Originally Posted by Peter M
This part of AVS is mostly populated with DIYer's and in the beginning I believe this thread provided us with some good, basic design advice, which could be quite easily put into practice with relatively little expense.
More recently the thread has evolved into a much deeper discussion that I believe very few of us have sufficient time, education or experience to follow, and certain participants just don't seem to understand the audience they're talking to.
I see some progress being made in:
What is the purpose of this forum/thread?
What are the limitations of the veteran theater buff, the theater DIYer hobbyist, and the newbie? How best to interface with him?
What are the limitations of the acoustician? How best to interface with him?Forums & Thread
I think many of the problems with this thread and forum is what you'd have if you couldn't break out the Sources into separate fora like cable, local hdtv, bluray, etc. Or display devices into LCD, Plasma, Projectors, Expensive Projectors. Or speakers into DIY, subs, etc. Acoustics It's too broad a topic, and it doesn't even have a dedicated forum. There's also "Audio Theory, Setup, & Chat" again, too broad for acoustics.
This particular thread is full of interjections like the one I made earlier, trying to reconcile and emulate designers' methods, bang-for-buck DIY treatments, actual usage of measurement methods, acoustic models, trying to reconcile works like Toole's with other paradigms, and "hey i'm new to this stuff but what do ya guys thing i should do?"
I suggest splitting out theory discussion and help-me threads. And if there are agreed-upon general precepts and critical core concepts, then we need sticky-worthy primers. Until those exist, then the "experts" are in a constant drone of repeating the same forever.Real World Theater Application of Acoustics
I agree with Mr. Erskine; there are compromises and limitations in applying acoustic science to home theaters. If one doesn't deal with that, then you're just reading, writing, or repeating theory textbooks.
This topic(s) is so much more difficult to grasp and address than "what's the best sub?" threads. But there's something to be learned from there. The newbie there thinks there's one end-all solution for subwoofers. The veteran educates that different subs meet different goals and criteria, and ask, "What are your constraints, what do you want to do?
" Without that starting point, it's all theory, or a tug of war of competing solutions to meet different goals, without addressing the real constraints.
So I can appreciate dragonfyr's frustration when people skip that first step of establishing "what CAN I do? what are the different models and their tradeoffs for me, what are my constraints?"
I thought a great step forward were the threads of a few months ago where the different room models were being discussed and people wanted real application of ETC. - Not sure what happened with that...I last read discussion about which models are most appropriate for stereo music, versus for multi-channel home theater. Here's one of the threads: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1366724Someone needs to write the Room Model Primer
- Main classes of models:
- with some variations within each
- primary attributes of each (eg LEDE: acoustically-damped "dead" front, suited more for the soundstage and ambiance to be produced by the source material and multiple speakers, with a more "live" and diffuse rear zone that helps to spread out the surrounds' sound field, which enhances ambiance, retains some sound power, and simulates a commercial cinema)
- Pros and Cons of each model
- What the ETC typically should look like for these models
- Levels of attainment for theaters, starting with the no-brainer, critical, bang-for-buck, and low-hanging fruit stuff, progressing to more difficult, expensive, less ROI, but delivering the last 30% of the room model's goals.