Quantcast
DIY Sound Diffusers—Free Blueprints—Slim, Optimized DIY Diffuser Designs (+Fractals) - Page 6 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
DIY Sound Diffusers—Free Blueprints—Slim, Optimized DIY Diffuser Designs (+Fractals)
Old 19th November 2012 | Show parent
  #151
Gear Addict
 
Arqen's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by unqlenol ➡️
Hi Tim and everyone.

Thanks for sharing all this.
Been reading this great thread and would like some opinions please.

I plan on making a rear wall diffusor for my little studio.
I was going to make a proper QRD from wood.
Then I saw it was going to cost me too much time and money.

Now I am looking at Tims simple blueprint and wondering:
Would that simple design be a better way forward for me? It would cost a similar amount to the EPS N17.

Or another way to look at it:
Would I be better off making Tim's simple 7 step design with 4 periods (I need to cover up to 1.8m of wall width)
OR
Would I be better of making a long 'high N', low density EPS stepped diffusor with narrow wells?

BTW, I was planning on coating the EPS with some tough water based polyurethane paint to create a very hard surface. A denser EPS increases the cost exponentially down here in South Africa.

TIA for any advice.

Nolan
Hi Nolan,

You'll likely get better performance with a high N optimized stepped diffuser which has been properly designed (like the N=36 stepped diffuser I posted earlier in this thread). If you use either of my N=7 designs, I recommend mounting the modules at different depths, which can drastically increase the performance.

While I've not yet tested an array of 4 modules, you can test the performance of 4-module mounting options (mounting them at different depths) using the demo version of the software AFMG Reflex.

Hope this helps.

Tim
Old 19th November 2012 | Show parent
  #152
Gear Nut
 
unqlenol's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Tim and Jens: thanks for the excellent clarification of all my issues! Looks like I have a new application to learn
Old 20th November 2012 | Show parent
  #153
Gear Addict
 
Arqen's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by unqlenol ➡️
Tim and Jens: thanks for the excellent clarification of all my issues! Looks like I have a new application to learn
Hey Nolan, glad to help out!

I would have been happy to test out 4-module versions of the design and post the results, but unfortunately my demo of Reflex has expired.

Don't worry, Reflex is very easy to use. And if you're wondering what tests to run, I've attached a screenshot of the settings I used to generate performance reports. I created 3 reports for each diffuser configuration: for each report I used the settings shown but varied the angle of incidence (one report for each angle: 0 degrees, -25 degrees and -45 degrees).

If you want to simplify things, you could not bother with testing the spatial response. I.e., you could just test the diffusion coefficients for various angles of incidence, including random incidence (the "diffuse field" option in reflex). And you could generate a single report, instead of three.

If you go ahead with this, please let us know if you find any arrangements that look promising!

Cheers,
Tim
Attached Thumbnails
DIY Sound Diffusers—Free Blueprints—Slim, Optimized DIY Diffuser Designs (+Fractals)-reflex-report-generation-settings.jpg  
Old 21st November 2012 | Show parent
  #154
Lives for gear
 
Jens Eklund's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Or just check the normalized diffusion coefficient for random incidence. Since this value is calculated using averaged circular autocorrelation (it basically means that if this value is good, any other angle won´t be terrible).

This is the value of significance when evaluating general diffusion performance.

What to look at when buying diffusers?
Old 23rd November 2012 | Show parent
  #155
Gear Addict
 
Arqen's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jens Eklund ➡️
Or just check the normalized diffusion coefficient for random incidence. Since this value is calculated using averaged circular autocorrelation (it basically means that if this value is good, any other angle won´t be terrible).

This is the value of significance when evaluating general diffusion performance.

What to look at when buying diffusers?
I agree that if you were to run a single test to assess the general performance, this would be the one.

It's easy to jump to conclusions while looking at the performance for a single angle. Such tests give limited insight into the overall performance. But if there is a particular angle of interest, I think it's worth testing in addition to random incidence.
Old 24th November 2012 | Show parent
  #156
Gear Nut
 
unqlenol's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Thanks guys. I will certainly try to give it a whirl, following your cues.

