room responses etc.

[Magnus Danielson]

From: Martin Czech <czech at Micronas.Com>
Subject: Re: room responses etc.
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 09:44:42 +0200 (MET DST)

> 
> :::Swimming pool jump-towers are nice, since you get out from the actual tower
> :::and has little direct reflections from that. However, watch out so your
> :::impulse responce doesn't become too "wet" ;)
> 
> Yesterday I saw a high voltage 220kV transmission line mast, one "arm" was
> still unused. Sould give 30m elevation. But that would be to dangerous.
> And I'll always run into noise problems: wind!

Oh yes, mother flanger in action!

Windy days are off, for MANY reasons!

Also, you really want a quiet neighborhood, that includes distance to air
traffic, highways etc. If you are sitting in the middle of Los Angeles you
better set up a good police-chase-a-celebrity thing so everyone is glued to
their tubes for sufficient time to have a quite time of your own.

> :::WHAT!??!? You have been arrested? And for doing measurements? Hmmm... you
> :::really should have taken a diffrent set of tools with you....
> 
> Just a joke!

Don't joke like that! Take a spark arrester and cool down!

> :::Well, this sounds all very nice... but putting the speaker on an infinit 
> baffle
> :::or something is not going to help you, you want to know how your speaker
> :::behaves in a free-space environment. Mounting the speaker in a large baffle
> :::will alter the speakers natural zero's and thus will give a diffrent 
> responce.
> 
> I didn't make my point very clear. The idea is: if I  can't measure
> the free field response, I'll change completely to half space response,
> ie. speaker build into infinite wall.  This means baffle when measuring
> (flat on the ground, speakers point to heaven).  And baffle when
> using. The remaining error would be different "baffle" size.  Maybe it
> is not desireable to have a half space response anyway.

Ah, OK. I see... well, if you LAY the royal philharmonic orchestra on the stage
and let them play with their instruments at the ground, then I could accept
it ;D

> Now, this all is not such a big problem.
> If I keep the original recordings, I can always apply an inverse
> transfer function on it, if I finally get it.
> And may be I'll apply filters to the impulse responses for
> "better" sound anyway.

Right.

Cheers,
Magnus