# my room responses



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hello everyone, I have attached pictures of my room responses, included 2 waterfall graphs. There is no eq except for a Marchand Bassis which boosts and adjusts Q of my sealed diy subs, set at 38hz. The room is extensively treated with broadband and two types of panel traps a la Ethan Weiner Real Traps diy plans. There are currently 25 2'X8' traps and 15 2'X4' traps. I will be adding another 18 2'X8' traps at some point. 
REW and bass trapping have been the most enlightening/revelation in my audio life. Thank you very much!!!!! I have been able to adjust my sub setting and main/subs positioning which was previously impossible to do before by ears alone. Also to be able to put a "face" to the sound is a revelation and makes it possible to really understand your system and rooms acoustics which was only "theory" before. Now I know what I am hearing. And loving it!

Thanks again,
Bob


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hello again, PS that is with 1/12 octave smoothing.
Bob


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Oops, here is the graph correctly sized.
Bob


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Oops again, and now down to 20hz! Also note the measurement is 74.2db not 75db because I have stepped attenuators and this is as close as I can come to 75db.
Bob


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Ooops again and again, Now the watefall in a correct scale.
Sorry for keep doing this! I think I got it correct! 
Bob


----------



## Guest (May 7, 2008)

Responses look very good. If you have the space then extensive treatment can reap big rewards, though with 40 already in place and 18 more to come is there room to squeeze in past all the traps? :bigsmile: You could be a record holder on the treatment front.


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi, my room is 16'X23' with a 13' ceiling at the peak. Then there is a loft area to my left with another 13' ceiling at the peak. This is in an circa 1850s converted barn, which is for my motorcycle collection and listening room. At this point most of the bass traps are in the front half of the room. The next 18 traps will be on the ceiling in the rear half of the room. There are 12 on the front half of the rooms ceiling. There is plenty of room without feeling claustrophobic. The first two pictures show the rear half of the room and third picture shows some of the free standing traps as well as some ot the traps on the ceiling.
The main speakers are Acoustat six, with DIY subs using eight froward and eight rear firing 8" eminent tech driveres in a sealed cabinet in a stereo pair for a total of 32 drivers. Crossed over currently at 120hz. 

Bob


----------



## Guest (May 8, 2008)

I want your life. :R

Now that's a man cave!


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hello, And the number one reason for bass traps is...my DIY subs, a picture of them under construction, an in room picture and my early attempt at room treatment. And dont forget there are just as many drivers in the rear of the speaker. In the last picture you see my early attemps at "room treatment", its really laughable that i was told to use blankets...foam etc.. well it would be laughable if it werent for the fact that I wasted time even thinking this would help. And unfortunatly people are still being told to do this, by people who should know better. Plastic ficus trees anyone?

Bob


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hello, here are the graphs with no smoothing and with one octave smoothing.
Bob


----------



## atledreier (Mar 2, 2007)

Now that is a nice curve! How does it sound?


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

HI, How does it sound? Yes, in a word fantastic. 

There are so many ways it helps that it is impossible to think of them all in one post. First off is that I started like everyone else, not knowing what exactly bass traps do (without hearing it). I did know that I wanted a smooth and good freq range, thats a given. One of the basic tenets of audio reproduction, and it does not matter where the error occurs a bad freq response from your equipment or your room is still a bad freq response. that is why I built the subs I did and buy some very nice equipment over the last 30 years. Some of it I still use today in my system. The solid state SAE amps I have owned since the late 70s I am sure one of my first purchases after getting out of collage and had some money. I had been drooling for SAE since high school and the amps cost $800 back then! A stereo pair currently drives the subs. The Acoustat 6s I have owned since 1984 and previously owned Acoustat 3s before them. An ET2 tonearm for 20 years. My phono preamp, crossover and direct drive Acoustat tube amps are relatively new to me, within the last 10 years. I kept thinking, just why does it not sound great? Did I need to spend more money on equipment? I knew the answer to that one! NO! I had heard plenty of systems that cost up to 10 times what mine cost and it did not seem to make a difference. I mean how could $20,000 amps not sound great? $30,000 speakers sound horrible? I would go home and listen to my system at 1/10th the cost and say to myself, my system sounds just as good/bad/same as those. How could that be? You know the answer, they were all limited by the room! 

