:27 PM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: audiorulez]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12262
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
…pro studios (you might try visiting one sometime and educating yourself btw)...
You assume things too easily…
I'm happy for you that you are "associated" with so many of today’s and yesterdays top engineers.
Most of the guys around here have been involved with recording for awhile and all have their own list of “industry names” they’ve been “associated” with.
I’ve seen my share of pro studios and been recording since the late 70's...
…so don't worry about my audio education or the education of most of the forum members here.
Bottom line is, yes the one room scenario can work, but it's far from ideal or the choice of pros.
Well...I don't think I ever said or suggested that a one-room approach was "ideal"...I just said that it was not difficult to record in one…which you seem to think is the case.
Also...the “record-playback shuffle” isn't so much about the engineer dialing in the recording gear…but rather it’s about allowing the musicians to dial in their rigs and their performance choices.
I’ve found most musicians really appreciate hearing playbacks as much as possible…and often I have to point out that we should try to keep things moving as time is running….but I never say NO if that is what helps make the sessions more productive.
And actually, having them right there in one room makes all that very quick and easy instead of them being in a separate tracking room(s) and having to stop, put down their instruments and come into the control room so they can hear the same playback on the same monitors and in the same room as the engineer.
Again...it's all a question of SOP...and there are a wide variety of methods/techniques that will all yield great results. You just have to be open-minded and NOT assume that you alone posses the knowledge of the one “best way” to record.
If you are “associated” with so many of today’s and yesterday’s top engineers…then I’m sure you should be able to see that while many of their techniques are similar…there are also many differences from one guy to the next, often depending on where they are recording and what they are recording.
Anyway…we still haven’t heard from the original poster on the size of his rooms…and until we do, it’s pointless to keep talking around all that...just to pass the time of day…
...though it’s been fun.
Enjoy your holiday…I’ll be recording/mixing the next 6 days. 
Edited by miroslav (07/03/07 05:30 PM)
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1776970 - 07/05/07 09:36 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: miroslav]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
Also...the “record-playback shuffle” isn't so much about the engineer dialing in the recording gear…but rather it’s about allowing the musicians to dial in their rigs and their performance choices.
This is classic!!!
So the engineer doesn't need to listen to what they are going to record you think? Newsflash, that's the bulk of what happens before recording!!!!!
The artist gets the sound they want, the engineer then makes choices on mics, pres, etc., that will best capture that exact sound the artist hears in the control room and to recoridings. In order to do that, they need to hear the recording chain completely isolated from the orginal source. Otherwise there's no way to know if it's identical to the source.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1776984 - 07/05/07 10:02 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: audiorulez]
|
Bill@Welcome Home Studios
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 08/23/03
Posts: 7340
|
|
Offline
|
|
You might notice there is only one big room here, and a reasonabe sizes iso booth:
http://www.michaelwagener.com/html/WWpictures.html
You might know his work:
http://www.michaelwagener.com/html/discography.html
I had a similar setup in my room... a large general space when the console and control gak sits, a couple of iso booths (I had three smaller ones, Michael has a single larger one.) Single room studios are not rare, and have been built for many years when they are the right solution to the problem. Would I have prefered a large space? Yes. But I worked with what was available. That is the answer. Pros get work done. As it says on one of my tshirts, nobody cares if you are Michael Jackson or the milkman....
I really don't knwo how you guys got so far afield, given that you two basically started out agreeing with each other.
Physics is physics. A square room is a less than ideal situation. You can move a wall if you want to, or remove a wall if you want to, or treat the room acoustically (which 'fools' the soundwaves into behaving as if someone had moved a wall...) but when it is all said and done, -something- has to be done along those lines to make the room work.
Beyond that, the two of you have different ideas of how work can get done. Fine. You don't have to work together, so what is the argument about?
Bill
Edited by Bill@Welcome Home Studios (07/05/07 10:02 AM)
_________________________
"...it's easier than hitting the kids, and almost as much fun..."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1776988 - 07/05/07 10:15 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: audiorulez]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12262
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
I know what I am doing in the studio...been doing it for years...and it all works fine.
You [audiorulez] are now taking bits and pieces out of context and twisting them up in order to try and stir up a dispute.
You did the same thing in the other thread.
Not sure what your motives are...but, you're not going to get any more play from me.
Be smart and adjust your communication style if you want people to interact with you on these forums...
Edited by miroslav (07/05/07 10:27 AM)
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1776996 - 07/05/07 10:32 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: Bill@Welcome Home Studios]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12262
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
I really don't knwo how you guys got so far afield, given that you two basically started out agreeing with each other.
..................
...the two of you have different ideas of how work can get done. Fine. You don't have to work together, so what is the argument about?
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1777008 - 07/05/07 10:46 AM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: miroslav]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
Knowing what you're doing is a good thing, however you still cannot know what your recording chain sounds like while in the same room and the acoustic instruments being mics, as I previously stated. You can argue this all you want, the fact remains you will not hear your recording chain discrete, you hear the original source as well, making it IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to hear accurately what the recording chain sounds like without recording and subsequently playing back. Yes this works, but yes it is also far more time consuming than being in an isolated control room.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1795875 - 08/14/07 10:53 PM
Re: treating square room acoustically
[Re: audiorulez]
|
paris
Member
Registered: 08/06/07
Posts: 21
Loc: Kamloops B.C.
|
|
Offline
|
|
Hi Bose,
there is a few sugestions listed here that are really good advise , basically
the square room needs to modified, baffled tuned or what ever your budjet allows for. check out the advise of the other sites listed to glean your solution.
there are a few basic accoustic principles to to be aaware of ,
take the longest diameter of your room divide that by 1130 you will get a frequency
that will saturate every corner of the room ( unless its a huge room) you most likely find a bass frequecy fundamental and its harmonics that permiate the room.
Flat walls and ceilings reflect sound causing it to bounce around and can create havock to the recordings. so after you treat the room however you wish to do so Rent a 1/3 octave frequency analizer and check the room for audio humps and valleys , to do this , alternate running the pink and white noise generator on the analizer through your system at a decent level and with a good microphone plugged into the analizer watch the graph on the analizer for humps and valleys , adjust your system accordingly if you have a stereo 31 band eq flatline it and if a hump appears at 4K on the analizer notch down the 4k on the eq.
Your ears will be the best test once you have completed these few changes and become familiar with the sound in your space. you will know what sounds good with your equipt and space . not all of us have pro studios under our belts but we can sure have fun playing with what we got!!!!
Paris
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: FoxTick, Bunny Knutson
|
|
|
)...