I am not even sure I am interpreting your supplied charts properly...but let's see.
Another point I was wondering about was what the effect of inverted versions would have. Main reason I am wondering this is economical: if I get a hot wire company to slice through a block of EPS to render my would be stepped diffusor design, then I would be left with the inverse version.
In other words: 2 diffusors for the price of one or 'half price'.
Is this idea worth even considering?
Old 27th November 2012 | Show parent
  #157
Gear Addict
 
Arqen's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by unqlenol ➡️
Thanks guys. I will certainly try to give it a whirl, following your cues.

I am not even sure I am interpreting your supplied charts properly...but let's see.
Another point I was wondering about was what the effect of inverted versions would have. Main reason I am wondering this is economical: if I get a hot wire company to slice through a block of EPS to render my would be stepped diffusor design, then I would be left with the inverse version.
In other words: 2 diffusors for the price of one or 'half price'.
Is this idea worth even considering?
That's a neat idea.

I've not tested the inverted versions, but I just drew them out to take a look at the geometry. The inverted geometry of A1-LF bears some resemblance to two other diffusers designs I'm aware of: an N = 7 QRD diffuser, and an N = 7 optimized stepped diffuser that Trevor Cox optimized in 1994 (however, the inverted A1-LF geometry is much shallower than either of these diffusers).

So I do think it's an idea worth considering... you might arrange the two different module types in an aperiodic sequence to remove periodicity. And if you want to be sure it works you could always simulate the inverted design using Reflex.
Old 28th November 2012
  #158
Gear Nut
 
unqlenol's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Guys, thanks again for all.

Time is short and before I know it my demo will expire. So, please help me out a little more here, and hopefully I can produce something worth sniffing at:

Using Reflex has beenuncomfortable compared to QR Dude. It feels totally 'freeform' with no guidelines towards 'optimising' a diffusor. Feels random. Like you can just fiddle forever and hope for the best.
I did skim through the manual and it did not seem to give practical application advice to help one arrive at an optimised design.

So, my questions for now are:

1. Where do I start? Should I just decide on a depth, well width and period width and just fiddle randomly with well depths?

2.I am not sure I know how to interpret the polar response graph. What am I looking for?
2a. Do I want my selected freqs projecting at as many angles as possible (ie: many 'lobes' or 'spikes')?
2b: Do I want the projections to all be of as high an amplitude as possible?

What say you all?

Thanks
Nolan
Old 1st December 2012 | Show parent
  #159
Gear Addict
 
Arqen's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by unqlenol ➡️
Guys, thanks again for all.

Time is short and before I know it my demo will expire. So, please help me out a little more here, and hopefully I can produce something worth sniffing at:

Using Reflex has beenuncomfortable compared to QR Dude. It feels totally 'freeform' with no guidelines towards 'optimising' a diffusor. Feels random. Like you can just fiddle forever and hope for the best.
I did skim through the manual and it did not seem to give practical application advice to help one arrive at an optimised design.

So, my questions for now are:

1. Where do I start? Should I just decide on a depth, well width and period width and just fiddle randomly with well depths?

2.I am not sure I know how to interpret the polar response graph. What am I looking for?
2a. Do I want my selected freqs projecting at as many angles as possible (ie: many 'lobes' or 'spikes')?
2b: Do I want the projections to all be of as high an amplitude as possible?

What say you all?

Thanks
Nolan
Hi Nolan,

In answer to your questions:

1) SETTING UP THE GEOMETRY IN REFLEX
1a) Start with the simplest depth sequence I've provided in the blueprints, which is [0 cm 4cm 5cm 3cm 5cm 4cm 0cm], and use a well width of 6 cm. This is your basic module. (make sure reflex is entering the well depths in cm... or, if reflex is in millimetre mode, remember to multiply all these numbers by 10)

1b) You want 4 of these modules, so make 3 copies of your basic module. You should now have 4 modules side by side.

1c) Now, you want to test how to mount the 4 modules at different depths. You can start by testing the modules, mounted at depths [0 cm, 5 cm, 6 cm, 0 cm]. To do this, you would add +5 cm to the height of each well in the 2nd module, and +6 cm to the height of each well in the 3rd module. Modules 1 and 4 would stay the same, as they are in part 1b.