That is the sad part, all along I could have been listening to great music but was told to put up a plastic ficus tree from Wallmart for dispertion, moving blankets and foam for taming the highs and nobody had a clue about bass. Or worse yet, was that I was told I needed to spend more money on a new piece of equipment! $3,000 does not buy a great preamp? How could that be? Just how much do you need to spend?

Some how I stumbled onto Ethans site and I was struck by lightning. Could this be the problem? I knew that turning up/down the bass or the volume levels was not the answer, from listening for years to my system and others. What was wrong? Why did my records sound so different in different houses, my own and my friends? I had heard Acoustats in my different houses and my friends owned Acoustats so I heard them in three different houses there also. So just why did my LPs not sound the same? Why did my friends like the sound of the LPs in their rooms but not mine and vise-a-versa. 

A while back a friend of mine bought a LP (with some great bass on it) that I have, after listening to it at my house. He commented that when he got his copy he thought it was defective! He said there was no bass one it! How could that be? We just accepted it for what it was that we were hearing, I mean you are hearing it so it must be correct. And he has a more expensive (and better) equipment than I do. Was my system wrong? Was his wrong, one has to be right.

Just how loud is loud? How low of a freq response is low? How low do you need to go? I thought there are answers to this, and I had been working on this by myself for a number of years of critical listening. I was on the right course but it was not untill I started with bass trapping that the answer was really revealed. 

I first started with corner traps and first reflection points of broadband absorbers. The change was signicant, bass was tighter with less overhang and the music sounded more natural. I knew I was onto something, thank you Ethan. I continued to read and think about bass traping and thought if this is the path, I must try real bass trapping a la Ethans panel traps. I started with treating the walls with free standing panel traps. Now I was really impressed. I started to get better bass levels and better high freq responses as the comb filtering was lessening and decay times started to come into reasonable levels. 

This was it, now I knew what the problem was and it was not my subs nor my equipment or the music I listened to. I then treated the ceiling, this is in the front half of the room only. The rear half of the room ceiling is still untreated with 32 linear feet by 15 feet wide for a total of 480sq feet of surface that is currently untreated. I will be adding 18 more traps (288sq feet)and I will be "done"! There will then be a total of 45 traps for a total of 720sq feet of coverage. this will be approx 75% of wall and ceiling coverage. As much as I can do in this room due to the fact it is also used for my motorcycle collection.

I feel that in order to get a real feel for what basstrapping can do 1/4 of the room needs to be covered, you will then be able to hear it effects and you will be addicted! Nothing else will give you this performance , not cables nor a new amp or Shakti stones. 

Have half of the rooms walls and ceilings treated and you will be there with very good sound, as much as most people need. Want to take it to the limit then 3/4 to probably 100% coverage is necessary. I have not tried diffusion and some say that perhaps the last 25% would be better with diffusion, but I am not experienced with that.

I have not answered your question "how does it sound?" in this post. I will answer that in following posts, as it is too multi faceted to continue here and i thought some background was in order first... and yes it sounds fantastic.

Bob


----------



## atledreier (Mar 2, 2007)

So you have a mixture of broadband absorbers and some panel absorbers there? That's alot of treatment. Wish I had space, money and time for all that! Would be very interesting to see an unsmoothed measurement up to 1kHz or so. I guess you have very few SBIR issues, though.


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi, Yes I have the 3 different absorbers in a repeating pattern around the room. I will take a measurement tomorrow and post it. I will also let you know the changes I hear.
Bob


----------



## atledreier (Mar 2, 2007)

three kinds? I see broadband and panel. Do you count the corners as a separate kind, or do you have a trick up your sleeve?


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi Atledreier, I guess its just two types! Broadband with the fabric covers, some are 4 inch thick (walls, with air gap) and the ones on the ceiling are 1 inch thick with air gap behind them. The other "two' types are 1/8th inch panel and 1/4 inch panel traps. There are broad bands in the corner 4 inch thick. So yea, I guess "the number shall be two". 


Bob


----------



## atledreier (Mar 2, 2007)

Hehe. I see. So no panel absorbers then, just different thickness broadband absorbers.


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi Atledreier, No, there are indeed membrane panel traps. Here is a freq response out to 1,250hz. No Eq except for Marchand Bassis to boost freq below 38hz due to sealed box design. See pictures attached. The first photo is taken from in front of the listening seat looking up to the ceiling at the left Acoustat. Main speakers are out 6 feet. The second photo shows the opposite ceiling looking up from in front of the (right) main speaker and sub. Note middle panels on both sides have yet to receive their fabric. 
Bob


----------



## atledreier (Mar 2, 2007)

Now THAT's a decent frequency response!  I wish I had a barn....


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hello, I have started on building the last sixteen 2'x8' panel/broadband traps for my room, which are going on the ceiling. There will be no more room (for more panels) after that! I have 10 of them currently built (yesterday) and will build the next 6 today and start attaching them to the ceiling today. I have off from work next week and will finish putting them up at that time. I will next week after they are all up take new graphs and post them. 

Sorrr I have not answered the question on how these affect the sound, but I have not forgotten and will discuss it soon.

Also I have not thanked the creators of this site and especially the REW program. Here is a BIG THANK YOU! This is the best thing that has happened to me in audio along with the bass traps!
Thanks,
Bob


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hello, I have been busy building my last 16 bass traps. Here is a picture with most of the frames up. They are glued and screwed to the ceiling and then the sealed panel traps receive also a caulking on the inside to further seal the box. I have so far finished 3 broadband traps and several have the rock wool in place. I will post pictures again, soon, to show progress. I have a week off from work next week so I will have plenty of time to finish them and do some new measurements and listening.
Thanks,
Bob


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hello, I have 8 of the 16 new traps up and will take a new measurement before adding the last 8 traps. In the meantime here are acouple of pictures of the new traps along with the non completed ones seen in pictures.
Bob


----------



## atledreier (Mar 2, 2007)

That's just wicked.

How's the highs affected by all that absorbtion?


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi Atledreier, I think that contrary to "popular belief" that as you add more bass trapping the room become too dead in the high freq. This is not what I am hearing or measuring. As you get a flatter response not only do the high freq peaks come down (more dead?) the high freq nulls come up! Less dead! Music just sounds more natural with even pitch. The imaging become more precise and clear. I have not had to make any adjustments to "compensate" for more bass trapping, though I did in the beginning when I added the first 20 traps! That was because as I was initally compensating for a "bad room" and had trouble adjusting my system as nothing sounded correct due to to the severe peaks in an untreated room. How does one set a subwoofer level (to mains level)when you have peaks and nulls over 20db? 
Bob


----------



## atledreier (Mar 2, 2007)

I saw this as well, in my room. I think the key here is even response, and even (broadband) absorbtion. Some rooms get narrowband absorbtion and get a skewed response. Minse sounds good now too. Nowhere near as complete as yours but getting there!


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi Atledrier, Here are some new response with the old responses. The new response is purple. Notice while not a huge change there is none the less a smoothing of the responses and broadening of the peaks. Of course ther is also a corresponding change in the waterfall response. There is a most notable change in the sound more than what is suggested just by graphs. The initial sound of attack is greatly increased also. The reference db level is 74db. There is also some shifting of responses due to not having the microphone in the exact same location.
Bob

Ps it is 12 noon here in conecticut USA, what time is it in Noway? Also what is you name, is it Atledreier?


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hello, and here are some waterfall to compare.
Bob


----------



## atledreier (Mar 2, 2007)

Right as I type it's 22:10, that's 10 past 10pm for you 'can't count to 24' guys. 

My name is Atle Dreier, that's correct. 

And that waterfall looks awesome! I have a decent waterfall above 70-80ish, but some nasty nulls and stuff up there from my ceiling. I also have a severe node at 33-ish and then 66-ish from the lenght of my room. My basstraps don't touch that low.


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi Atle, Thanks for the complimets. I think at this point I am seeing the law of diminishing returns. Though I am on my desired goal to get a response within +-2.5db across the board, and hopefully even better! Only eight more to go! As you see though, that even though I said it was minimal improvement you can see really quite a change in the 650-780ish range, I am within 1db. With the low freq response you can see a 0.5-1db improvement!

