I’m definitely appreciating these Q&A videos. I am very interested in what you have to say about wavelets and completely understand the struggle of figuring out how something complex can be explained adequately.

Hi Matt, thanks for taking the time to answer my question about the JTR 110HT. Wasn't sure if things just fell through the cracks, but what you said makes sense since the design has gone through some changes. Actually since I got mine a little over a year ago, it has the newer coaxial that a prior review of yours may not have accounted for. But your basic thoughts in this video are good enough to hear and still accurate for the current design. You're right about the bass, personally I have them crossed at 100 hz with my sub and that works well.

Would love a video about time \ phase aligning speakers. Complex topics are why we watch you :)

@trauma50disaster1

3 ай бұрын

I'm so lost on that subject. I have a bunch of speakers in the front and I imagine I'm canceling all kinds of crap out. I do have an option on my avr that is supposed to fix that but I can barely notice a difference.

I have been curious why Anthony G. and your designs place the front speakers around 25 degree instead of Dolbys recommended 30 degrees. Thanks for the videos and sharing your great knowledge in the field.

@PoesAcoustics

4 ай бұрын

Well first, where did you get that my designs always place them at 25 degrees, or Anthony's? And where did you get that Dolby says its supposed to be 30 degrees? Neither of those statements are true. Dolby gives a range between 22 and 30, anywhere in that range is acceptable. 22.5 is actually the standard and that creates a 45 degree L-R angle which is what was considered correct for decades in multichannel and 2-channel mixing. But...we don't follow those numbers stricly and isntead focus on placing the L-R speakers near the edge of the screen. If that lies at 22, 25, or 30 then so be it. I honestly would go to 32 if I needed to in order to correctly place the L-R near the edge. It's all a balancing act and this is the correct way to design a surround system. The viewing angles should be chosen to be correct for the rows of seats such that you also get roughly the correct MLP speaker angle splay. but there is a range for a reason and we work within that range.

@ min 4. the discussion is that the reflections is part of depth presentation. this is not true ... easily figured out for those with baffle walls and home theatres. Build normal speakers with a BR port in front or none at all. Let them play in front of your baffle wall, then put them inside your baffle wall making them "in wall speaker" but just being high quality speakers. U dont get a decreased amount of depth, you just remove unwanted noise, this actually expands ur depth perception. also u gain more output. Not sure where this is coming form. Baffle wall concepts are ... old ... like ... 50 years and more. Back in the days it was needed for output reasons because u only had amps with a few watts. And weve done them millions of time.

Have a question for next video. Many of us have open back HT room/space. In my case my T speace is about 14 ft 15 ft with another 9 ft of open back space for general use. Is ther any acoustical treatment needed beyond the HT space or I should'nt worry with the sound going past the dedicated area? Thanks.

Do you have more info on the GUD panels? Like scientific papers etc? Pretty curious about those

@PoesAcoustics

4 ай бұрын

Go to Real Acoustix. The information is on his blog, which you can get to from the website. As for the science beyond that, you can download the GLL files and view them for yourself to see how they perform. They are a modifed QRD. Outside of the original scientific papers on QRD's, there really hasn't been a lot of published papers on specific diffuser designs. Mostly on diffuser theory generally. So no, I don't have specific scientific papers on the GUD's, those don't exist. But then, most modern diffusers don't have scientific papers on them either. Mostly white appers, blog posts, and measurements. In this case, the measuremnets tell you what you need to know.

@jortpeters6419

4 ай бұрын

Thank you so much for the info!@@PoesAcoustics

Regarding inwall & onwall speaker discussion I am confused in hometheature scenario as you said might be right if we are using the same set up for pure 2-chanel steereo listening how it perform with out subwoofer

@PoesAcoustics

4 ай бұрын

I may not understand your question. An in-wall or On-wall can make a really good surround or 2-channel setup. It all depends on the quality. Without subwoofers however most in-walls will not have any bass. So you need subwoofers. But the subwoofers are unrelated to surround and 2-channel, it's just about ensuring sufficient bandwidth.

@sandeepjohny6480

4 ай бұрын

@@PoesAcoustics it's very clear now thanks for clarification I really appreciate if you can provide a tutorial video regarding aquestics and room eq especially RT60 Measurements On youtube alot of videos are available regarding the same subject, but none of them are not perfect alot of information is missing how to achieve the best RT60 timing for the great cinematic experience as well as steereo listening in the same room environment

Do you often use bipole or dipole speakers in the surround field? For example, I have some well-aged B&W SCM8 dipoles that worked well when my listening position was very near a side wall. Should I consider them in a more typical home theater room (maybe 12x15ft)?

@PoesAcoustics

3 ай бұрын

I personally never use them. They aren’t really a part of modern theater design. Certainly not dipoles. Those should not be used anymore.

@adammarlowe2523

3 ай бұрын

​@@PoesAcousticsthanks for your reply and hyperbole-free approach. Exploring dipoles further, is there a use case for a large bipole like the Def Tech BP2000 in hifi or theater? Rear-firing (in-phase I assume, not dipole) drivers are imployed in modern designs (ex. von schweikert vr4).

Get real Matt. It should be common knowledge by now that the reflected sound output of speakers is what causes the depth and spaciousness of open baffle, omni, dipole, and direct/reflecting speakers ever since the Bose 901 and my paper on An Image Model Theory for Stereophonic Sound (Oct 1989). On wall and in wall speakers can put out only direct sound, which you can easily see with an image model drawing of the room. They are like listening through holes in the wall.

@PoesAcoustics

Күн бұрын

That isn’t a realistic approach to multichannel sound nor is it the method used by researchers and academics for developing these formats. Since that is what we are dealing with, I don’t see Omni speakers as an option. As for in walls being direct only. That’s clearly a false statement. A in wall speakers only difference from its box variant would be whatever sound wraps around past the half way point. Which is minimal and only low frequency. I don’t really see that adding to the depth of imaging. Please show me some legitimate studies that support your supposition here. I see lots of papers loaded with theories based on the authors interpretation of how we hear. Little to none that is actually based on actual tests.

@geickmei

21 сағат бұрын

@@PoesAcoustics Yes, and I have argued with Floyd about this for years and sometimes in letters in The Journal. His tests used mainly direct firing speakers, but even then he found that most experienced listeners preferred some reflected sound output rather than the narrower patterns. The open baffle rage right now is more proof of that.