So, the resulting shape in reflex would consist of 28 wells (4 modules x 7 modules/well), with the following well depths:

[0, 4, 5, 3, 5, 4, 0, 5, 9, 10, 8, 10, 9, 5, 6, 10, 11, 9, 11, 10, 6 0, 4, 5, 3, 5, 4, 0] cm


2) POLAR RESPONSE PLOTS
You can basically ignore the polar response graph, as it only gives information at specified frequencies. But if you're curious, an ideal polar response would look like a semicircle. The more uniform the polar response looks, the better the spatial diffusion is for that particular frequency. By uniform, I mean that a semicircle would be perfectly uniform. On the other hand, if there are several large spikes with a high dB value, with big gaps in between that have a very low dB value, then the polar response it is very non-uniform (poor diffusion at that particular frequency).

But these polar plots can lead to much confusion. So to assess the performance properly, you want to focus on the graph of the normalized diffusion coefficient.


Does this make sense to you? I hope this helps!

Tim
Old 5th December 2012
  #160
Gear Addict
 
Arqen's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
LF Fractal Profiled Modulation

Hey guys,

Here's a great way to increase the performance dramatically. As I mentioned earlier, you can also mount 7 modules using a profiled modulation based on based on fractal self-symmetry (and if you did this to the fractal diffuser, you'd have a 3rd order nested fractal!). For example, you could mount 7 modules at these depths:

[0cm, 8 cm, 10 cm, 6 cm, 10 cm, 8 cm, 0 cm]
(based on the depth sequence of the stepped diffuser [0, 4, 5, 3, 5, 4, 0] multiplied by 2)

I've now included images and diffusion coefficients for this fractal modulation (as applied to the basic stepped diffuser).














If you did not mind a thick diffuser, you could take the fractal self-symmetry concept even further. You could create a low frequency fractal stage (a profiled modulation) with the proportions equal to the stepped diffuser (i.e., keeping the width:depth ratio consistent, where width:depth ratio = 42 cm/5cm = 8.4). Considering an array of 7 diffuser modules (294 cm wide), the deepest step of the profiled modulation would be 294 / 8.4 = 35. Since the deepest step of the stepped diffuser is 5cm, you would scale all the depths by 35 cm / 5 cm = 7.

This would give you a profiled modulation of 7x[stepped diffuser depths] = [0, 28, 35, 21, 35, 28, 0] cm... resulting in a much deeper diffuser than the one we started with!

Let me know if you guys have any questions about this!
Old 7th December 2012 | Show parent
  #161
Lives for gear
 
Schaap's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Forgot I made a photo of the diffuser when I made the audiofiles some time ago. The modulationheights are difficult to spot unfortunately.

The second one shows use of the fractals on top of Gik Scopus Tuned traps(70 and 40; they are really good!).
Diffusion rocks
(BTW this is obvious not the standardsetup in the room)

Henk
Attached Thumbnails
DIY Sound Diffusers—Free Blueprints—Slim, Optimized DIY Diffuser Designs (+Fractals)-arqen-stepped-diff.jpg   DIY Sound Diffusers—Free Blueprints—Slim, Optimized DIY Diffuser Designs (+Fractals)-fractals-1.jpg  
Old 9th December 2012 | Show parent
  #162
Gear Addict
 
Arqen's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schaap ➡️
Forgot I made a photo of the diffuser when I made the audiofiles some time ago. The modulationheights are difficult to spot unfortunately.

The second one shows use of the fractals on top of Gik Scopus Tuned traps(70 and 40; they are really good!).
Diffusion rocks
(BTW this is obvious not the standardsetup in the room)

Henk
Henk,

They look awesome! Thanks so much for posting those photos. It's great to see what an array of the fractal diffusers looks like... eye candy for audio geeks!
Old 9th December 2012 | Show parent
  #163
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
They work great.I paid for someone DIY for me ha ha.Instaled then in my drum room side walls.It's a small room with few absorption panels.Great.The drummers had apreciated.Great stuff.
Old 9th December 2012 | Show parent
  #164
Lives for gear
 
Schaap's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackers ➡️
They work great.I paid for someone DIY for me ha ha.Instaled then in my drum room side walls.It's a small room with few absorption panels.Great.The drummers had apreciated.Great stuff.
As said earlier these diffusers handles transients very well and are good esp. for drums, percussion and fingerpicking etc. besides the 'normal' diffusion component.