The "before" ( green waterfall) picture of the low freq waterfall seems to have disappeared, if it does not reappear back from cyberspace I will repost it, but even at a very low freq, there was an improvement.

I am doing this "little experiment" not just for myself, to get a great room, but to really see if all of this really works! For everone to see. Cant stop now! Whats impressive now is that I need to use the graph set on 2db increments to note the changes, as its getting flatter.
Bob


----------



## atledreier (Mar 2, 2007)

Awesome. I didn't notice the graph scale, that's just insane!  Wish I could go toally overboard like that!


----------



## brucek (Apr 11, 2006)

bob,

A couple points.

Usually waterfall plots are useful for frequencies below ~200Hz (BTW, it's a good idea to switch your waterfalls to logarithmic mode rather than linear). Above that, RT60 is used, and only when the room is large. You certainly are a candidate for that. 

RT-60 displays the decay across the entire band or a selectable section of it (i.e.octave bands). It's basically reverberation time, the time it takes a sound to decay 60dB or 1,000,000th from its initial impact, or sound pressure level. It's very revealing and will show the fruits of the work you're doing. Think of what a church sounds like and you know what high RT60 is.

Generate the RT60 from the impulse response screen (after a full range sweep) and then take a look at the RT-60 tab. The scale is frequency versus time (in portions of a second from 0 to 1 seconds).. Ignore below 200hz. A flat line of about 0.3 seconds would be considered ideal. 

I would be very interesting in seeing an RT60 of your room. (both 1/3 and 1 octave). It might show if you have enough or too much absorption.....

brucek


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi Bruce, Thanks for taking the time to write and correct me! And keeping me on track. Here is an RT60, Is this what you are asking for?
Bob


----------



## brucek (Apr 11, 2006)

Yep, but we want to see it to 20KHz (as long as you're using a full range mic and not a Radio Shack meter)...........  both third and one octave graphs (selectable on the RT60 page).

brucek


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi Bruce, I am using a Radio Shack meter. I usually measure up 1250hz. Generally speaking should I measure up higher? Tonight I will do a measurement up to a higher freq, what do you recommend?
Bob


----------



## brucek (Apr 11, 2006)

> Generally speaking should I measure up higher?


With the RS meter I would limit the upper end to around 3KHz (they tend to be unpredictable after that). Even with what you've shown, I think it's going to be obvious you have a very low RT60. Quite the accomplishment in basically a big barn.

brucek


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi Bruce, Here is a RT60 out to 3000hz. I still have 5 traps to finish and will post a graph when they are done. 

When setting sub to main speakers distance we all see changes in freq response , is this because of phase? Is there one test in particular or a combination of tests that would show when the subs/mains are in phase?

I did notice the RT 60 changes when the subs are moved, would I be best served by getting the flattest RT 60? And would that indicate they are in phase?

Bob


----------



## brucek (Apr 11, 2006)

> When setting sub to main speakers distance we all see changes in freq response , is this because of phase? Is there one test in particular or a combination of tests that would show when the subs/mains are in phase?


The effects of the phase control and receiver time delays are only realized when speakers are played in concert with each other (sharing the same frequency). You will observe no effect of phase and time with a single speaker playing. 

So, with respect to a sub and mains (for example), the area where the two are _mixed_ and sharing the same frequencies is at the crossover frequency (i.e. 80HZ). The phase of the sub is adjusted to obtain the smoothest transition at that crossover area where the two meet (and somewhat above and below that). Simply taking successive measures of the sub + mains from 0-200Hz and adjusting the phase of the sub is the best way to make the adjustment. Get the smoothest transition. Using the RTA feature of REW with periodic pink noise is the easiest way to make this adjustment, since it's dynamic - you turn the dial and watch the response change at the crossover....

The phase control of the sub is a close approximation of the time delay in the receiver and can be used if there is no phase control available on the sub..



> I did notice the RT 60 changes when the subs are moved, would I be best served by getting the flattest RT 60? And would that indicate they are in phase?


