John Sayers' Recording Studio Design Forum Archive

Here's a floorplan for the mixing/mastering room I'm building in my basement (trapezoidal monitoring room and storage/machine room):



Drywall is up, and the room sounds great already, even without the corner bass traps I plan to add after it's painted. The ceiling is short, but I used a cloth ceiling with insulation suspended on string behind the cloth, so early reflections from the ceiling are essentially non-existant. I feel like my acoustics will be as close to optimal as I've ever had in my short mixing/mastering career.

The dimensions shown in the image are slightly off -- back wall is closer to 19', front wall closer to 12.5'.

My current monitors are Dynaudio Contour 1.3SEs powered by a Bryston 4BST. I love the sound of these admittedly small monitors, and when powered by the Bryston, they definitely extend to 37Hz as per the specs, though I've found that at the lowest frequencies, there is a 1-3db dip in level (also according to advertised spec).

My question is this: considering the size of my room, what are some upgrade options when the time comes? I love the high-end on the Dynaudios (very revealing but non-fatiguing tweeter on these speakers, and the crossover is basically invisible), but I know they are not truly full range, despite the advertised and measured frequency response. Would adding a sub (or stereo subs) be just as good given the size of my room? I can see a lot of larger speakers being difficult to place properly, given the size of the room and where the posts in my room are located.

Thanks,
Lazlo

IF your existing combo goes loud enough but not LOW enough, a sub (or two, up to four) could work - for one thing, chopping off the bottom end and allowing the sub to cover below 80 hZ could buy you a bit more headroom.

If you intend to eventually do 5.1 or 6.1, full range satellites could drive the cost up drastically; something else to consider... Steve

Not to mention the capability to tweak the sub position for smoothest response without compromising monitor location.

I would argue that the best place for a sub is on the same baffle as the rest of the drivers. Plus low bass may not be directional- but motor noise is, and all subs have it (to different degrees). I think imaging is better on full range stereo systems. Plus you are likly to have phase problems with lumpy response if you allow your sats to run full range which means for a good sat system you need a good XO and time to work out the problems.

I still have yet to hear a satalite system with sub where the imaging compared to full rangers. My $.02-

Plus low bass may not be directional- but motor noise is, and all subs have it (to different degrees).

?

I have never heard of "motor noise" from speakers before. MOre info please.

Thanks:
Andre

Andre, the voice coil (or other physical drive means) of a speaker is often called the "motor" - any extraneous noise this mechanism generates (voice coil rubbing, etc) is "noise", hence the term "motor noise" - as opposed to other motor noise from tape decks, CD players, etc -

http://www.diysubwoofers.org/projects/inf10/

http://ultimateavmag.com/features/704way/index3.html

http://international.jbl.com/car/PressR ... 01GTi.html

HTH... Steve

I am fanilair with speaker design. I had never read of the term "motor noise" to identify sounds when the driver is driven beyond its linear range. That is what I am picking up ( no pun intended) from the links.

Thanks Steve!

Yeah, I'm not sure when that term started being used either; maybe when some of the heavier duty subs started using actual MOTORS to drive the transducers, as mentioned in one of those links

Terms can be fun ( or frustrating); when I worked at Memorex' digital development lab (just before dirt was invented), we called the mechanism that moved the seek heads for early HDD's a "voice coil" - it was very similar to a speaker voice coil, but of course there was no "voice" per se; I guess they had to call it SOMETHING...