@Tim: thanks for the kind words and your work
Old 10th December 2012 | Show parent
  #165
Gear Nut
 
unqlenol's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arqen ➡️
Hi Nolan,

In answer to your questions:

1) SETTING UP THE GEOMETRY IN REFLEX
1a) Start with the simplest depth sequence I've provided in the blueprints, which is [0 cm 4cm 5cm 3cm 5cm 4cm 0cm], and use a well width of 6 cm. This is your basic module. (make sure reflex is entering the well depths in cm... or, if reflex is in millimetre mode, remember to multiply all these numbers by 10)

1b) You want 4 of these modules, so make 3 copies of your basic module. You should now have 4 modules side by side.

1c) Now, you want to test how to mount the 4 modules at different depths. You can start by testing the modules, mounted at depths [0 cm, 5 cm, 6 cm, 0 cm]. To do this, you would add +5 cm to the height of each well in the 2nd module, and +6 cm to the height of each well in the 3rd module. Modules 1 and 4 would stay the same, as they are in part 1b.

So, the resulting shape in reflex would consist of 28 wells (4 modules x 7 modules/well), with the following well depths:

[0, 4, 5, 3, 5, 4, 0, 5, 9, 10, 8, 10, 9, 5, 6, 10, 11, 9, 11, 10, 6 0, 4, 5, 3, 5, 4, 0] cm


2) POLAR RESPONSE PLOTS
You can basically ignore the polar response graph, as it only gives information at specified frequencies. But if you're curious, an ideal polar response would look like a semicircle. The more uniform the polar response looks, the better the spatial diffusion is for that particular frequency. By uniform, I mean that a semicircle would be perfectly uniform. On the other hand, if there are several large spikes with a high dB value, with big gaps in between that have a very low dB value, then the polar response it is very non-uniform (poor diffusion at that particular frequency).

But these polar plots can lead to much confusion. So to assess the performance properly, you want to focus on the graph of the normalized diffusion coefficient.


Does this make sense to you? I hope this helps!

Tim

Tim ,thank you very much. The end of the year is so busy I fear my reflex demo will expire before I do something useful.

Thanks for the explanation. Yes it makes sense and I am pleased that I get your approval to ignore the polar plot.

What I don't get here:
1. Am I not just doing what has already been done by starting with your basic module? I mean, we are talking about modulating a 7 well panel. I thought I was meant to be shooting for a 'higher N' period...embarking in unchartered territory etc....
I was imagining something like an 'N-17' type approach with narrower well widths (to raise the top diffusion freq).
Or is the modulation itself the answer here?

1.Must I forget about all that and just follow what you are saying?

2.Is it a bad idea to go for narrower well widths to raise the top freq (and make the array FIT into my space appropriately )

The other thing is that if I am going to have EPS hotwired, I could just as easily do fractals instead of narrower wells. The hotwire doesn't care. It would just mean more labour for me when I design the blueprint for the hotwire guy.

Thanks again
Nolan
Old 10th December 2012 | Show parent
  #166
Gear Addict
 
Arqen's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackers ➡️
They work great.I paid for someone DIY for me ha ha.Instaled then in my drum room side walls.It's a small room with few absorption panels.Great.The drummers had apreciated.Great stuff.
Well hey, there are only so many hours in the day, so it makes sense to pay someone to make them if you don't have the time / tools . Really glad these are working out well for you!
Old 11th December 2012 | Show parent
  #167
Gear Addict
 
Arqen's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by unqlenol ➡️
Tim ,thank you very much. The end of the year is so busy I fear my reflex demo will expire before I do something useful.

Thanks for the explanation. Yes it makes sense and I am pleased that I get your approval to ignore the polar plot.

What I don't get here:
1. Am I not just doing what has already been done by starting with your basic module? I mean, we are talking about modulating a 7 well panel. I thought I was meant to be shooting for a 'higher N' period...embarking in unchartered territory etc....
I was imagining something like an 'N-17' type approach with narrower well widths (to raise the top diffusion freq).
Or is the modulation itself the answer here?

1.Must I forget about all that and just follow what you are saying?

2.Is it a bad idea to go for narrower well widths to raise the top freq (and make the array FIT into my space appropriately )

The other thing is that if I am going to have EPS hotwired, I could just as easily do fractals instead of narrower wells. The hotwire doesn't care. It would just mean more labour for me when I design the blueprint for the hotwire guy.