RT60 is really only useful outside the modal resonance bandwidth, so it should only be considered above 200Hz. The subs have very little effect at this frequency and above, so ignore the subs with respect to RT60.
The best value for RT60 is debatable. It depends on the venue and what you're looking for. A higher RT60 might give the effect of 'space' and some might consider that desirable (church and stadium soundfields come to mind). In a studio, the engineer might want a very low RT60 across the spectrum to ensure intelligibility. A studio may be as low as 0.2 seconds.
In a large HT room, especially when the surround system is there to provide the 'space' soundfield, I read that a target of around 0.35-0.40 would be ideal across the spectrum (but some might like it higher).

Note where your RT60 is sitting.... it's actually below 0.30 seconds (and amazingly flat over the area you have measured - too bad you don't have the RT60 graph before you added treatment. If you have an original mdat file, create an RT60 and look at it). You're certainly getting that room quite dead (at least the plot looks that way). That may be your goal, I don't know. Is the sound that you experience to your liking now? maybe it's time to slow down on adding more treatment - I just don't know. 

Your graph is one-octave selected on the RT60 page - try selecting third octave for a bit different view.

My experience with RT60 is simply book learnt, so I can't claim to be any kind of expert in this. It would be nice if others who are experienced would post on this.

brucek


----------



## atledreier (Mar 2, 2007)

I can only speak for myself and my room/system, but my RT60 is in the 0.2-0.3 range, and the room doesn't feel 'dead'. Quite the contrary, I'd say. It's not echoey, but certainly not overdamped. Very precise and focused.


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi guys, I do not have a phase adjustment or time delays on my subs. So my concern is getting the subs/mains in phase (if that is indeed the correct termonology) by moving the subs closer and further away from the mains, all of the time of course watching the effect of moving the subs in and out of the corner. I probably have a lot of measuring to do!

I posted a graph of my earliest measurements with two RT60s Taken around the same time. At this time, though, I allready had in place all of the bass trapping (around 24 fullsize traps, most in the front of the room) except for the last 16, which are almost completed. I am finishing up two low bass panel traps and two broadbands tonight. Then its the last three. Trust me its a big project putting up 16 2'X8' traps on the ceiling.

So the early RT 60s shows quite a change from my current RT60. I really wish I had a measurement before any room treatment, who knows how long it was?Also any other measurements such as freq response and waterfall would have been interesting to say the least.

I really like the way it sounds now I do not find it overdamped or dry. I find the dynamics to be much improved, bass keeps getting lower and tighter, imaging improves etc. Voices and instruments become more complete and natural sounding. If they could slice and dice your vegetables, bass traps would be the deal of the century.

I was curious a few weeks ago about my house system and how it would sound in the barn. Its not much more than a boom box, but I wanted to see the measurements and hear how it sounded. Bass trapping helped the boom box the same as it did to my main system, of couse it is noisy, limited volume, limited freq, limited dynamics, the speakers rattle and it sounds cheap. But the sound did improve and it actually sounded "decent" in its own limited way. 

I do believe that even a system with a single driver would be helped immensly by bass trapping, well any system/speaker would be.

Bob


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi Atie, Just keep going with more bass treatment.

Here is my take on it. 
At an absolute minimum for any room is floor to ceiling bass traps in corners, the thicker the better along with first reflection points with broadband traps. This will "take care" of major problems in the room and really is not intrusive for a listening room. I felt this was a major improvement in my listening experience when I did this and it encouraged me to keep going. I did not have REW to measure any of this at the time

The next step is treating about 1/4 to 1/2 of the room with a variety of panel and broadband traps. I do believe that this will get you 90% of what is required for great sound and most people (myself included) would be very happy with this amount. It eliminates most comb filtering, gets a very good freq response and a very good waterfall. Any serious audiophile with a dedicated room would be well served at this level. 

I am not sure yet and question that much more than this is required. But an entirely treated room would not be "bad" and actually is better than less treatment but at some point the "law of diminishing returns" takes effect. I will do some sq foot measurements at some point and let you know exactly how much surface area is treated in my room. Now for me I would not have it any other way as I always like to take things to the nth degree. So for me if I were able to, I would add even more treatment, but I have effectively run out of walls that I would like to treat in my room. 

