AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › Seaton Sound SubMersive1
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Seaton Sound SubMersive1 - Page 256

post #7651 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary J View Post

Yes most of us got that when you explained setting your sound system at certain angles to walls and openings.

Then that settles it. Now, how about those Seaton Subs of yours? Is one better served by a pair of 18" subs, one driver in each sub or a pair of 15" subs, two drivers that are opposite each other; four drivers total?

-
Edited by BeeMan458 - 12/19/12 at 6:49am
post #7652 of 8062
Question about cancellation. If I added a 3rd SubM F2 toward the rear of my room (nearly 11ft across from the front left SubM with a slight offset), would I experience cancellation between the front left and rear left subs? I would normally think yes, but looking at Art Sonneborn's room, the 4 Submersives are right next to each other with no (assumed) cancellation...
post #7653 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

Nowhere in my comments did I suggest arbitrarily opening up walls -

Then tell him/us where you would like him to open the wall, the size of the opening the results he can expect and the rational for your recommendations.

I already said opening walls can make a difference . (In my case, they were negative differences).

And why would I want these questions on a PM? I'm sure there are many interested in what your specific recommendations are and why.
post #7654 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

Then that settles it. Now, how about those Seaton Subs of yours? Is one better served by a pair of 18" subs, one driver in each sub or a pair of 15" subs, two drivers that are opposite each other; four drivers total?
-

You know I keep meaning to ask Mark if the two drivers in a Sub M is closer in effect to having two separate subs or just one big one. What are the benefits of two drivers beyond the obvious?
post #7655 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post

Then tell him/us where you would like him to open the wall, the size of the opening the results he can expect and the rational for your recommendations.
I already said opening walls can make a difference . (In my case, they were negative differences).
And why would I want these questions on a PM? I'm sure there are many interested in what your specific recommendations are and why.

rolleyes.gif
post #7656 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrolicBeast View Post

If I added a 3rd SubM F2 toward the rear of my room (nearly 11ft across from the front left SubM with a slight offset), would I experience cancellation between the front left and rear left subs?
Yes, and no. You'll get cancellations at some frequencies, increases at some frequencies. If this was outdoors it would be a simple matter to calculate. Indoors not so much, because not only are the direct waves from all the subs part of the equation, so are all the reflections of all those waves off every boundary in the room. But chances are matters will be improved. What you're mainly dealing with is the boundary reflection nulls and peaks from the existing subs. As the boundary reflection nulls and peaks with the third sub will occur at different frequencies than the other two, because it's in a different spot, the overall result will probably be smoother. Before I invested in a third sub, though, I'd move one of them from the front to the side or rear. Having both in front means that some modes will be the same, or very close to the same, for both in some sections of the room.
post #7657 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post

Then tell him/us where you would like him to open the wall, the size of the opening the results he can expect and the rational for your recommendations.

One has to be in the room to answer those types of questions as not being omniscient, it would be unreasonable for one to comment in the specific as opposed to the general on a room they haven't seen. I'm not playing word games. I haven't seen the room, so how can I comment other than in general terms?

Quote:
I already said opening walls can make a difference . (In my case, they were negative differences).

Actually, you mentioned opening doors as opposed to the actual wall. If the reflective surface is not the cause of the standing wave, then opening door or wall won't make a difference but it will reduce the reinforcement of a sealed room; negative impact. And if the reflective surface has been removed that reinforces, then a null can be created by it's removal; negative impact. The point, yes, I understand there are complex interactions within a sealed environment.

All who live in Silicon Valley know about the interaction of the Mt View based Shoreline Amphitheater and how it's outdoor acoustics affect many households, miles away as the concert sound waves choose to gather in their bedroom using nighttime air vs warmer daytime air. This is an example of complex interactions. The same can be said for internal acoustics of homes in the path of the local airport runway. Even takeoffs can be an indoor problem for homes that are well over ten miles away; ya gotta love the bass. Unfortunately, due to the higher frequency of thunder, one has to be outside to fully appreciate the sonic range of thunder as it cascades across the sky versus what one hears inside; complex interaction. Currently, I'm in the home office on the other end of the home. I know the wife is awake when I here the whistle of the pipes; complex interactions. On school days, we have trouble having conversations on our front porch in the morning due to reinforcement issues of passing vehicles. Of course school buses are the worse. Again complex interactions and yes, simply removing the walls of the front porch will solve the problem as stepping down to the front yard, closer to the road, the problem goes away. Running calibration sweeps inside our home has it's foils. Although having double paned windows coupled with 2x6 construction and insulation, passing vehicles play havoc with calibrations sweeps due to reinforcement issues and there's nothing that can be done short of doing sweeps in the middle of the night when no traffic; again, complex interaction. The point of the above, we're surrounded by complex sonic interactions that don't just end at the nose of Home Theater.