Thanks again
Nolan

Hi Nolan,

Good questions. The reason I suggested modulating an existing design like my N = 7 stepped diffusers, is that these shapes have already been optimized. I wrote a computer algorithm to choose these shapes out of more than 260 million other candidates.

If you were to design an N = 17 stepped diffuser by manually changing the well depths, it would take you a ridiculously long time to find a good solution because depending how you set up the problem, there are at least billions or trillions of possible candidates to search through.

But if you're modulating an existing design, you can use intuition to help because it's easier to visualize what simple, large shapes will scatter sound effectively. For example, one way to modulate a set of N=7 modules is to mount them so that the shape approximates a convex arc (or semi-cylinder). Another way is to mount them using a fractal modulation. This is how I've come up with the two modulations I've posted in this thread. With about 10 trials using reflex you can probably find a good modulation if you use intuition as your guide.

But when we are dealing with a bunch of narrow wells, in my experience intuition is not such a good guide, so I'd expect it to take a ridiculous amount of time to find a good design unless you have a computational algorithm to figure it out for you.

If you simply want an optimized N = 17 stepped diffuser design (that uses 6 cm wells), I think I saw the well sequence for one in a paper I read. I'll see if I can find it.


Well Width

For stepped diffusers I recommend you use a well width between 3-7 cm.

Practical well widths are at least 2.5 cm, and usually around 5 cm [as noted by Trevor Cox and Peter D’Antonio, the leading researchers in diffusion]. If you make the wells too narrow, absorption drastically increases due to the way sound behaves in tight spaces (in technical terms, the viscous boundary layer becomes significant compared to the well width, which causes extra absorption due to friction).
Old 11th December 2012 | Show parent
  #168
Gear Nut
 
unqlenol's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Hi Tim,

Thanks for the great reply.

My mentioning an N=17 was pretty random.
It was just an entertaining of the whole 'rather have one big High-N panel to avoid periodicity' thing.
I guess I was overcomplicating things.
I need to go back to the idea of a 4 panel system where 2 are inverted as a side effect of hotwiring a block of eps.

By 'narrow' wells I am talking not less then 5cm.

Will try show something useful here soon.

Thanks!!!!
Nolan
Old 12th December 2012
  #169
Gear Nut
 
unqlenol's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Hi all,

Okay, I have a design to post the looks cool to me assuming I understand everything correctly. I took Tim's post no 160 'profiled modulation based on based on fractal self-symmetry' concept and ran with that.

Bear in mind that my back wall space for my would-be diffusor is about 1.8m wide.
So, I went with a 35mm well width which I thought was a very gentlemen-like compromise and which allows a 7 period modulated array to fit into that space.
I also raise the hi freq on the graph plot to 8k to see what was happening up there.

So here are 2 screenshots: The first one is absically exactly what Tim shows in post 160 above, except that I show up to 8k in the co-efficient graph.
The 2nd pic is the same design but with 35mm well widths.
Looks good, no?
Attached Thumbnails
DIY Sound Diffusers—Free Blueprints—Slim, Optimized DIY Diffuser Designs (+Fractals)-7-panel-6cm-wide-0-8-10-6-10-8-0-mod.jpg   DIY Sound Diffusers—Free Blueprints—Slim, Optimized DIY Diffuser Designs (+Fractals)-7-panel-35mm-wide-0-8-10-6-10-8-0-mod.jpg  
Old 12th December 2012 | Show parent
  #170
Lives for gear
 
Jens Eklund's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Make sure the check the normalized diffusion performance for random incidence and not only 0 degrees.
Old 12th December 2012 | Show parent
  #171
Gear Nut
 
unqlenol's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Thanks Jens!

By 'random' do you mean I should simply calculate for a whole bunch of different incidence angles?
Old 12th December 2012 | Show parent
  #172
Lives for gear
 
Jens Eklund's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by unqlenol ➡️
Thanks Jens!