Bob


----------



## brucek (Apr 11, 2006)

> So for me if I were able to, I would add even more treatment


hehe, I don't know if you've ever stood in a real anechoic chamber before (not many get the chance), but it's quite the experience. If you and I stood and talked to each other in the chamber, face to face, you would hear me. If I turned my head and spoke away from you, you would not. Is this the end game you're searching to achieve? hehehe - just kidding of course, but it shows the extreme end.

brucek


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi Bruce, Hey thats not funny!:rofl2: Really, don't scare people off to this thinking that this is what it will do. Even though you and I know its not true. I dont think it is possible to over damp/deaden/kill the room this way. Ethan is correct the more the better and even when you think that the room is fully treated, as I was just looking at mine, its not even close to 75% treated. But this is where I am STOPPING! :bigsmile::yay:

I love the smiles now that I figured out how to apply them!:neener:

Here is a new RT60 taken with the additional traps and some placement changes. Looks good! I only have two high freq panel traps to go!:jump::clap:

Will post new photos of EVERYTHING soon! 

Bob


----------



## atledreier (Mar 2, 2007)

That's a very even RT60, dude. I bet it sounds good in there! Hope none of those bikes rattle with those subwoofers!


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi Atle, I have been playing with my subs location and seating location, I have noticed that what is nice, and one of the benefits of bass trapping, is that seating position is not as critical as it one was. Of course moving around the room, the sound is more even throughout the room. And it is nice to not have to "choose your poison" in regards to seating location. By that I mean, previously when listening with large peaks/dips, moving the seat back and forth as you go through the nulls/peaks, you made a choice does it sound better sitting in the peak or the null?! I always felt like I was "robbing Peter to pay Paul". 
I discovered that is what made listening to different music/albums so problamatic. I mean why did some albums sound so bass heavy and others so thin? And which do you adjust your system for? Its all so obvious now! :T Now I can move my seat forward/backward (within a range where it always sounded good, this range is about two feet in my room, further forward than that and I am in the middle of the room and further back than that and the imaging goes away) but having smoothed the freq response and not having to worry if I am in a peak/null, I can concentrate on things like imaging and the music. 

Not much rattles in my room, a few thing but never intrusive. This appears to be something else that bass trapping did, I remember before treatment that the whole barn would shake:hsd:, it was impressive but thinking back now, it just was not right. There was a resonance and the whole barn/music would sound like woouu, woouu, woouu. That I am sure that went away as my waterfall improved. Ahh knowledge and maturity:bigsmile:

Bob


----------



## atledreier (Mar 2, 2007)

Well, that makes sense in as 'transparent' a room as yours. If you were outside there would be no room nodes to worry about, and as you keep adding traps the problems will eventually go away. I have found my sweetspot as well. Good balance between maging and response. A little EQ goes a long way to cure the problems down low.


----------



## acoustat6 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hello everyone, I have been listening to my system and recently changed the crosssover point to 85hz from 120hz. I believe this is the right direction. But this is not what I am writing about.

Last night I had an realization of what bass traps sound like. Your speakers sound like headphones, it sounds like you are listening to a pair of headphones. This is a good thing, as you start improving your in room freq responses, which improves detail by eliminating peakes which obscure other freq and callls attentiont to themselves and by bringing up the nulls which bring up the musical detail making your system sound more musical and real. And more importantly the acoustic problems that mask imaging and detail. Only then do you hear your speakers, and I like the sound of my speakers :jump:. 

You start to get that great direct/connected sound that headphones give you, but it is large and coming from in front of you with the associated room vibes that can make a system visceral. Its cool. 

And as I said in a previous post even my little boom box gets the same benefits though limited in its abilities to make it sound like something that you would want to listen to. 

Disclaimer! This is not to say/imply that I have a perfectly treated room! Or a great sounding system, and I am sure a bunch of people would hate the way it sounds, thats just the way it goes. 

I will continue to work on the acoustic treatments as I am sure there are more benefits to be gotten by continued tweaking and improving my room treatments. 

Sorry for the disclaimer. You have to say things like that in other forums or they tear you apart, though I know we are much more mature here.:T

I will add pictures soon. Thanks again for this great site.
There had ought to be a smilie for "blowing hot air".
Bob


----------

