Quote:
Originally Posted by
gowers
➡️
I think the assumption that adding a second sound source will help in accuracy is false. The issue with sound is it is a 4 dimensional thing. You have 3d axis of sound waves and their interference with each other then you also have to factor in time. The biggest issue facing achieving a good monitoring environment is ringing. This is most problematic in sub frequencies where the wavelengths are very long or longer than the room itself so can self oscillate making nodes. You are better off with a tight monitor if you can't fix your room issues. Adding a sub might cancel some nodes or smooth them but you will still be reflecting sub around the room.
You absolutely need to be absorbing or diffuse scattering those waves to deal with the real problems. I'm a bit annoyed anyone would suggest two subs, which is expensive compared to acoustic treatments is a solution.
Just to be clear, this discussion is not about using multiple subs to increase the energy in the room but in fact to contain it, cancel it, and, average it out at ~100Hz and below because of exactly the problem you describe. There are specific ways to place them based on research/testing that a number of us have been trying and it turns out they really work. This is not the typical suggestions about sticking one in a corner, or doing the "sub woofer" crawl to try to find a spot in the room that works for one listening position. The idea is to use multiple subs to create a drastically more flat low end response across a large area in the room.
What acoustic treatments do you find effective in these small room modal frequencies? We have tried a bunch of approaches but they all were less effective and actually cost more, I am hoping you can show us something for less $$ !! We just want what works best, fits in a small room and cheaper than multiple subs and DSP would be awesome!