Technically 2.1 is three discreet channels but I know whatcha mean OP.
I have a couple KRK-RP8's and the 10s sub. I don't always click the sub on but do something, it depends. Also I have the sub pretty modestly set so it just fills-in the low end as opposed to exaggerating it and being all rumbly and ugly.
>>51336332 and good rooms for subwoofers are hard to come-by. have a small room or one with particular dimensions will pretty much make the ultimaite determination on whether the sub is any good in there.
>>51336941 Hmm well getting it decoupled from the floor is one thing that'll help, just to keep that mechanical vibrations out of the floorboards, but also the exact location in the room can maximize your room's response, that way you can pump less power through it for the same effect. It's tricky though, because when the sound energy is able to go through walls (as subs generally do) then you'll get weird acoustic coupling to the building and not just your room. If I had dimensions or floorplan or something I could help with that, but depending on those dimensions and wall materials it could be impossible to get it significanly improved, at least as far as the neighbors are concerned. We do love dem low Hz but they're hard to control.
>>51338268 I've never owned a pair, but I would assume they're decent.
Fro the price you could probably get some yamahas or whatever else. The real problem is that everyone has them, it's as if they are *the* speakers to have. The whole yellow cone thing is practically a brand.
>>51338131 Sort of true and sort not true. Although the word "need" pretty much makes it true, in many circumstances a sub will make your monitoring more revealing and accurate. Depends what the setup is. Without going into weird sound-wankery, one major benefic is being able to place the subwoofer in a different location from where the main monitors are... so you can sidestep and circumvent room mode issues that the main monitor placement is subject to.
And of course subs are good for just plain pleasure listening, if you want your movie or music to rumble just for funsies.
>>51338103 >>51338268 >>51338307 >>51338339 I use KRK Rokits. I had a budget when I bought them, but I like them. They aren't exactly Opals or ATCs but they're actually quite good. They're precise enough for me to be happy, and they're aesthetic enough for me to be happy. They aren't spectacular, but they aren't exactly inhibiting. A frined of mine has the higher-priced KRK VXT8s and he's whicked unhappy with the low end in them. It's hard to win with every purchase but you gotta just get on with it and do what you can with what you have.
>>51338464 I'm sure they are good enough, I myself bought a pair of m-audio bx8 d2's when I started out. If I hadn't seen so many people with the rokits I would probably have a pair too. Just didn't want to be part of the trend so I went for other (possibly worse?) monitors.
>>51338520 Idunno, specs aren't evenything. If you're happy with the M-Audios then you're better off. When I bought my KRKs I'd only heard them a couple times, and nobody I knew had them. This would have been ~2007... but yeah, I see them if every production booth and screening room nowadays. I well.
I totally agree about the sheer pleasure of the listening experience with a sub.
Subwoofer placement matters A LOT less than monitor placement. Most setups have subwoofers in the corner of the room away from everything. If there is comb-filtering cause of the acoustics, it's unlikely that sub-placement will do anything about that. It's only ever really necessary if your monitors can't produce proper bass, but good ones should be more than enough, though there are a few that are intentionally designed to be used along with a sub.
It's because it takes room acoustics out of the equation. If you're using monitors the room you're monitoring in becomes SO important, to the point where there's no point investing in expensive-ass monitors if your room isn't acoustically accurate.
>>51338645 >Subwoofer placement matters A LOT less than monitor placement Not neccessarily bro! Monitor placement is dictated more by space and workflow/setup conditions. The subwoofer can be moved around with more freedom to acoustically fit the room better. For examples, your main monitors might be capable of delivering beautifully flat 20-100Hz, but if they're sitting in the room in a way that misses the lower room modes but exaggerates 200Hz they're not going to deliver. The sub can be moved to compliment, to activate say, a 30Hz standing wave, but not activate the 200Hz one - so then you're just achieving a flatter response within the limitations of the room and main monitor setup. Comb filtering/phase isn't a huge issuse with the sub unless you're making it reproduce frequencies too high (150Hz+), which a lot of home theater systems subs do.
>>51338833 if you put the subwoofer so the cone/tranduscer is right on the the 160Hz null spot (which might be the center of the room up off the floor hehe) it won't activate 160 at all! But then you'll have a shit right in the middle of the room.
Yeah that's true, but where in the room the sub is placed won't really matter is what I was saying. That's really true though, you can use the sub to compensate for missing frequencies at the listening position, but then you're outputting way more of that frequency than you should be, and that becomes problematic because then you limit proper listening to a specific place in the room. Problems regarding acoustics are what needs to be addressed in that situation. I think treating the room would be way more beneficial than buying a sub when the monitors themselves already have a flat FR.
>>51338880 acoustically treating a room for low frequencies is generally prohibitively difficult and expensive. It is the best though.
Where the sub is placed matter a lot, because you want to activate some modes but not activate others. That plus a combination of room treatments is the golden arrow, but we're talking control room budget.
>>51338877 haha I know! Goddamn subwoofer placement. I did the crawl technique, and that only gave me the same answers. I've done room correction with my EQ to just drop the 160-200Hz range a little, and it's sounding much better. I also have padding up now, but I gotta move that around more and get some more walls padded. Also roof tile rattle is a pain in the ass.
