Studio Pics

[psn]

Nothing is most, then.

[Guest mischjok]

 

Edited November 21, 2011 by mischjok

[TechDiff]

 

Studio sucks, where's the overflowing ashtray, and also there is no space for a coffee cup. So lame.

The studio although looks a lot of fun - its just overkill. Half those synths do the same thing or are superseded by another synth. In real terms having 20-40 bits of hardware is just stoopid 'cause a lot of them will overlap each other in terms of what you can get from them. I think more now than ever that less is more.

 

To be fair, if you check the guys website he explains that he buys the synths not as musical instruments as such, more because he has a technical interest in the workings of them. Its fair enough to be honest. If I had a shed load of cash I'd buy a shed load of synths.

 

None the less, still doesn't change the fact that there is no space for a coffee cup to go, and imo coffee is an essential studio item.

[Silent Member]

this is true. coffee and beer goes a long way.

Edited November 21, 2011 by Gocab

[Guest]

My bedroom studio sucks. sry guys.

 

 

edit: forgot to include song. I'll put one up here some time soon, so you can see just how well my terrible workflow works (it doesn't.)

Edited November 21, 2011 by ganus

[BCM]

looks pretty good to me!

[Lucas]

My bedroom studio sucks. sry guys.

 

Not as much as mine !

 

 

But I wanted to participate. The equipment is no so important, right ?

 

 

if I had a better "studio" I'd have tidy up the desk just for the picture

 

[Squee]

 

But I wanted to participate. The equipment is no so important, right ?

 

Right.

[Silent Member]

right.

[Guest]

Only reason equipment is important to me is that it inspires me. If I already have the inspiration to make something and I'm at my computer, I won't even bother with the equipment, and it will sound just as good. Your work seems pretty inspired as it is, so I'd say in your case, that it is not important, no.

Plus, I would definitely not say that that is a bad setup. It looks very easy to jam in and get down ideas quickly, which is really important.

[Lucas]

Yeah I definitely agree with you on the fact hardware is more inspiring. Two years ago I purchased that Electribe which was my first electronic instrument and I was so amazed when I discovered how it feels to twiddle the knobs for real. I mean, I knew how playing with the cutoff and the resonance was like but to do it with the hands is so more exciting. And that's just an Electribe filter. The one of the Monotron is really good but that little knob is a little bit frustrating.

 

The less you use the mouse and the keyboard, the more spontaneous the result will be I suppose. I'm not saying all the electronic music should be like that because the computer gives you something else (a more precise control in the overall maybe?), but every electronic musician should know how it is to play electronic music. I wish I knew anyway (that goes with the classic sound-geek dreams about having a plenty of rhythmboxes and hardware synths) !

 

edit : oh and thanks for the kind words

Edited November 21, 2011 by Antape

[TechDiff]

 

 

OOooohh, didn't notice this pic, you got one of those spinny midi controller things that look a bit like a HD. How is it to use?

[Guest mischjok]

 

 

OOooohh, didn't notice this pic, you got one of those spinny midi controller things that look a bit like a HD. How is it to use?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4RmqVO44A0&feature=channel_video_title

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDR4swgGFuo&feature=channel_video_title

[delet...]

 

if I had a better "studio" I'd have tidy up the desk just for the picture

 

 

If we're going to do messy workstation, i can finally participate in this thread.

 

;-]

[Cryptowen]

If we're going to do messy workstation, i can finally participate in this thread.

yo

 

[foresense]

lol skillz

[Guest Promo]

My bedroom studio sucks. sry guys.

 

Not as much as mine !

 

 

But I wanted to participate. The equipment is no so important, right ?

 

 

if I had a better "studio" I'd have tidy up the desk just for the picture

 

Nice little set up.

[elusive4]

should /rename this thread - show us your edge diffraction generators!

[awepittance]

is that a pretend audiophile joke

[Guest Diao]

I think it was just a pretend joke.

 

 

My poor studio is in disarray at the moment. I'm in the process of building a dedicated room for it, as I'm tired of my bed taking up space I need for gear. I'm also building a new, larger case for my modular, so all my modules are strung about as well. I've also got a pile of power supplies and busboards, I'm just waiting on rails so I can cut the wood and get this bastard up and running again.

[elusive4]

is that a pretend audiophile joke

 

it would be wise to understand the significance of the envelope time curve response. many are doing themselves a disservice by keeping their monitors on their desk (early early specular reflection arriving a few ms after the direct signal) as well as placing them near objects or close to the edge of their desk which will generate edge diffraction.

 

http://www.focalpress.com/uploadedFiles/Books/Book_Media/Audio/9780240808307.pdf

 

in a small acoustical space as of which many of you are working, it is imperative to reference how incident specular energies impede the listening position in the time-domain (gain with respect to time of the original signal) , not the frequency-domain.

[elusive4]

Any experience with auralex(-type) products Elusive for sound control purposes?

 

useless as they usually do not fully address the entire specular band (which, depending on room dimensions, will usually extend down to ~300hz (Schroeder critical frequency, 'fc') - and their are cheaper alternatives.

 

in the specular region (where sonic energy behaves and can be modeled like rays of light (geometry)) of a small acoustical space (which has a discrete definition), we have many specular reflections that impede the listening position very shortly after the direct signal. their spectral content depends on the off-axis polar response of the speaker, as well as the acoustical impedance of the boundary - but never-the-less, it is the arrival time and gain of these reflections with respect to the original (direct) signal that dictate how we can approach to manage them.

 

the brain cannot distinguish discrete reflections from the direct signal when they arrive within the haas interval (~20ms, simplified for this discussion) - and thus, 'fuses' these reflections with the direct signal into a single auditory event (what richard heyser called, 'time-smear distortion') - obliterating intelligibility and clarity. and while the precedence effect will force the brain to focus on the first arriving wavefront (direct signal from speaker -as it is the shortest vector-path and thus, will arrive before any indirect energy), localization is skewed by off-axis early arriving energy within this interval.

 

thus, the smaller the room, the earlier arriving indirect signals, which will continue to compound the problem.

 

ideally, as the finite amount of specular energy within an acoustical space is crucial, one would use geometry (splayed walls) to redirect the early arriving indirect specular energy away from the listening position such that it can be managed at a later time (assuming that the 'reflector' is large with respect to wavelength, otherwise the wavelength will diffract around the reflector and not solve the problem). however, many (alraedy being constrained to such a small space) do not have the real estate for such endeavors. thus, the easiest way to clean up these indirect signals is to attenuate via absorption. attenuation of the indirect signal needs to be below the human detection threshold (variables: gain and arrival time). while attenuating below the human detection threshold (eg, -20dB down from direct sgnal) does not mean 'unhearable', it does mean that they are so far down in gain with respect to the direct signal that the brain no longer processes them (thus, the indirect specular reflection does not compete in the brain psycho-acoustically with the direct signal for localization).

 

the problem with many of the commerical products out there is that they are 'thin' treatments which do not fully attenuate the specular reflection across the entire specular region (which can extend down to 300hz). thin absorption simply 'EQs' or 'filters' the reflection by attenuating the mid-HF band only, allowing the lower specular region of the reflection to persist. not to mention, most speakers will have more off-axis energy (polar response) as the frequency decreases, and there is fundamentally more energy content as well (thus, requiring a more effective/thicker absorber). you must understand that absorbers used for such purposes are porous absorbers, which convert particle energy of the soundwave into heat as it is forced through the porous material (lowering the gain of the reflection, which will yield less constructive and destructive interference as it reflects off the boundary and combines with the direct signal at the listening position).

 

there are two (inversely pro-proportional) attributes to a sound-wave: pressure and velocity (flow). porous absorbers require high particle velocity in order to function, as it is the high flow of the air particles that transfers the energy into heat. as such, the porous absorber must be placed in areas of high particle velocity in order to be effective. when a sound-wave hits a solid boundary, the sound-wave is terminated and pressure maximizes as velocity goes to zero (the wave stops travelling as the direction is reversed). therefore, pressure is a maximum at the boundary and velocity will be a max at 1/4 or 3/4 phase (wavelengths) away from the boundary (ignoring summation of direct and indirect phases). as such, the porous absorber must be thick enough to be placed in areas of high particle velocity for the longest wavelengths (with the most energy content) you will be required to absorb (eg, ~300hz).

 

therefore, sufficient thickness of the porous absorber is required to fully attenuate the signal. flow-resistivity (not density) is key value of the porous material (be it open-celled foam, rigid fiberglass, mineral wool, or any other porous insulation). a thin absorber (of which you see many people using) will simply filter/EQ the reflection, and not fully attenuate it - which can only make things worse.

 

for broadband specular reflection absorption, it is best to use a higher density (higher gas-flow-resistivity) porous material such as rigid fiberglass or rockwool mineral wool. i would suggest calling your local HVAC suppliers (or hardware stores) and try to source batts/panels of such material. the minimum recommended that i would use to be effective throughout the entire specular region is:

 

-3pcf density Owens Corning 703 rigid fiberglass

-4pcf density Rockwool MineralWool

 

they will usually come in 2" thick batts, of which you can stack together. 4" of material with a 2-4" air-gap will be sufficient to fully attenuate the broadband specular reflection. the reason we can use an air-gap (vs using more material to make at thicker panel) - is because by spacing the porous material away from the wall, you are placing it into areas of higher particle velocity (less pressure) for the lower frequencies (which have longer wavelengths). you can then wrap the insulation with any acoustically transparent fabric.

