Originally Posted by GIK Acoustics
Localhost may only have a hammer, but at least he knows how to use his hammer well. He does not provide any contradictory statements in this thread at all - these are all very standard, agreed upon, well tested, and well documented facts.
You say they are agreed upon yet I can cite peer reviewed paper after peer reviewed paper, industry luminary after industry luminary who will not only challenge what he says with science but also with listening tests. You give me the count of how many you want me to cite, and I will cite them
. Sure, there are a group of people who agree with that point of view and he repeats those statements over and over again but that doesn't make them the consensus of the industry.
Reverb in this discussion has nothing to do with psychoacoustics. RT60 is a calculation, not an effect - and reverb is the physical effect not one that is generated in our heads. Therefore, it is physics, and physics does describe it.
I said nothing about RT60 but see more below. I explained why in a space as large as that garage, one can hear secondary events. And if you can hear secondary events, then it is a form of reverb or echo. What tells us that is psychoacoustics and listening tests. But by all means, post a physics formula that gives the curve I posted. I am pretty sure you cannot.
While you are at it, do you want to explain why such things as speech intelligibility actually improve with more reflections than the other way around? What in physics tells why that happens?
I still see absolutely no use for an RT60 calculation at all for a bedroom, even if it were valid. A waterfall simply has much more relevant information present.
Using waterfalls correctly requires considerable skill and knowing its limitations just the same. Knowing that requires another field of science called signal processing.
RT60 is a usable shortcut and can easily be demonstrated to track (more or less) how much late reflections one has. Fact that the room reflections are not fully diffused in small spaces does not invalidate its use.
Here is a case study as preformed by Dr. Toole:
Before you say you don't agree with that, let me remind you that you said everyone agrees with you all's point of view.
The demonstration shows that late reflections can be reduced and that effect shows up in RT60 calculations. Do we care if the relationship is 1:1? No. This is a rough measure with wide latitude of 0.2 to 0.5. We are not after precision.
Note how Ethan remarked that if he removed the car from his garage, the amount of lingering reflections will be higher. Same observation as the above graph. Indeed, that is why furnishings in the home help keep the room from being overly live, or to use Ethan's term, overly reverberant. Again, the fact that the reverberations are not diffused is not important.