Ableton Forum

Forge. wrote:because -36 dB is only the level of certain frequencies. It all adds up together.

it is a SPECTRUM of many frequencies. "spectrum" is telling you what is going on for each frequency band.

That makes sense. So the level meter on Lives faders is kind of like the RMS of the frequencies?

ze2be wrote:OK, I tried the noise trick. In the picture here the dark line is the white noise before the room recording. The bright line is when the same audio is recorded with the NT3 microphone. The grid is in steps of 6db. Appears that from 100 Hz and down, I loose about 12db. There is also a dip around 10kHz. Is this OKish, or is it bad?



I wonder why 0db on Lives faders equal to -36db on the spectrum..

So at least, your room does no tseem to have any high resonant peaks. Thats good. Try again with a sine sweep, and see if you can hear what your measurements say.

ze2be wrote:

Forge. wrote:because -36 dB is only the level of certain frequencies. It all adds up together.

it is a SPECTRUM of many frequencies. "spectrum" is telling you what is going on for each frequency band.

That makes sense. So the level meter on Lives faders is kind of like the RMS of the frequencies?

No Live's level meter is a "Peak meter" which means it really just shows the loudest sound at a given moment.

If you extend the mixer upwards it shows the actual peak level above each fader.

punching_sandwiches wrote:The trick is to first record something (in the video it is a paragraph of text spoken) then to play that back into the same room it was recorded in and record that.
Do this a hand full of times (maybe even more) and what happens is that each recording amplifies the resonances in the room.
It's a great art piece but also fantastic for finding what frequencies your room resonates at.

In an ideal environment the sound should be pretty much dead.

In my case I get a HUGE peak at 133Hz after only a few rounds. This is telling me that that is a problematic frequency in my room.

I was wondering if this frequency constitutes bass traps or another type of room treatment.

I read about the piece but I never knew it had such a practical application. Would you not get a better result with something more full frequency than a voice? Edit- I just spotted uncloned's white noise example.

Forge. wrote:If you extend the mixer upwards it shows the actual peak level above each fader.

Dam, I never knew that. Thanks for the heads up

I'm not so sure these methods are very accurate.

If you get the REW software, it gives you the instructions, compensates for your soundcard, and gives you waterfall so you can better see the modal ringing, etc. And it's free.

In general for home studios or smaller rooms the recommendation seems to be (in order of importance)
1) Speaker placement
2) Acoustic treatment including mostly bass traps to control the low end
3) EQ, etc to fix any small unresolved issues.

If you're serious about it there are some very helpful (professional) people in that gearslutz forum I mentioned. If you end up buying panels or bass traps from any of the retailers, they'll go even further to help get your room just right.

tech44 wrote:I'm not so sure these methods are very accurate.

If you get the REW software, it gives you the instructions, compensates for your soundcard, and gives you waterfall so you can better see the modal ringing, etc. And it's free.

In general for home studios or smaller rooms the recommendation seems to be (in order of importance)
1) Speaker placement
2) Acoustic treatment including mostly bass traps to control the low end
3) EQ, etc to fix any small unresolved issues.

OK, I will have a look at REW. Regarding 3. If you look at my graph just as an example, would you use an eq on the master, boosting the drop out frequencies from 100hz and down? Does that even work? I mean, if those frequencies already phaze them self out, would it really change to bring up the gain of those frequencies.

ze2be wrote:

tech44 wrote:I'm not so sure these methods are very accurate.

If you get the REW software, it gives you the instructions, compensates for your soundcard, and gives you waterfall so you can better see the modal ringing, etc. And it's free.

In general for home studios or smaller rooms the recommendation seems to be (in order of importance)
1) Speaker placement
2) Acoustic treatment including mostly bass traps to control the low end
3) EQ, etc to fix any small unresolved issues.

OK, I will have a look at REW. Regarding 3. If you look at my graph just as an example, would you use an eq on the master, boosting the drop out frequencies from 100hz and down? Does that even work? I mean, if those frequencies already phaze them self out, would it really change to bring up the gain of those frequencies.

do you have a sub?

Forge. wrote:do you have a sub?

Yes, but I dont use it. Room is L shaped, 3x5x3m. Genelec 1030A with a 6.5" bass. Monitors in the corner of the L shape. Long side is the living room, short side is the kitchen.

Im currently reading the 29 page thread about KRK Ergo. And ive seen all the videos of REW - Room EQ Wizard. I dont have real bass traps, but ive filled the 2 closest corners with thick foam, and defuser foam in the roof and on the 2 closest walls.

ze2be wrote:I dont have real bass traps, but ive filled the 2 closest corners with thick foam, and defuser foam in the roof and on the 2 closest walls.

And the result is...?

Der_Makrophag wrote:

ze2be wrote:I dont have real bass traps, but ive filled the 2 closest corners with thick foam, and defuser foam in the roof and on the 2 closest walls.

And the result is...?

So far ist whats on the Spectrum picture I posted above. Im currently looking into if I need a better measure mic then my rode nt3. Behringer ecm8000? If I should get either a KRK Ergo or JBL MSC1 room correction system, or spend the money on better bass traps.

ze2be wrote:

tech44 wrote:I'm not so sure these methods are very accurate.

If you get the REW software, it gives you the instructions, compensates for your soundcard, and gives you waterfall so you can better see the modal ringing, etc. And it's free.

In general for home studios or smaller rooms the recommendation seems to be (in order of importance)
1) Speaker placement
2) Acoustic treatment including mostly bass traps to control the low end
3) EQ, etc to fix any small unresolved issues.

OK, I will have a look at REW. Regarding 3. If you look at my graph just as an example, would you use an eq on the master, boosting the drop out frequencies from 100hz and down? Does that even work? I mean, if those frequencies already phaze them self out, would it really change to bring up the gain of those frequencies.

Well, I wouldn't go by that graph TBH. But, even if you use the REW, the eq is a last resort for minor corrections that can't be addressed any other way. Speaker placement and traps are going to get you much better results.

Having said that, every graph is going to roll off on the low end regardless. You're not going to get it completely flat.

ze2be wrote:

Der_Makrophag wrote:

ze2be wrote:I dont have real bass traps, but ive filled the 2 closest corners with thick foam, and defuser foam in the roof and on the 2 closest walls.

And the result is...?

So far ist whats on the Spectrum picture I posted above. Im currently looking into if I need a better measure mic then my rode nt3. Behringer ecm8000? If I should get either a KRK Ergo or JBL MSC1 room correction system, or spend the money on better bass traps.

You can get a cheap spl meter and get good results:

http://www.realtraps.com/art_microphones.htm

I spent days with speaker placement, moving and measuring each time. Tedious as hell but managed to reduce the common 100hz null that is common in smaller studios. Adding traps afterwards flattened the response even further. Tiny adjustments even within 1" have an affect on the measurement. Even went as far as vnc'ing into my iMac via my phone to take the measurements without being in the room.