By 'random' do you mean I should simply calculate for a whole bunch of different incidence angles?
DIY Sound Diffusers—Free Blueprints—Slim, Optimized DIY Diffuser Designs (+Fractals)-reflex-settings.gif

Old 12th December 2012 | Show parent
  #173
Gear Nut
 
unqlenol's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
That was my next guess!
Old 12th December 2012
  #174
Gear Nut
 
unqlenol's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Okay, Diffuse field result attached. Raised resolution to 1/24.
I have been looking back at other graphs. This appears to me to be decent but not fantastic. Am I right or wrong?
Attached Thumbnails
DIY Sound Diffusers—Free Blueprints—Slim, Optimized DIY Diffuser Designs (+Fractals)-7-panel-35mm-wide-0-8-10-6-10-8-0-mod-diffuse-field.jpg  
Old 12th December 2012 | Show parent
  #175
Gear Nut
 
unqlenol's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Hmmm, I forgot to ask a question:

How should one weight the value of the 'diffuse' result vs the '0 degree' result? Is the 'diffuse' result the one to look at for a truer interpretation of overall average performance? Feel free to point me to Tim's thesis or any other reference if you feel that is more appropriate..

Side note to anyone looking at the above picture:
The yellow well in the middle of the above design should not confuse you. It is meant to be green. I simply forgot to 'unselect' it in Reflex.
Old 12th December 2012 | Show parent
  #176
Lives for gear
 
Jens Eklund's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by unqlenol ➡️
This appears to me to be decent but not fantastic. Am I right or wrong?
Yes.

Considering the short period width, you might be able to improve the performance but it´s good enough.
Old 12th December 2012 | Show parent
  #177
Lives for gear
 
Jens Eklund's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by unqlenol ➡️
Hmmm, I forgot to ask a question:

How should one weight the value of the 'diffuse' result vs the '0 degree' result? Is the 'diffuse' result the one to look at for a truer interpretation of overall average performance?
https://gearspace.com/board/8466521-post154.html

Old 13th December 2012 | Show parent
  #178
Gear Addict
 
Arqen's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by unqlenol ➡️
Hi all,

Okay, I have a design to post the looks cool to me assuming I understand everything correctly. I took Tim's post no 160 'profiled modulation based on based on fractal self-symmetry' concept and ran with that.

Bear in mind that my back wall space for my would-be diffusor is about 1.8m wide.
So, I went with a 35mm well width which I thought was a very gentlemen-like compromise and which allows a 7 period modulated array to fit into that space.
I also raise the hi freq on the graph plot to 8k to see what was happening up there.

So here are 2 screenshots: The first one is absically exactly what Tim shows in post 160 above, except that I show up to 8k in the co-efficient graph.
The 2nd pic is the same design but with 35mm well widths.
Looks good, no?
Quote:
Originally Posted by unqlenol ➡️
Okay, Diffuse field result attached. Raised resolution to 1/24.
I have been looking back at other graphs. This appears to me to be decent but not fantastic. Am I right or wrong?
Looks Great, Nolan!

Thanks for going through with this! Looks like your version worked out well with the 35mm wells.

I agree with you and Jens that the performance is good considering how simple the base shape is. One thing I noticed is that the overall design is not quite symmetrical. To achieve symmetry the second or sixth module could be flipped (reversing the well order). I don't know if this will make any significant improvement to the performance (it might even hurt the performance), but it's worth a shot if you've not yet tried it.
Old 13th December 2012 | Show parent
  #179
Lives for gear
 
John White's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arqen ➡️
One thing I noticed is that the overall design is not quite symmetrical.
Yes, was that intentional or was it an over sight?
Old 13th December 2012 | Show parent
  #180
Gear Nut
 
unqlenol's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
It was an oversight!!!!! I have sinned.

Thank goodness I am terrified of closing Reflex (no save option in demo) so I still have the design up: have corrected the offending well (which was 150mm high instead of the required 130mm). I am currently re-rendering analysis.
Takes a while when doing the diffuse field setting at high res on an old PC.

Sorry for any unnecessary brain scratching.

My 5 yr old boy has just finished asking me what all the Emoticons mean.
Now he wants to know what a diffuser is. Tim and Jens, can I get him to call one of you?
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 1366 views: 1114825
Avatar for chrispire
chrispire 26th March 2021
replies: 2619 views: 475406
Avatar for S21
S21 22nd March 2021
replies: 75 views: 31916
Avatar for massimomucci
massimomucci 11th June 2020
replies: 88 views: 5860
Avatar for TobyB
TobyB 1 day ago
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump