Nashville Studio Build (need design help first!!!)

Shybird wrote:

I think there should be a sticky that demonstrates ray-tracing and RFZ design at a more detailed level. It would be a great help for us newbies!

Say no more, Trevor! Have to say, I've been following your thread since you started it, and got to say that i love the progress you've had with it. I actually got in mind putting together the information I've gathered over the past months from internet/forums in a A-Z form for newbies like myself, who are considering to build a homestudio. But before that I have to get to home from HERE, where I've been working for past month. It's hard to try to design a studio on a hotels bed with a laptop from almost 700 miles from home :D -Juho-

Ah Juho that would be awesome!! I've been thinking about how much time it would save the moderators on the forum if everything were neatly compiled like your saying (I realize this is no easy task)...so newbs could search within something more concrete and organized rather than searching the entire forum which oftentimes is more frustrating than rewarding :? ... Anyways, thanks for the encouragement on the progress! Sometimes I feel like I'm moving at a snails pace with this stuff but I just keep reminding myself how important the entire design process really is...I'm hoping for "smooth" sailing once construction begins. You gotta get back to a desktop so you can do some real work!! You're waaaay out there...what kind of work do you do?? Also, let me know how I can help you with this "sticky" idea or whatever it turns into...I'd love to contribute however I can. Cheers Trevor

One other thing I forgot to mention... I've been measuring the distance of first reflections behind the engineers head using a listening position that is 18" in front of the monitor intersect point...so even when I get the reflections to be about 20" behind the engineer's head...they are really only 2" behind the intersect point of the monitors...is this ok? Or should I be designing so that the reflections are 1-2' behind the intersect point? Glenn had told me awhile back that he uses 18-24" in front of the monitor intersect point as a guide for where the engineer should actually sit...just wanted to make sure that applies to what I'm doing here with the ray-tracing. Thanks again...sorry for so many questions! Trevor

using a listening position that is 18" in front of the monitor intersect point...so even when I get the reflections to be about 20" behind the engineer's head...they are really only 2" behind the intersect point of the monitors...is this ok?

That's fine and correct, yes. Just think of it this way: the entire control room is built around and for your EARS. They are the most important focus of the entire design, so that's what you should reference everything to. Here's a hint I have used on a couple of designs: In SketchUp, create a couple of vertical planes that run through the center of your head. One runs forwards and backwards along the center line of the room, and you can use that to test symmetry, while the other runs left-right exactly through the place where your ears will be. I have found that to be very useful in setting up room geometry. I make those planes translucent, so I can still see what I'm doing on the other side, and I put them on their own layer, so I can turn them off when I don't need them.

Glenn had told me awhile back that he uses 18-24" in front of the monitor intersect point as a guide for where the engineer should actually sit...just wanted to make sure that applies to what I'm doing here with the ray-tracing.

Yep. Glenn likes to have the intersect a bit further back in the room. Or rather, the listening position a bit further forward on the room. With me, it seems to end up as about 12" to 18", so at least we all agree on 18" as being a good! :) Actually, I'm slowly moving in Glenn's direction too for a number of reasons.... He might just persuade me to get to 24", one day! :) - Stuart -

Glenn had told me awhile back that he uses 18-24" in front of the monitor intersect point as a guide for where the engineer should actually sit...just wanted to make sure that applies to what I'm doing here with the ray-tracing.

Yep. Glenn likes to have the intersect a bit further back in the room. Or rather, the listening position a bit further forward on the room. With me, it seems to end up as about 12" to 18", so at least we all agree on 18" as being a good! :) Actually, I'm slowly moving in Glenn's direction too for a number of reasons.... He might just persuade me to get to 24", one day! :) - Stuart -[/quote] Certainly NOT to derail this thread ... which I have enjoyed the progression ! Glenn [Gullfo] designed my Control Room [along with wonderful support and insights from Stuart, xSpace]. I've also positioned the 'focus' of the mains 18" behind the ears at the seating position. It is not so easy to move monitors around to test/ measure ... and I am certain that I could improve response by experimenting further ... it's just that I've been enjoying the room too much :lol: If a separate thread was ever started to discuss/ educate us students on the theory/ philosophy of monitor focus depth in relation to the 'mixer seating' position ... I would certainly attend that thread ! Stuart ? in your 'spare time' :shock: :shot: On topic ... Shybird ... more words of encouragement to continue the percieved 'snails' pace ... you will thank yourself for years later ! Looking forward to the 3D :wink:

... in your 'spare time'

Ummmm... "spare time"???? What's that? I think I read about that intriguing concept somewhere, and it sounds like something I should have! Where can I get some? Do they sell it in Home Depot??? :) :shot: I haven't asked Glenn for all his reasons, but one of the things that I'm starting to appreciate with having the intersect further back, is a wider sweet spot at the console. If the "cone" ends right behind your head, then as you lean left or right you can find your self with one ear off-axis and edging outside the direct field of both speakers, while the other is getting right into the middle of the combined field. With the speakers aimed slightly outside your ears, for the more rearward intersect, then as you lean left and right, you are moving you ears more directly onto the axis on one side, while still staying in the combined field on the other side. OK, so its a subtle effect, but I have noticed it, so it is worth taking into account. The same also applies to front/back movement: If the intersect is close behind your head, then you don't need to move your head too far back to be through it and out to the other side, where the left speaker is now aimed more at your right ear, and the right more at your left. Especially if you had to increase the toe-in to 45°, for example, due to the room dimensions. In a big room with the speakers far away, these effects probably aren't very important at all, but in a small room things are different. And of course, the closer you are to a speaker, the less you have to move to get off-axis. For example, at the extreme case of having your ear just 6" form the tweeter, if you move just two inches to the side you are already nearly twenty degrees off axis, and well out of the on-axis field. But if your ear is 60 inches away and you move it 2 inches to the side, you are less than two degrees off axis, which is not important. Of course, all of the above depends on the directional behavior of the speaker itself (dispersion angles). For a speaker with wide dispersion angles across the entire spectrum, the effect is much less. But in that case, you need more careful room treatment, since the speakers are "illuminating" more of the walls with the wider cone, so your first reflection points (for example) need to cover more area, and your ray-tracing (if you are doing RFZ) needs to consider higher angles. On the other hand, speakers with only narrow on-axis fields at higher frequencies don't illuminate so much of the walls with the highs, but they do make your sweet spot smaller, since you can't move your head around as much and still stay on axis. So there's a lot of factors here, and a couple of others that I'm still looking into. Each effect by itself might be small, but add them all up and it definitely seems that having the intersect further back makes sense. Plus, there's an interesting study I read a while back (but can't find now!) that showed how most engineers tend to work with their heads a little forward of the supposed "optimum" point of the sweet spot, most likely subconsciously: they just work where it sounds best. There has to be a reason for that! Glenn might also have other reasons for his recommendation: I'm wondering if he is around? It would be good to hear his comments! And John's, and Rod's and Andre's... - Stuart -

Hey Stuart thanks for answering my question regarding the mix position...that's some very valuable information that I don't see stated on the forum very often. Seems so simple, but I'm sure many newbs like myself are hazy when it comes down to such finite details.

Certainly NOT to derail this thread ... which I have enjoyed the progression !

RJ, how DARE you try to derail my thread!! :evil: haha just kidding...PLEASE feel free to chime in at any point about anything...it really helps keep my motivation up! Not to mention I've looked forward to the day that this thread might take on a life of its own... :shock: :lol:

If a separate thread was ever started to discuss/ educate us students on the theory/ philosophy of monitor focus depth in relation to the 'mixer seating' position ... I would certainly attend that thread !

I full heartedly agree with this statement...

Stuart ? in your 'spare time'

Yea Stuart...time to buckle down man. No more lolly gaggin around. Stop putting off that trip to Home Depot and just go buy you some spare time. It's not THAT expensive and definitely worth the price tag. :D

So there's a lot of factors here, and a couple of others that I'm still looking into. Each effect by itself might be small, but add them all up and it definitely seems that having the intersect further back makes sense.