Quote:
And why would I want these questions on a PM? I'm sure there are many interested in what your specific recommendations are and why.

And I'm sure many here just want to argue for the sake of arguing and by taking the conversation to PM, the arguments end. I answered a question. Enough has been said. If one wishes to continue with off topic conversation, please PM me. Otherwise, how do you like your SubMersive subs and if you changed the phase so not in sync with each other, how did changing the phase improve or deteriorate the overall bass sound quality in your Home Theater?


(The world as we know it is not going end on the 21st.)

..........rolleyes.gif

-
Edited by BeeMan458 - 12/19/12 at 8:03am
post #7658 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

Otherwise, how do you like your SubMersive subs and if you changed the phase, how did changing the phase improve your sound quality?

SubMersive have no phase control.
post #7659 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

One has to be in the room to answer those types of questions as not being omniscient, it would be unreasonable for one to comment in the specific as opposed to the general on a room they haven't seen. -

Really? The why did you tell the poster this?
Quote:
Opening a wall to the next room helps with standing waves and sometimes enhances the rooms appearance in the process.
post #7660 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Seaton View Post

For those rooms with left-right construction symmetry and subs on a front wall, this plays a big part in why 2 subwoofers at the front wall of the room tend to have minimal benefit over a single subwoofer in the corner or center of the front wall.
Once again, measurement is key if you want to get deeper into this level of system optimization. Without measurements of the real room, you're guessing.

Great point (as usual) Mark. The asymmetry of my room is probably why I was able to get away with front wall placement. But all is dependent on the LP in relation to the subs and boundaries so the variables are many. The question is to place and EQ for one ideal location or, to try for the best average over several locations.

I have found Audyssey (XT32) to be best for the latter scenario. Confirming with measurements is helpful but resolution through eq and or placement for more than one location is difficult for all but the most dedicated hobiests.

Of course, additional subs mitigate most problems ... which is good for business. smile.gif
Edited by RMK! - 12/19/12 at 7:58am
post #7661 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

And I'm sure many here just want to argue for the sake of arguing -

I am not arguing. You made a very specific (or general if it makes you feel better) recommendation to the OP. All I am trying to understand is on what scientific basis you make that recommendation and what results can he expect.
Quote:
One has to be in the room to answer those types of questions as not being omniscient, it would be unreasonable for one to comment in the specific as opposed to the general on a room they haven't seen. I'm not playing word games. I haven't seen the room, so how can I comment other than in general terms?

So it's all about "visualization". Then why do folks like Keith Yates use very complex mathematical models to determine what you say you can visualize? No argument. Just looking for explanations.
Edited by audioguy - 12/19/12 at 8:32am
post #7662 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post

Really? The why did you tell the poster this?

Because doing so, does. If I'm guilty of anything, it's giving too general of a reply and yes, for that I'm guilty.

As to scientific theory, there isn't any in the sense that there doesn't need to be. Yes, if you're a scientist, mathematics are great to explain an approach (pretty much, any approach) but one doesn't need to be in command of the specific math to understand what nature intuitively understands. An example, so as to kill an opponent, one doesn't need to be a mathematical master of ballistics for the purpose of accurately getting an arrow from one side of a medieval battle field to the other. One does not need to be a master of the scientific principals of metallurgy to understand the necessary forces required to penetrate medieval battle armor. And in the same vein, nor does one need to be a master of acoustical science to understand what's acoustically happening in an enclosed space. Like cooking spices, a little bit goes a long way. Math simply explains what your brain's auditory system is intuitively perceiving and interpreting. If someone wants to argue these points, please, use a PM.

It's said that Bumble Bees shouldn't be able to fly. Obviously that's horseradish as we all know, Bumble Bees can fly. Having spent decades working with Bumble Bees, I know why. Two points, they have incredible lift in their wings due to their wing speed as do Honey Bees and second, Bumble Bees and Honey Bees (as do all flying insects) have rotating wing joints where the wings meet the body. And due to this rotating ability, they can easily fly. So much for scientific pronouncements as I'm sure that readily, somebody has the math which proves that Bumble Bees can't fly. How many failed scientific principals does one need to be aware of to realize, science isn't the end-all-be-all and that yes, science needs to be challenged.

