Originally Posted by localhost127
little point enabling you any further as you clearly do not even read my posts.
The problem is yours my friend. You put forward an expert witness, Dr. Toole to back your position. When it is then pointed out that he says otherwise in the rest of his teachings, you attack the poster and claim Dr. Toole is not qualified to have an opinion in that regard. And that you know more than him because you have seen pictures of a studio with 4 foot diffusers. I have repeatedly asked why we should care about such a project and you have put forward nothing. No other examples related to home listening environment is put forward by you, showing that listeners like the results of the technique you recommend. But yet, we go on because as I said, the discussion does, in a strange way, lead us to more insight into where we need to go with respect to our room acoustics, whether you acknowledge that or not.
how many times have i stated that it is the USER'S CHOICE whether they want an accurate, critical listening space vs that of a subjectively pleasing listening space based on their own personal preferences. unlike you, i do NOT make an attempt to decide for the user...sigh,
Ah, you play a great game of Calvinball
! "The only consistent rule states that Calvinball may never be played with the same rules twice."
You challenge the credibility of Dr. Toole. So I answer how he is more qualified than all of us combined in this thread. Then you come back and say "sigh" that you were talking about providing choices? What does have to do with the challenge you put forward regarding Dr. Toole's credibility?
As to choices, please put forward listening tests showing which models are more preferred or that none is more than others. Otherwise, it shows that you don't have such data and that you don't know how to answer questions like the one that started this thread. Dr. Toole has no problem answering the question and has done so not in this forum, but in authoritative papers published at top institutes in this space. Again, he may be wrong, and the opinion may not apply to all, but it sure is one hell of a lot better starting point than the fallacious slogan, "I give them a choice and you don't" stated by someone not in the industry and posts on an Internet forum with a networking/IT originated alias.
Besides, you don't let them have a choice. You keep complaining about someone showing them the other points of view. You insist that the only answer is no answer per above. Well, that is not a position you have managed to back up with data.
and why on earth do you keep quoting toole on control rooms. what control rooms has he designed? what acoustic models has he put forward for accurate, critical mixing rooms? is toole relevant in the studio world?
As I have said repeatedly and so does Dr. Toole, the choices people make for a business of mixing and mastering music is different than the choices consumers need to make. Dr. Toole has even tested the two audiences and found their preferences for good music to be different. So it matters not if the expert you want to quote has done one or a million control rooms.
As to why keep quoting Dr. Toole on control rooms, you are the one who asked me about it! And continue to do so in this quote. I provided data as to his expertise, yet you don't acknowledge it and keep going. So here it is again, hoping you will read this one. From AES Journal paper, The Modification of Timbre by Resonances: Perception and Measurement" biography at the end:"Dr. Toole has designed recording studios, control-room monitor loudspeakers and sound-reinforcement systems for large multipurpose concert halls and theaters."
In his presentations he talks about Ron Howard's Todd-AO studio and Disney hall. I am sure there are countless others. In the next post I hope you share with us how many more control rooms you have designed than Dr.Toole.
"Floyd Toole, a leading expert in the field of sound reproduction, explains how to design the best possible listening experience for recording control rooms and home entertainment systems. "
so where is all of his discussion on accurate, critical listening room design? what acoustic model standards has he put forth? none? hmm,
You seem to be stuck in this grove of cookbook models for rooms. If cookbooks were so good, why did the Blackbird studio not follow the ones before it? Why have others not followed that? You need to learn how to fish rather than how to buy one if you want to be set for life. Dr. Toole is a fan of analyzing how technology can produce the highest fidelity experience. He has proven that time and time again. And then provides insights that let you design your room appropriately.
For your part, you have not even shared with us which one of these cookbooks you have followed. You say there are choices. Please show us your choice and explain why. Of course you won't do that because you either have no system to talk about, or have one that you know won't stand up to test of accuracy. I am confident you won't post one frequency response chart showing you have flat response. The #1 metric we use for accuracy in audio is that. Who would buy an amp with 20 db fluctuations in frequency response? Yet that is likely what we have in our homes while you talk about screwing around with a reflection point. Forrest is lost from the trees...
please do not pretend like you even have a shred of a clue as to what LEDE is. quoting your commentary for preservation of ignorance. and what about RFZ model used to achieve LEDE specular response? hmm? not a shred of broadband absorption. hmm, but why would you know this. you don't have ANY real world experience here.
All buzzwords. Yet if I asked you to post a sentence from the presentations on those models in journals, you wouldn't be able to do it because you have never read them. Why? Because the sum total of your experience is what someone has post on a forum. On top of that, it is not like you have designed such rooms or compared them to others. You have just read about them and they sounded good to you, in words, not real experiences of being there. I get that. But that is not what it is about. It is about whether we as home listeners would like such environment. I hear you. You don't know what that answer is. But others do.
also, much of the information on LEDE/RFZ is closed-source. so would you mind presenting which documents you are sourcing your information on?
Closed source? This is closed source? http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=3965
"The LEDE- Concept for the Control of Acoustic and Psychoacoustic Parameters in Recording Control Rooms."http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=11805
"History and Development of the Lede Control Room Concept"http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=3744
"Translating LEDE- Control Room Design into Practical Experience"http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=3688
"Engineering an LEDE- Control Room for a Broadcasting Facility"http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=2852
"The -Lede- Concept for the Control of Acoustic and Psdychoacoustic Parameters in Recording Control Rooms"
The list goes on. Of course, if you can't fill in the login information to download the papers then you do have the problem you state. Not an issue for me because I am an AES member and pay out of my personal pocket to be informed and learn.
you don't even know what LEDE is so please stop attempting to reference it. you have ZERO experience in the studio world and you have ZERO knowledge on such control room models. quoted for ignorance.
Same back at you partner
. I am super comfortable saying that I could care less about LEDE or RFZ even though I have read some of the papers. Nothing about research or application to our homes says we should care or attempt to duplicate what they have done. And we know for certain some of the models were misguided and therefore have no applicability even in pro space even though people still follow them in some instances.
yep - so then you shouldn't be having difficulty refining your answer and telling me how toole was involved in the design of such a model. can you please inform the audience what aspects of ambechoic room design toole was involved in? any specifics? anything at all? has toole even been in blackbird? no?
I already answered. That the key researcher that designed that room gives him credit for informing him those reflections in rooms may be something that should be preserved. And that perceptual tests and measurements are important and will follow. What other engagements he has had, I don't know and is not important. I did ask you however to tell us how many other rooms have been designed that way since. You seem to have difficulty answering that question.
you're clueless. you think they just randomly put up big broadband diffusers and "called it a day" eh? seriously, you're utterly clueless and have ZERO experience with respect to room design and even less experience with respect to the studio world.
This is your chance to show us you are not clueless. Show us how many rooms you have designed and their measurements. I am ready to be humbled by your experience
OK, the rest of your post is a repeat of the same argumentative points, sharing no new data or insight.