 

since specular energy is modeled (and functions) like rays of light, we can use simple geometry to determine reflection points on large boundaries where indirect energy will reflect and impede the listening position. while you sit in your listening position, you can have a friend hold a mirror flat on the boundary until you can see the acoustic center (NOT the tweeter!) of the speaker. we look for the acoustic center because it is the true center and will contain lower frequencies (with more energy content) that will be more 'off-axis' than the HF/highly directional content from the tweeters. now, the mirror is simply a very simple method to understanding how such energy behaves (geometry), but it does nothing more. the ETC response actually details to you the relevant information that is needed (see next paragraph). also note that the mirror only works for large boundaries, it does NOT identify sources of early specular energy from non-obvious boundaries such as edge diffraction off random objects in your room.

 

lastly, and the most important - we do not break specular reflections down in terms of frequency. we measure and attenuate specular (indirect) reflections with respect to gain. thus, the Envelope Time Curve (ETC) response (eg, part of the free measuring suite: Room EQ Wizard) - can be used to measure the impulse response of how indirect energy impedes the listening position with respect to the direct signal (gain with respect to time). from here, we can identify which boundaries are the source of such indirect specular reflections (since we know the time-arrival delta from the original signal, and thus via knowing the speed of sound, can calculate the total flight path of the reflection and identify the boundary of which it is incident off of) ... and place an absorber there to attenuate the specular reflection. you can then re-measure via the ETC (one speaker at a time!) to verify the attenuation of the specular reflection, and to verify it has been attenuated below the human detection threshold (eg, -20dB from direct signal).

 

clean-up any early arriving specular energies arriving within the haas interval such that your brain hears the direct signal from the speakers, and then has ample time to digest the direct signal without any early arriving indirect energy impeding the listening position being 'fused' with the direct signal into a single auditory event.

 

there are many, many more parts to this story but this is the first step. as i stated earlier, the frequency-response is essentially useless as it merely displays the interference pattern (combination/summation/superposition of the direct and indirect signals). it tells you nothing of the arrival time of such indirect signals, or what boundary they are incident off of. if you have flat monitors, they are measured 'flat' in an anechoic chamber such that there are no reflections - and just the direct signal is measured. when you place such speakers into a bounded space, you generate an interference pattern via the superposition of the direct signal and many indirect reflections that combine constructively and destructively at the listening position to produce what is generally referred to as 'comb-filtering'. if you clean up these indirect energies with resepct to the time-domain (via the ETC tool), you will automatically reduce the constructive and destructive interference which will begin to even out the frequency response.

 

this is about as simple as i can make it, but please ask any questions if you are interested. there are many many more parts to this story with regards to psycho-acoustics - and if you are interested in any of the standard control room designs (NE, LEDE, RFZ, Ambechoic), please let me know. the first step is identifying indirect energies and attenuating/destroying them. you'll increase clarity/intelligibility (since your brain will have ample time to digest the direct signal before being bombarded with spectral copies via early reflections), increase localization and stereo imaging (as your brain will no longer be receiving copies of the signal from directions OTHER than from the speakers), even out the frequency response, as well as increase the perceived size of the room. you may be limited to physical dimensions of your room, but you can alter the acoustical size of the space! by delaying (in time) when such reflections arrive, you will trick your brain into it perceiving it being into a larger room. your brain determines the size of the space via the arrival time of such reflections. if i were to blind-fold you and take you into a tiny bathroom and you spoke, your brain could 'hear' how large (small) the room is - due to the reflections arriving very very quickly. now, if i were to take you into a much larger room (while still blind-folded), and you spoke, your brain will perceive that it is in a much larger space simply due to the later arrival of the first reflections.

 

again, this is simple a very short introduction to the specular region and inherent issues within small acoustical spaces. there is much much more to it but it is a start. also bear in mind this is only for the specular region and we haven't touched on the modal region yet (below ~300hz in the LF / bass region), where energy (wavelengths) larger than the room boundaries will function as waves (vs rays) - and we attack LF absorption in a different manner.

[Guest ryanmcallister]

"nerdgasm nerdgasm nerdgasm"

Edited December 10, 2011 by ryanmcallister

[elusive4]

--------------------------------

 

an example ETC - remember that since we are focused in the time-domain, the arrival time of such specular energy directly corresponds to the distance of the reflection's total flight path. hence, by knowing the time-different of the reflection vs the direct signal, we can work backwards to identify the path length, and from there identify the reflection path (and thus, the incident boundary).

[elusive4]

a visual that may make it easier for one to comprehend the time-domain vs gain aspect of the impulse response:

 

http://www.syntheticwave.de/Two_Ears-Two_Loudspeakers.htm (towards bottom)