Again, my response was an a simple reply to a question. A reply I might add that clearly doesn't deserve this type of attention and this is why I'm asking if someone has questions or wants to attack me, please, take it to PM as opposed to continuing with off topic conversation.

-
Edited by BeeMan458 - 12/19/12 at 9:10am
post #7663 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

Because doing so, does.
As to scientific theory, there isn't any in the sense that there doesn't need to be. Yes, if you're a scientist, mathematics are great to explain an approach (any approach) but one doesn't need to be in command of the specific math to understand what nature intuitively understands. An example, so as to kill an opponent, one doesn't need to be a mathematical master of ballistics for the purpose of accurately getting an arrow from one side of a medieval battle field to the other. And in the same vein, nor does one need to be a master of acoustical science to understand what's acoustically happening in an enclosed space. Like cooking spices, a little bit goes a long way. Math simply explains what your brain's auditory system is intuitively perceiving and interpreting. If someone wants to argue this point, please use a PM.
It's said that Bumble Bees shouldn't be able to fly. Obviously that's horseradish as we all know, Bumble Bees can fly. Having spent decades working with Bumble Bees, I know why. Two points, they have incredible lift in their wings due to their wing speed as do Honey Bees and second, Bumble Bees and Honey Bees (as do all flying insects) have rotating wing joints where the wings meet the body. And due to this rotating ability, they can easily fly. So much for scientific pronouncements as I'm sure that readily, somebody has the math which proves that Bumble Bees can't fly. How many failed scientific principals does one need to be aware of to realize, science isn't the end-all-be-all and that yes, science needs to be challenged.
Again, ti was an answer to a reply. A reply that clearly doesn't deserve this type of attention and this is why I'm asking if someone has questions or wants to attack me, to please take it to PM..

The problem is that what you believe you know intuitively simply isn't correct. If it was, the math would support it.
post #7664 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

Yes, and no. You'll get cancellations at some frequencies, increases at some frequencies. If this was outdoors it would be a simple matter to calculate. Indoors not so much, because not only are the direct waves from all the subs part of the equation, so are all the reflections of all those waves off every boundary in the room. But chances are matters will be improved. What you're mainly dealing with is the boundary reflection nulls and peaks from the existing subs. As the boundary reflection nulls and peaks with the third sub will occur at different frequencies than the other two, because it's in a different spot, the overall result will probably be smoother. Before I invested in a third sub, though, I'd move one of them from the front to the side or rear. Having both in front means that some modes will be the same, or very close to the same, for both in some sections of the room.

Thanks for the feedback Bill. In the room's current state, my two Submersives measure very well with no modes (Thanks to treatments and painstaking positioning experiments). I’m only considering a 3rd and eventually a 4th for headroom, as the design for my next theater is nearly complete and I will be building my next house within a couple of years. I’d rather get the additional Submersives before the actual building starts, because I won’t be in the mood to buy anything with the unforeseen costs of construction looming over my head. So when I get the subs, I’d like to integrate them into my current room without ruining the very good measurements I’m getting now with two. Reading your post about the many variables that contribute to full or partial cancellation, perhaps—given the distance they would be from each other and my lack of desire to introduce any cancellation to throw off the current flat measurements, I may be better off leaving them in their boxes until they’re ready for the larger theater.
post #7665 of 8062
If this stuff functioned intuitively, things'd be different. The one thing that I can see opening up a wall doing, for sure, is changing the frequency at which cabin gain occurs. My somewhat limited research suggests it's dependent on the length of the longest dimension in a room, so unless the next wall behind the removed wall is closer than any other dimension in the room, cabin gain automatically changes. It also ought to measurably and audibly change peaks and nulls, both in location and frequency . . . . So an audible difference seems guaranteed. Audible improvement is possible.
post #7666 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

If this stuff functioned intuitively, things'd be different. The one thing that I can see opening up a wall doing, for sure, is changing the frequency at which cabin gain occurs. My somewhat limited research suggests it's dependent on the length of the longest dimension in a room, so unless the next wall behind the removed wall is closer than any other dimension in the room, cabin gain automatically changes. It also ought to measurably and audibly change peaks and nulls, both in location and frequency . . . . So an audible difference seems guaranteed. Audible improvement is possible.

Just a correction in understanding, the overall wall stays in place as an opening is made in the wall as opposed to the prevailing wall being completely removed. An opening could be as benign as a kitchen pass through into a living room to double wide openings at different locations in the living room to access kitchen or entryway. In some remodels, the whole wall is removed so the living room, kitchen and dining are are now one as ceilings are raised.

If one can remodel a whole home, why not a listening room?
post #7667 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrolicBeast View Post

given the distance they would be from each other and my lack of desire to introduce any cancellation to throw off the current flat measurements, I may be better off leaving them in their boxes until they’re ready for the larger theater.
+1. I never fix anything that isn't broken. wink.gif
Quote:
It's said that Bumble Bees shouldn't be able to fly.
That was postulated by some engineer who got the math wrong. The guys who got the math right never said that. Data and what actually occurs are never at odds. If they appear to be the data is incorrect and/or incomplete, or the user's knowledge of how to apply the data is incorrect and/or incomplete.
Quote:
If this stuff functioned intuitively, things'd be different.
+1. There are some areas where intuition is a useful tool. Acoustics isn't one of them. More often than not if you let intuition/common sense be your guide with respect to acoustics you'll be wrong.
post #7668 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post


As to scientific theory, there isn't any in the sense that there doesn't need to be.

Seriously? Then Keith Yates and every other credible room designer is wasting their time.
Quote:
but one doesn't need to be in command of the specific math to understand what nature intuitively understands.

See above
Quote:
An example, so as to kill an opponent, one doesn't need to be a mathematical master of ballistics for the purpose of accurately getting an arrow from one side of a medieval battle field to the other. And in the same vein, nor does one need to be a master of acoustical science to understand what's acoustically happening in an enclosed space. Like cooking spices, a little bit goes a long way. Math simply explains what your brain's auditory system is intuitively perceiving and interpreting. If someone wants to argue this point, please use a PM.

Pulling a string on bow is similar in concept to designing a listening space? Who would have thought that ? Adding spices to cooking has anything in common with room design? Absolutely amazing.
Quote:
A reply that clearly doesn't deserve this type of attention and this is why I'm asking if someone has questions or wants to attack me, to please take it to PM..

Attack you? All I am asking for is an explanation of your apparently unique abilities - an ability that no well qualified, reasonable, educated room designer that operates with integrity seems to have. How do you explain that?
post #7669 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post

Seriously? Then Keith Yates and every other credible room designer is wasting their time.

Seriously, take it to PM.
post #7670 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

The guys who got the math right never said that. Data and what actually occurs are never at odds. If they appear to be the data is incorrect and/or incomplete, or the user's knowledge of how to apply the data is incorrect and/or incomplete.

Bumble Bees haven't a clue they need math to understand flight.
post #7671 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

Just a correction in understanding, the overall wall stays in place as an opening is made in the wall as opposed to the prevailing wall being completely removed. An opening could be as benign as a kitchen pass through into a living room to double wide openings at different locations in the living room to access kitchen or entryway. In some remodels, the whole wall is removed so the living room, kitchen and dining are are now one as ceilings are raised.
If one can remodel a whole home, why not a listening room?

Are you willing to fund the OP's wall reconstruction if your visualization turns out not to improve sound? Why would anyone move/break walls without a reasonable expectation of success?

Far cheaper to pay a qualified acoustician to run the math/simulation than a bunch of guys with sledgehammers, drywall, and paint (likely for multiple cycles of break/build/guess again).
post #7672 of 8062
Hi guys,

So I finally managed to move the sub. It didn't work out at all by putting it in the wall gap. The bass at the seating position was an absolute null. So my hopes were gone for that. I thought I'd do the sub crawl again. And I found that the best position was at the back left of the room. Also, It actually sounded a bit more controlled down there too. Whilst doing the subcrawl there was just no bass anywhere at the front, which there was just a bit, the last time i did the sub crawl. But that time the table wasnt in the right location so that could be a factor. So ill move the sub to that location once I get a longer subwoofer cable.

Going back to when I moved the sub to that gap, there was loads of bass at the right couch in the room. The left couch, which the submersive was siting behind was where the party was. The whole couch was shaking so bad. Never experienced something like that before. But then again there was absolutely no bass at the seating position which was very dissapointing.

Hopefully I actually get the bass I heard whilst doing the sub crawl when I actually move the submersive there. Bass that needs to be EQed can be done when the SMS comes. But there has to be some in the first place.

Cheers for the help guys smile.gif
Ash
post #7673 of 8062
Do you have any measurement tools like OmniMic, REW or XTZ? Without one, you are never really going to be able to find the right spot. (But PLEASE don't cut any holes in your walls or take any walls down).
Edited by audioguy - 12/22/12 at 7:14am
post #7674 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post

Do you have any measurement tools like OmniMic, REW or XTZ? Without one, you are never really going to be able to find the right spot. (But PLEASE don't cut any holes in your walls or take any down walls down).