Stuart, this all makes much more sense now! Thanks for taking the time to go into all of the details! I will be posting the new layout soon! Cheers and thanks for all the support guys! Trevor

Alright...drumroll please... :snack: Layout 14.3! Ok so it's not that much different but the control room is fixed! The first reflection off the side wall comes in at about 2' behind the engineers head. All of the reflections are directed to the back of the room and the closest reflection time comes in at 20.31ms after the direct signal hits the ears! This is with monitor angles at 34º which puts the ears 5'5 1/4" from the speakers. I figured this was pretty decent for this size room (245 sq. ft.). I also changed the doors into the mechanical room and bathroom...I feel like it will be more fluid this way, plus it adds wall space to the live room for treatment etc. What do you all think? Any other thoughts regarding this design? Let me know if you want to see any close up shots of any particular section. The only place I'm not sure I can get away with is the sliding door into the control room. I currently have it flush with the soffits, which would be awesome if I could pull it off since it increases sight lines. Is this possible? I've not seen it done in any of the designs on the forum so I feel like it may be a problem. Any and all criticism is welcome!! Please convince me of any issues you foresee with this design... Thanks in advance, Trevor

My only concern at this point is whether or not the CR has space/places for slats. What do you all think? I'd like to make sure it has the potential for slot resonators in case that is the route I end up going for some of the treatment. I guess if I angled those rear walls out a bit more, that would be a good place for resonators? Looking forward to hearing some opinions! Thanks Trevor

Any other thoughts regarding this design?

Naah, terrible: I think version 1.0 was the best.... You should go back to that... :) :shock: :!: :roll: :shot: Seriously, it's looking very good.

The only place I'm not sure I can get away with is the sliding door into the control room. I currently have it flush with the soffits, which would be awesome if I could pull it off since it increases sight lines. Is this possible?

Should be OK. That's more an issue of framing and trim, than it is of acoustics. You'll be able to figure out how to do that once you add the 3rd dimension to your flat-land world, and start putting 2x4s in place. It just means that you wont have ay real door frame on that edge: it will go in behind the edge of the soffit. I don't see it as being a big issue.

My only concern at this point is whether or not the CR has space/places for slats. What do you all think?

Rear sidewalls is where I would probably put them. Maybe not the entire surface, but at least some of that could be slots. I like the new bathroom layout, too. Better. - Stuart -

Thanks for the feedback Stuart! MUCH appreciated as always... I fiddled around a little more with the design today and decided to go ahead and splay those rear walls of the control room out to the point where the right side is parallel with the outer shell...I think this will allow for a much better sounding control room since there will be plenty of space for treatment. I decided not to worry about the space lost in the mechanical room since it is still plenty big enough for the purpose it will serve. I drew in some very crude bass hangers and potential slot resonators (the brownish areas) just to show how much more space is now available in the rear section of the CR. Also, in regards to the bathroom walls...I didn't use the angles created by the CR because I figure it would be easier just to frame it in with 2X4s rather than spending money on the resilient channel that would attach to the CR shell. The decoupled 2X4s will also provide better isolation from flushing noises (and ehm..shall I say...other noises :shock: :) ) than the resilient channel could provide. I do have one quick question regarding this drawing: - Would the slat resonators extend to the back wall of the CR (as shown) or would they stop where the bass hangers come out to? I wasn't sure when I drew this in and I realize it's not that important right now...I was just curious. I think this might be the one!! Feedback is GREATLY apreciated! Thanks again Trevor

Shybird wrote:

Ah Juho that would be awesome!! I've been thinking about how much time it would save the moderators on the forum if everything were neatly compiled like your saying (I realize this is no easy task)...so newbs could search within something more concrete and organized rather than searching the entire forum which oftentimes is more frustrating than rewarding :? ...

I totally know the feeling :D As said, feels like i've read the whole forum from start to end 20 times :D

Anyways, thanks for the encouragement on the progress! Sometimes I feel like I'm moving at a snails pace with this stuff but I just keep reminding myself how important the entire design process really is...I'm hoping for "smooth" sailing once construction begins.

You're welcome! It's been really nice to follow such a fine develop in a design..I feel that snails pace too, man! But I've decided that this is the time when i'll design my building properly :) Usually, with normal renovations/buildings i'll just start making things, and design them on-the-go..

You gotta get back to a desktop so you can do some real work!! You're waaaay out there...what kind of work do you do?? Also, let me know how I can help you with this "sticky" idea or whatever it turns into...I'd love to contribute however I can. Cheers Trevor

I finally did! Yay! I'm able to be at home for weekend :) Still have to return to the far north at Monday though.. I am an electrician, and i run my own firm. And the reason why we are up there is that we're building 3 gas stations at the area.. I will let You know, Trevor. As soon as i get back to my normal day routine, maybe in 2 months, then we'll start putting those terms together :yahoo: Cheers! -Juho-

I am an electrician, and i run my own firm.

Sweet! So I can bombard you with electrical questions when I get to that phase?? :) haha

As soon as i get back to my normal day routine, maybe in 2 months, then we'll start putting those terms together

That's perfect! I'm ready to help anytime. I think it would be very resourceful. Regarding the design...I'm working on some slight modifications today. I want to see if I can push the mix position back a bit and the sliding doors forward a bit. It's really bothering me that the sight lines into the right half of the live room are limited. I understand it's not necessarily "make or break" but I have to see if it CAN be fixed. If not, I think this layout is the one. I'll post back with an update today. Cheers! Trevor

Hey guys I'm back with an update... After trying different combinations of soffit angles and front wall angles in the control room, I think I've found the best happy medium for this floorplan. Here's the specs: 1.) Sight lines cut through the middle majority of the LR (blind spots on either side are roughly equivalent). This is the best that I can achieve without cutting the size of the LR down too much. I did lose about 10 sq ft though...but I feel it's worth it in regards to visibility. 2.) Front walls in the CR are angled 20º and the soffits are angled 32º. I'm a bit concerned once again about the space left between the drywall and the corner of my Event monitors but Stuart had told me not to worry too much as long as there is space for connecting the monitor cables in the back, which there is enough for that. 3.) Live Room: 448 sq ft Control Room: 271 sq ft Iso Booth: 148 sq ft Storage Room: 68 sq ft Bathroom: 35 sq ft 4.) The closest reflections from the sliding glass doors and opposite wall are about 2'1" behind the engineer's head. 5.) The time it takes the first reflection to reach the ear after the direct signal is 20.056ms... :D Also, I went ahead and drew in some basic treatment just to get a rough idea of the floor space left over. The brown spaces are potential slot resonators, the dark gray spaces are absorption, and the dark blue are cylindrical diffusors (I just thought they fit nice...not sure if it's a good idea though :!: ). And then of course the purplish rectangles at the rear of the CR are hangers. This is all very willy nilly. Oh and that is a concert grand piano btw. I do not own one though...it's just for a better perspective on size of space! :lol: I really need some feedback on this design! I'm eager to start the 3D model but want to make sure I've not missed anything. Thanks again in advance! Trevor

Nice! Really nice! I like it.

I'm a bit concerned once again about the space left between the drywall and the corner of my Event monitors but Stuart had told me not to worry too much as long as there is space for connecting the monitor cables in the back, which there is enough for that.

I said that? :shock: :) Yeah, I think I did. But here's a curve ball for ya: If that gets very tight in there, then you could build just that one stud bay "inside out", and double up the mass, maybe by using fiber-cement board instead of drywall for one layer, using the "beef up between the studs" technique. That will give you at least an extra 3 inches of depth behind the monitors, if you need it. Would that help?

5.) The time it takes the first reflection to reach the ear after the direct signal is 20.056ms...

Damn! That's no good! It has to be at least 20.06148573 ms! You better go back and start all over... :) The basic treatment looks reasonable, with some caveats. But we can get to those later, as you did say that this is just a rough idea, for aprox. positions and sizes. Looking very neat! I'm hopeful for this turning out really well! :thu: - Stuart -

Thanks for the encouragement Stuart!! Much appreciated as always...

That will give you at least an extra 3 inches of depth behind the monitors, if you need it. Would that help?

That would help definitely! I guess there are two major reasons I would take the extra time to build it like you described: 1.) To have the space and potential for upgrading my monitors down the road to something of higher quality. On a side note, do you think this room is suitable and/or would benefit from monitors with larger (than 8") drivers? If so I need to make sure there is room in the soffits for such an upgrade. 2.) This discussion (HERE) got me to thinking more about the space inside the soffits. One person (oudplayer) mentioned how soffit mounting can cause "horning" which he then explained as this: "Not sure exactly what is mechanically happening, except that certain frequencies "horn" or spike out due to the back-of-speaker to wall-to-speaker-again refelction time. Basically, the opposite of 'flat frequency response,' where certain individual frequencies become really prominent. I think these are often low-mid frequencies and not so much high frequencies." He basically (as I understood) said it was a problem that occurs when the soffits are not designed with enough space between the back of the speaker and the wall. He went on to say "Thus, the sheer amount of real-estate you lose in a well-constructed soffit configuration may dissuade you from this approach..." Honestly though, there is an awful lot of arguing going on in that thread so I have no idea what to take from it. :?

Damn! That's no good! It has to be at least 20.06148573 ms! You better go back and start all over...

Hmmmm...I wonder how many millimeters I would have to move the rear wall back to gain that extra .00548573ms?? :horse: :roll: :)

Looking very neat! I'm hopeful for this turning out really well!

So is this my ticket to the land of 3D?? Haha... :yahoo: Onward! Trevor

except that certain frequencies "horn" or spike out due to the back-of-speaker to wall-to-speaker-again refelction time. Basically, the opposite of 'flat frequency response,' where certain individual frequencies become really prominent. I think these are often low-mid frequencies and not so much high frequencies."

I haven't read that thread yet, but I find it hard to agree that reflections BEHIND the baffle can have much effect on the room, if the soffit is built correctly. "Massive, rigid, hard" is the ticket, with the entire cavity well damped. If the baffle is massive enough, rigid enough, and hard enough, and the cavity is as fully damped as possible, then there should be precious little (if any at all) bass energy from behind the speaker getting back into the room. Even if the speaker cabinet itself is rear ported, and there is interaction going on in the port, I still don't see it creating any "horning" effect on the front of the soffit. Or maybe I'm just misunderstanding what he is saying? In any event, I don't recall ever seeing a REW analysis of a room that would suggest such a thing actually happens. There might be horning going on, but I'm having trouble believing that it is due to effects behind the soffit face. When I have a chance, I'll read that thread and see if I'm understand his argument correctly.

I wonder how many millimeters I would have to move the rear wall back to gain that extra .00548573ms??

I figure a bit less than two tenths of a mm should do it! :) (So just use thinner paint, and you'll be fine... :) :!: :shock: :roll: :shot:

So is this my ticket to the land of 3D?? Haha...

:thu: Now the REAL fun starts.... Now you get to do your ray-tracing in all three dimensions at once, instead of just 2! :) - Stuart -

This discussion (HERE) got me to thinking more about the space inside the soffits.

OK; I just read the thread over there, and the only guys making any sense are Barefoot (not surprisingly!) and Bob Olhsson (also not surprisingly!). The others don't seem to have too much grasp as to what soffits do, how they are built, and how they work. There's a lot of waffling about "Well, that's just techno-jargon, but I know better than the experts, because my speakers sound fantastic, and they aren't soffit mounted.". Go figure! :) The person who made that comment you mentioned also doesn't seem to understand soffits at all, since he wasn't even sure if there really is a 6dB bass boost, or why. Fortunately, barefoot explained it very clearly, and very accurately. There was also the side-track in there, about how "mastering rooms never soffit mount", which isn't true, of course, and the comment that when Bob Katz heard a mastering room with properly soffit mounted speakers, he thought is was "some of the best ... he had ever heard". That's pretty meaningful, coming from Bob Katz! - Stuart -

OK; I just read the thread over there, and the only guys making any sense are Barefoot (not surprisingly!) and Bob Olhsson (also not surprisingly!)

Ah thank you Stuart...that eases my mind. I figured it was a matter of personal opinions not being justified by proper understanding of acoustics! However, I had no idea who to trust because I don't feel confident enough in my own knowledge yet.

There was also the side-track in there, about how "mastering rooms never soffit mount", which isn't true, of course, and the comment that when Bob Katz heard a mastering room with properly soffit mounted speakers, he thought is was "some of the best ... he had ever heard". That's pretty meaningful, coming from Bob Katz!

Thank you for setting it straight...I was really starting to wonder how in the world proper soffit mounting could be "bad" for mastering (or even mixing for that matter)!!

I figure a bit less than two tenths of a mm should do it! (So just use thinner paint, and you'll be fine...

hahah that's great I'll post back once I have my 3D in progress! Trevor

I figured it was a matter of personal opinions not being justified by proper understanding of acoustics! However, I had no idea who to trust because I don't feel confident enough in my own knowledge yet.

Just so you feel even more comfortable: You might not know who Barefoot is: he's actually a member of this forum, and used to post a lot more often here than he does today: the problem is that his studio reference monitor manufacturing business is going so well that he doesn't have much time to post any more!! :) Barefoot monitors are pretty darn good, and well regarded in the industry. So what he says, carries quite a bit of weight! He knows a thing or two about how monitors work, I reckon... :!: - Stuart -

I've definitely heard the name tossed about on the forum...not sure if I've read any of his posts...probably have and don't realize it! haha That's good to know though. Also glad his business is doing so well! Thanks again Trevor

Hey guys...just wanted to post some updates on my progress...it's slow but sure. The gate for the studio was completed yesterday to allow access for trucks during the construction phase as well as access for load-in/load-out once the studio is completed. Nothing too exciting but still progress nonetheless. :yahoo: haha I've contacted a local glass company here in Nashville (recommended by my builder) for some quotes on laminated glass. Based on my research, I think I'm going to go with 3/8" and 1/2" thicknesses for the window between the booth and CR...however, the guy at the glass place wasn't sure if they had 3/8" so I might end up with a quote for 1/2" and 5/8". Not sure if that's overkill...I'm still not entirely confident with calculating these things based on my wall mass. :? How do you factor in the Green Glue between double drywall when trying to match the window mass to the wall mass? Based on what I've read in other builds, I should be ok with 1/2" and 5/8" for sure. Seem like correct thinking? In regards to the sliding glass doors I'm not entirely sure what to do. The glass company does not carry sliding door frames that provide the isolation I will need (according to the guy I talked to). They will glaze the doors if I somehow constructed the frames ( :shock: )...that's not going to happen lol. Can you even buy sliding glass door frames without the glass?? I was hoping to buy completed sliding doors and just have them installed. However, I just got a quote from this company for their studio sliding doors and it would be about $10,000 for two pairs (72" x 80") shipped to my house with 5/8" laminated glass on both (it was only $1000 less if you got two of them with 1/4")... :shock: :ahh: :cen: :!: Anybody know of a way to get this done substantially cheaper than 10 grand while maintaining the quality of the isolation? Their doors do appear to be pretty darn good. Check out the TL charts here. Also, I've been doing a lot of research on Rod's design for "superdoors" since I figure this is the route I will go for the front door. However, there seems to be a lot of crucial details left out of Rod's designs provided in his book, which has stirred up some pretty lengthy conversation on several threads. One major thing I have to bring up is something that Rod seems contradictory on (or at least it appears so): In his book he writes this on page 104 (2nd edition): "I'll let you know right now that this is one place I don't worry about maintaing the separation of wall assemblies with the frames, even when using totally separated assemblies. When it comes to carrying a door that might weigh well over 300 pounds, or even standard solid-core doors, you do not want your door frame attached to a stud that can move over the years. As I noted previously, tests have proven that a through jamb does not effectively lessen the total isolation value of a wall assembly to any great degree. So don't worry about any minuscule amount of isolations you may lose. Just build the frame straight through the cavity." But then his diagram specifically shows compressed rockwool, backer rod, and acoustic caulk between the 5/4 stock wood jamb and the wall studs. I figure this is there to decouple the door jamb from the two separate wall frames so that they don't become coupled by the 5/4 stock. But why would he do this when he just stated not to worry about it!! It's EXTREMELY confusing to me and it appears to have a lot of people around the forum somewhat confused too. RJHollins went through it on his construction thread. Even after reading through all the back and forth discussion there, I am still very confused on how to properly mount and frame a "superdoor". I have to know how to do this in the 3D model before I can even fathom telling the builder (with confidence) an accurate measurement for the rough opening (framing) of the front door. (and just as a disclaimer...I think Rod is great!! I would not be this far without the help of his book!) Continuing my research! Any help or tips or links to something I have missed would be greatly appreciated! cheers Trevor

One other thing I forgot to mention which I'm not quite sure how it slipped my mind since it has taken up quite a bit of my research lately... but I finally talked to a tech guy over at Event who actually had to setup the monitors (Event ASP8) in the lab in order to answer my questions regarding the dispersion characteristics. Seems pretty crazy that they don't have this information on hand if you ask me :!: Anyways, he provided polar plots of the test results which I have provided below. Figured this might be helpful to anyone needing this information for these monitors. They are nowhere else on the internet... I'm pretty sure. :roll: :) He still has not returned my answers regarding the acoustic axis of the speakers, but I'm hopeful he will reply soon. Anyways, I am debating whether or not to go ahead and upgrade to a better pair of monitors before I design and construct the soffits. I love my Event ASP8's but after finally talking to the Tech guy at Event (who is part of the research and development), I began to realize where on the totem pole they "rank" in terms of modern speaker technology. Plus, I have had issues in the past with low end translation to other typical consumer and car stereo systems with the ASP8's. However, I more recently attributed that to room problems and lack of proper placement/treatment within the room rather than the speakers themselves...primarily because I now realize how much was wrong with my previous control room setup. :| So, at this point it would really be hard to say I've given my Event's the best possible environment for proper monitoring...therefore, my ability to judge whether or not they will be what I need for the long-haul is not really possible. But, based on my research, there are definitely monitors made with higher quality components and attention to detail that can provide much more clarity during the mixing process. So, I have begun researching my options for a potential upgrade. I've narrowed it down to several models/ brands of monitors that I think would be significantly better than the ASP8's that I currently own... as well as $3000 or less for the pair. I can't really go higher than that considering that is already more than I'd really LIKE to spend (I didn't foresee this purchase until just recently!!). The ones I am really interested in hearing are the Dynaudio BM15A, Focal Solo6 Be, Adam A8X, and last but definitely not least the Event OPAL (the $3000 limit was determined by the price of these :D). I have to say, with everything I have read about the Event OPAL's, I can't imagine them not sounding fantastic in a well designed room. However, it does concern me that I can't find any examples that demonstrate them being soffit mounted. And since they are somewhat oddly shaped, I'm pretty sure they don't meet the criteria for "easily soffitable"... :wink: . Any opinions on this dilemma? Would it be worth it to upgrade to some monitors of this quality over what I have now? Has anyone heard any of these monitors side by side? I am desperate to hear the OPAL's but no stores in Nashville have any to demo. Not sure how to go about shopping for monitors if I can't HEAR them! Haha Alright well...you know my feelings...any and all help and/or thoughts, opinions, cries of warning, sighs of distress, whatever....is MUCH appreciated! cheers Trevor

hmmm ... I'll have to check that passage in my 2nd edition ... I'd not noticed that. However, I do recall my 'learning time' on the door design ... believe me, it took both Gullfo and Soundman to pound the concept into me :lol: Rightly so, the weight concern in the jamb area is not to be taken lightly :shock: bad pun :shot: You may see it in my thread, went with the 5/4 maple jamb [built by a pro mill shop]. The door's framing area was given serious attention. Especially the number of studs used on the hinge side. I also had discussion with the 'sway bracket' designer who was very helpful in how I might employ those ... which I did. OverKILL :roll: Very possible ... and would do it again, cause, ya just don't want to have to worry about things like doors and the use/abuse. The caveat to my build ... well, it turns out that over 90% of the time, I can work at optimal mix volume [~80dB] with the door wide open and not bother any of the household. This has been an unexpected surprise that I'm happy with. To add ... with the door nearly always open, I periodically check how the door alignment has maintained. It's been up and open for nearly a year ... zero issue. Another important point. I DID call in a top notch carpenter to handle the door installation. The screws that we used for the jamb were in the 'specialty' section of the hardware store. Maybe that, too, was overkill ... but my Pro smiled when he drilled them in. Sorry for the long winded response ... I would be curious of other expert insights on the 'To Split' or 'Not To Split'. Not withstanding the cost differential. .... and he off to the background :)

Why not ask Rod directly? :wink: Questions for Rod Gervais about his book