|
| 2.2 The Setup

These 1/2 and 1/4 round TUBE TRAPS are typically on 18 inch centers
on the walls and ceiling of a small gyp board sound room. Their
orientation on the walls is vertical. Starting at the ceiling they’ll
often run all the way to the floor. This leaves a distribution of
6 to 7 inch wide strips of reflecting surfaces throughout the room.
The ceiling is similarly set up.
The four wall/wall corners and the four wall/ceiling corners have
the 1/4 round trap installed. This corner loaded trap has excellent
absorption through 60Hz (10) and controls the lower frequency small
room resonances (11, 12). Note the door and window are both covered
with traps. As with the gobo system, visual access to the engineer
or other players is maintained through the spaces between the traps.
The curved reflector in each trap serves to scatter mid and high
frequency sound. The lower frequency range is not scattered by this
specular reflection but by diffraction as the wavefront rebounds
off the thin strips of hard wall surface left between the absorptive
bodies of the traps. A more complete presentation of the performance
of this unique class diffraction grating effect is presented in
the addendum.
|
|
| 2.3 Vocal Test Setup
Here we look at the acoustic signature of
a typical vocal setup in the QSF room. A full set of measurements
is presented to develop an overall sense of the room’s performance.
2.3A (see below) illustrates the classic
vocal setup used inside the QSF room. A small vocal hot spot speaker
is positioned 14 inches away from the mic, some 5 feet off the floor.
The mic/speaker center line is asymmetrically set in the room.
2.3B (see below) shows the 80ms ETC. At 6dB
per division, the decay rate in the room is very steady, as evidenced
by the flatness of the decay curve. Decay time, RT-60 is 0.11 sec.
Except for the distinct 3ms gap between the direct and the first
reflections, there are no spikes, no gaps, no time delayed kickers.
The density of reflections is high and uniform.
2.3C (see below) retains the 6dB per division
amplitude but has increased time resolution, only a 40ms ETC. The
early decay rate is 0.09 seconds, just slightly faster than longer
time averaged decay rate. The initial time gap is more evident.
There is no loss in the smooth, dense fill of reflections that drop
away in time.
2.3D (see below) shows the 20ms ETC at 6dB
division. The regular features of the staccato of reflections continue
to be observed. It is easy to count three significant reflections
in almost any millisecond. The initial time gap is 42dB deep at
3ms after the direct signal. The subsequent diffusive fill begins
at 4.5 ms, and each strike stays 24 to 30dB below the direct signal.
2.3E (see below) displays the 100 to 10K
TEF waterfall over a 60ms period. The broadband smooth decay is
obvious. The frequency axis is linear in this display. This type
of decay in a small room is due to the balance struck between full
range absorption and full range scattering. The vertical axis is
12dB/division.
2.3F (see below) shows the top view of the
TDS waterfall. Again very regular, non-resonant decay is noted,
evidenced by the high density of streaking straight down the time
axis. Note the floor opens up at nearly the same moment, especially
if the slight high frequency drop off by the speaker is taken into
consideration. |
|
|
|
| 2.4 Instrumental Setup
This
series of ETC recordings was made with a sound source located 42
inches off the floor and 24 inches out from the face of a corner
trap. The speaker faces across the room’s diagonal. Test measurements
are taken along the diagonal as indicated in 2.3A. All ETC data
is in 6dB per division and 40ms.
2.4B (see below) shows ETC for 40ms with
a close mic setup. The speaker/mic separation is 6 inches. A high
density of diffuse fill slopes down from the direct signal. The
direct to reverb energy is about 19dB. Reverb time is 0.09 sec.
2.4C (see below) shows the ETC for 40ms with
the mic moved back to 18 inches. Note the direct/reverb energy ratio
drops to 15.5dB. The RT60 remains at 0.09 sec. The early diffuse
signature is still strong.
2.4D (see below) shows a mic distance of
54 inches. The direct/reverb energy is down to 7.76dB with reverb
time to 0.08 sec. Notice the development of an initial time gap,
it is about 5ms wide.
2.4E (see below) displays a mic position
of 66 inches. The direct/reverb ratio is now down to 5.7dB, RT60
holding at 0.8 sec. The initial time gap is being reduced to about
2ms with a strong fill in the first 8ms. Each early reflection is
within 14dB of the direct signal but their density is packing sound
power into the early reflection time period.
2.4F (see below) shows mic position of 78
inches. Very strong ambience is developing. Count nine reflections
15 to 23dB below the direct signal within the first 6ms.
2.4G (see below) is the diagonal opposite
the speaker, 90 inches apart. Count four distinct reflections between
10 and 15dB down, and within 3.5ms, and another group 6dB down in
the following 3.5ms. This is very similar to the Acoustic Island
gobo signature.
Throughout this survey of the room’s
acoustic performance, the decay rate in the room remained constant
at .08 to .09 seconds. Nearfield and farfield mic positions had
significant dir/rev ratio difference but otherwise had very similar,
quickly dispersed sound fields. |
|
|
|
| 2.5 Adjustable Setup
So far the ETCs presented are all variations
of a strong direct signal immediately followed by a lower level
set of diffuse reflections. As the mic moved back from the sound
source, the dir/rev ratio was reduced. Additional adjustments to
this ratio can be made. Here, the extreme case is reached where
the direct signal is completely lost, leaving essentially only a
pulse of diffuse signal.
2.5A and 2.5B (see below) show respectively
the setup and the ETC which it produced. ETC scales are still 6dB
per division with a 40ms view of the time. The speaker is placed
in one corner facing the opposite wall. The mic is placed some 72
inches away just off the same wall near the other corner. We have
the direct signal now weakened, due to its directionality features,
lower by a couple dB than the early reflections. This signature
has an initial delay gap of 3ms followed by a 6ms slug of diffuse
signals. By count, 16 separate reflections are within 3dB of the
direct signal. It is reasonable to expect the lower, omni-directional
frequency range comprises the direct signal while its full range
is found in the early reflections.
2.5C and 2.5D (see below) are similar setups, except the mic is
in the diagonal corner. There is no initial time gap. The direct
signal is immediately followed by 4ms of dense, equal level reflections
(at least 8 by count) just 2dB down. Beyond that is a 10ms flood
of signals just 6dB down from the direct. The mic, being more into
the directivity pattern of the speaker, will show more midrange
signals than the earlier setup.
2.5E and 2.5F (see below) show the extreme
case of the direct signal being significantly below the diffuse
early reflection group. The speaker faces into the corner and the
mic is out in the open. The direct signal is easily 6dB below the
peak of the early reflections. The early reflections remain stronger
than the direct signal for over 12ms.
These setups are not necessarily being promoted.
The desirability of their use rests within the ears of the engineer.
The purpose served here is to illustrate in a first order manner
how the QSF room handles off axis and directionality features of
an instrument. |
|
|
|
| 2.6 Real World Comparison
Information
without a sense of reference is difficult to evaluate. The acoustical
signature of the QSF type room needed a comparison. A series of
tests were run that used approximately the same speaker/mic/room
distances. By this, the distinctive feature of the QSF acoustical
signature should become discernible. The speaker was generally 4
feet from the mic and both roughly centered in each room and 5 feet
off the floor.
Three tests were taken in the QSF room, the
first of which is the standard room. Then 2 sheets of plywood were
installed to either side of the speaker/mic axis. The last test
added two more sheets at either end of the room.
2.6A, 2.6B and 2.6C (see below) show the
three stages of the QSF room. One measured difference is the RT60.
It starts at 0.08 seconds, extends to 0.09 seconds with two sheets
and to 0.12 seconds with the 4 sheets. The second feature measured
is the decrease in dir/rev energy ratio. There is 6.7dB in the QSF
room, dropping to 4.07dB when 2 sheets of plywood are added and
again to 2.44dB with four sheets.
Subjectively, there are more “holes”
in the ETC as plywood reflectors are added. There is also increased
presence in sharp, strong spikes. Something more subtle is also
visible, there are two parts to the bar graph ETC. The very dense,
low level signals provide the solid, blacked out feature that seems
to fill upwards from the bottom. Above this extremely dense signal
set rises a series of distinguishable spikes. The more QSF the room
is, the smaller and more frequent the spikes rise above the dense
underfill. Weaker QSF rooms have their dense underfill cut into
more often, the spikes become stronger and more separated.
2.6D, 2.6E and 2.6F (see below) show a new
recording studio, drum room and vocal booth room. Decay rates are
respectively 0.10, 0.10, 0.14 seconds and di/rev ratios are 7.71,
4.55, and 2.20dB. The good dir/rev ratio of the studio is due to
its size (15 x 20 x 8’). In all three cases, the diffuse substrait
is heavily eroded and crowned with strong, clean and spikes. These
rooms are typical and not very “quick” sounding. |
|
2.4A-F Compared Data

|
|
|
3.0 Subjective Reports
A recording room has two clients,
the performing talent and the recordist. Both need to be satisfied
and their requirements are not necessarily the same. The QUICK SOUND
FIELD room with its unusual lively/dead quality seems to satisfy
both. Here are comments of impressions made by actual users of the
QSF room. |
|
|
3.1 Vocal: The first, immediate impression
is its quality of silence. You hear nothing but what you are doing,
no residual noise. It is easy to get feedback and immediately adjust
for improvements. This room seems to be the ultimate practice room
because it doesn’t lie or make things more beautiful. It is
an honest, clean, clear and yet dry room. The room is very comfortable
to work in. I felt much sound all around me, and that is important,
because in singing, I am so close to my instrument.
|
|
|
3.2 Cello: The cello in small rooms usually
sounds muddy but not here. It has a natural, fat bottom-end. I heard
the whole cello. Its sound came through the room clean, clear and
comfortable.
|
|
|
3.3 French Horn: This room is impressive,
dry and flat, not boomy but not dead. It seems very responsive to
musical changes. A slight shift to emphasize upper partials really
comes through and you can make immediate adjustments. I can hear
a great deal, almost any detail, body movements, breathing, foot
tap and fingering. It is an airtight room. I could hear all my imperfections
which, while not fun, is good for me. For example, I thought I was
ready for a demo tape with this piece until I had a session in this
room. Now I know I need more work and no one had to tell me. Usually
practice is hard because so much of the sound goes straight out
the bell and I don’t get to hear it. Here, sound is very good,
gives the whole sound of the horn. When I played, I didn’t
feel like I had to hold back. It’s a very comfortable room.
|
|
| 3.4 Drums: Usually the drum booth is too
dead. Here, you can’t tell you’re in a small room. It’s
low and speaks very well. Sound is like a picture and this room
takes an accurate one, good balance. Snare had a rounded, fat sound
and I didn’t have to doctor the heads. Playback was exact
with what I heard live, usually coloration ruins it. Clear accurate
sound of the whole drum is played by the room. That’s what
we want for sampling. |
|
| 3.5 Recordist: The room is very interesting
to work with, it is acoustically stable. I can move the mic anywhere
and the room sound stays constant. It’s a big plus to have
this kind of stability in a small room. It’s always hard to
mic, placement and pattern selections are critical. Here I can make
decisions based solely on the instrument and performer without concern
for room color.
I used two mics on the French horn, one near
and off axis while the other was set far across the room. There
was no near wall reflection sound, no boom and no low end murky
sound in the far field mic. The room saves the highs; I was able
to get a good stereo pan between the two mic positions without seeing
room color shifts.
Natural sound of the instrument is what I
try to get. I often work in large halls and have to be 20 to 30
feet away to get the totality of the instrument. This room allows
me to be just a few feet away and still collect the full sound without
room color. This room does have strong ambience, but only of the
instrument.
With drums, I usually close mic but here
I could get 3 to 4 feet away from the mechanical noise. I usually
roll off at 200Hz but here I can leave it fat and get the total
drum sound, full, round and flat. I added reverb later and got a
realistic concert hall snare. The bottom end is great. The room
handles transients so well that they don’t mask the attack
of the “whomp.” Hardstick on ride cymbals had fantastic
ambience. I used only two mics on the snare, one 2 feet above and
the other 2 feet below and to the side. I could mix very well, lots
of isolation between the two signals.
|
|
|