And why not? We gut houses, re-pitch roofs, raise house foundations to add or finish basements and applaud those who build home theater palaces?

-
Edited by BeeMan458 - 12/22/12 at 7:22am
post #7675 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashi777 View Post

Hi guys,
So I finally managed to move the sub. It didn't work out at all by putting it in the wall gap. The bass at the seating position was an absolute null. So my hopes were gone for that. I thought I'd do the sub crawl again. And I found that the best position was at the back left of the room. Also, It actually sounded a bit more controlled down there too. Whilst doing the subcrawl there was just no bass anywhere at the front, which there was just a bit, the last time i did the sub crawl. But that time the table wasnt in the right location so that could be a factor. So ill move the sub to that location once I get a longer subwoofer cable.
Going back to when I moved the sub to that gap, there was loads of bass at the right couch in the room. The left couch, which the submersive was siting behind was where the party was. The whole couch was shaking so bad. Never experienced something like that before. But then again there was absolutely no bass at the seating position which was very dissapointing.
Hopefully I actually get the bass I heard whilst doing the sub crawl when I actually move the submersive there. Bass that needs to be EQed can be done when the SMS comes. But there has to be some in the first place.
Cheers for the help guys smile.gif
Ash

Hey man, I know how frustrating the search for positioning with one sub can be. For months I suffered sub-par bass with the position of my old SVS PB13-Ultra. One day, I rotated it by 90 degrees and SOME of my problems were solved, but never fully. I ended up having to run it fairly hot until i upgraded to my submersives.

Sometimes our rooms can be our own worst enemies. Although measurements can definitely help, the ear is a remarkable tool. I really wish you luck on your journey. I know how frustrating it can be.
post #7676 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

And why not? We gut houses, re-pitch roofs, raise house foundations to add or finish basements and applaud those who build home theater palaces?
-
Subwoofer integration should not require house reconstruction. rolleyes.gif

BTW, one whole wall of this room is glass windows. Glass, in general is almost transparent to bass, having an STC, (Sound Transmission Coefficient), of about 20 below 100 Hz, (see chart below.) This basically means that whole wall is already "open" for bass frequencies. Any room modes that would have been generated by reflections off that wall, (axial, tangential or oblique), will be extremely low level. Do you honestly believe that opening another wall will be of benefit?



(More measurements of the STC's of different window configurations can be found on Pages 46 through 55 of the following: http://www.saflex.com/pdf/en/Saflex_Acoustical_Guide.pdf )

Also note in the above graph how reflective glass is at higher frequencies. If the glass windows in this room are uncovered by drapes, they will reflect a much larger percentage of the mids and highs, while allowing the bass to pass right through. This will unbalance the sound even more and exacerbate the problem. Ashi, maybe you should suggest to your dad that he remove the windows and fill in the holes with solid wall material to improve the overall sound of the room and the bass response. (sarcasm)

Craig
Edited by craig john - 12/22/12 at 10:28am
post #7677 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

Subwoofer integration should not require house reconstruction. rolleyes.gif

There's no need to be offensive by rolling your eyes at me or openly being sarcastic to Ashi777. That's being intentionally antagonistic which is against forum posting rules.

You're applying your comments as if they're universal to all rooms and all conditions which isn't realistic as the LFE channel is 0-120Hz and 25dB is a huge attenuation, which we all know as the chart doesn't go below 100Hz. This is a done topic of conversation. Please, if you wish to continue, take it to PM. If you don't wish to take the topic of your post to PM, please don't address me directly or indirectly.

-
Edited by BeeMan458 - 12/22/12 at 10:46am
post #7678 of 8062
In my HT room, I pluggged and taped all the windows with 4'' foam board then painted.
post #7679 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

There's no need to be offensive by rolling your eyes at me. That's being intentionally antagonistic which is against forum posting rules.
You're applying your comments as if they're universal to all rooms and all conditions which isn't realistic. This is a done topic of conversation, please, if you wish to continue, take it to PM.
You mean the forum provides a standard emoticon that is against the rules to use? rolleyes.gif

And the sarcasm wasn't directed at Ashi.
Edited by craig john - 12/22/12 at 11:17am
post #7680 of 8062
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

You mean the forum provides a standard emoticon that is against the rules to use? rolleyes.gif

..... biggrin.gif

I figure that emoticon is OK based on previous use patterns.

BTW, good info validating your position Craig, particularly how you specifically address Ashi777's room.
Edited by bfreedma - 12/22/12 at 10:57am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › Seaton Sound SubMersive1