>>51338986 If you're worried about padding for low Hz only you can do just about everything you need just by putting it in the corners - the corners where where every single room mode exists, so a lot can be achieved without having to cover walls. Of course, it'll have to be thick stuff in the corners (like 1ft+ foam blocks etc). Too much padding on the wall surfaces/too anechoic is death for translating music.
>>51339365 Yeah bro of course it is! I've worked with a couple PA installation companies and they're more tradesmen than acousticians (but that's generally ok - and you want those type of people doing the installation and rigging anyway). The more you know the better off you'll be either way.
Got a pair of Yamaha HS7 studio monitors, will probably buy the sub from same series soon.
Oh and headphonefags: I was headphone fag for like 10 years, using DT 770 pros nowadays. Yes the sound good, but you just can't compare headphones to good speakers. I never listen to music using headphones anymore, I only use em while gaming.
>>51339420 Not that guy, but I've done a music tech bachelor's degree and I'd like to get into acoustics more. When you say you've got a couple of degrees - what do you mean exactly? Is it worth getting into acoustics if I'm not planning to deep into it?
>>51339654 I've got a similar Bachelor's, but I focused on acoustics because that's what I wanted to pursue. After a few years I went and got a 2-year M.Sc. in acoustics. If you don't want to get deep into I would say save your money, there's a lot to be learned by reading books and doing your own research. Especially if you're more into just room acoustics (as opposed to electroacoustics, DSP, building acosutics, sound system design, etc).
>>51339770 Interesting. Well primarily, I suppose - yes, I'm interested in acoustics cause I'll be definitely building a studio space at some point.
But another thing on my mind is employment. I don't really want to do music for a living (that might include mixing and sound design), but you could say sound work is the only proper skill I've got. So IF I was to go further down the path of sound - it's either acoustics or audio programming.
>>51339770 >>51339903 Sorry, posted a bit too early. I guess my question would be - why did you go into this field in the first place? I mean I suppose you make music as a hobby, and I guess your work involves acoustics. Does your job / acoustics work take away any interest from musicmaking / whatever it is that interests you the most in music?
Because that's one of the reasons I'm afraid to take up a music-related job. I don't think I work hard enough on my own creations and I doubt I'll want to work more if I spent 40-60 hours a week working on someone else's stuff. Started learning Python in hopes of one day getting into serious audio programming, or at least just make some fun plugins for myself.
>>51339903 >>51340051 My main motivation is work in acoustics and acoustic engineering (less so than being an audio engineer, etc). I've had a good deal of employment as an audio engineer but I feel like for a lifetime career acoustics and the STEM-side of sound is a better bet. I still love music and still get a lot of work as an audio/mastering engineer... it is hard to combine both into one field though, really - although knowledge of one greatly helps the other and vice-versa
>>51340042 I like it! Not bad anon. As much as I chuckle about Ethan Winer references, the mas does know wtf he's talking about - especially his mythbusting extrodinaire when it comes to bass traps, etc. One thing I've noticed over the years is people misunderstanding when you say "rigid fiberglass panels" They might not fully click that you mean fiberglass insulation. That's just a matter of semantics, the info is correct though. The other good thing about the fiberglass insulation (besides being cheap, easy, and DIY, is that i's fire safe!
Also, the open-cell wedges (aurelex etc) have one great benefit (besides they're easy and look ok) - and that's that they have diffusion qualities that make them good around the edges of your RFZ, or if you're room is particularly large and you want to cut down on reflections some without making it anechoic.
The plywood diffusor addition is great - people underutilize convex surfaces!
The only thing I might add would be some design goals - 20ms ER time, etc. This helps guide people so they don't over treat with absorption, and keep distant diffusion in mind (back wall, outside the RFZ, etc).
Very fucking good though, things that people will benefit from that goes a little beyond the common sense everyday knowledge stuff.
People who constantly use subs and monitors - how do you deal with your neighbours?
Living in a concrete apartment complex, i can hear my subs at a very moderate volume to outside of my apartment p easily, so a constant, daily use of them is completely out of the question.
>>51340042 i could manage the DIY stuff here with ease, since i already have the material and tools from my families' construction work (just a bit of experience too), but i'm completely sure this would not do the job to do a sensible job for me to listen to music on a preferred volume. Let's say my neighbours can clearly feel the bass at a 20% volume, but just about at 80% is where the bass really affects me physically in a comfy way.
I really don't think a moderate compromise would be possible, it's either full volume, ~4hrs a day or just settle for my headset. Hence the only answer i could think of is getting a house.
I don't know, is there any accurate stats on how effective >>51340042 could possibly be?
>>51340790 I'm the guy who made the guide, and in terms of soundproofing (making it so that your neighbors can't hear you), it's basically useless. My guide is focused on getting your room to sound good when you're inside it; keeping sound in or out of your room is an entirely different story.
Though I do provide a link to a good book on Acoustic that you can read by Rod Gervais.
The only thing you can really do is put the sub on pads (neoprene is best but those foam blocks they sell work too) to reduce the mechanical vibrations. The other thing is to place the subwoofer so that you're maximizing its in-room response - that way you get the most out of it with minimal power. Between the two you can drastically reduce the amount of thump or rattle that's going to cause problems but depending on the building structure and wall materials it might not help enough.
It has to be designed on a case-by-case basis because proper tuning is essential... and like I said, they still might be bothered due to all the variables involved.
Thread replies: 75 Thread images: 9
Thread DB ID: 20567
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.