Advice Needed: Treating room, Tuning Room w/ Sketchup files

[danny@curtean.com]

Hello again dear John Sayers’s community!

I have used this great resource in the past with a friend of mine when we built a fairly extensive studio with all the bells and whistles in a relatively medium sized space. I've moved to another state since then and after years I have come across the need for a new control room/recording room which also serves other purposes.

I run a branding and content creation firm with commercial photography, cinematography, audio production and other esoteric services. So naturally I need a "home base" or a mothership to work out of, thus the build of this room.

SketchUp File HERE - https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=B ... file%2cskp

Photos / screen grabs of Sketchup drawing HERE https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=B ... =folder%2c


What have I done so far?

- I've done a good 6 months of research, education, re-learning and new-learning of acoustic principles to really be armed enough for this build.
- Extensive amounts of time were spent on Sketchup and visualizing/calculating the room layout, treatments, ideas and so for - so this isn't a fresh topic for me
- I've done extensive REW simulations, measurements, comparisons and data mining to get a solid idea of what I am hearing + what is mathematically predictable in my room
- With the traps I have built so far, extensive testing, moving, hearing and so on was done to “mess with” the sound of the room
- I've gotten down to a design package that I think will be highly effective at treating the problems which I am hearing in the room.

What is wrong with the room?
• Currently in basic terms I have a 250-550 Hz bump/buildup that makes stuff sound too “heavy” and fatiguing – it sounds forced and unruly.
• There is a massive resonance at 137.5 Hz that REALLY sticks out big time
• Obviously the room has some major room nodes at several harmonics, which I feel would be treated with the targeted treatments I am planning, namely 58 Hz and 140 Hz. I think the harmonics of these would go away if the fundamental is worked out to some degree.


What do I need help with?

- Review of what I've done and constructive criticism on what is wrong, what can be improved and so on - I am at your mercy
- Understanding the constraints I am working with, such as using already built treatments, and incorporating them as much as possible (try to avoid replacing things that cost already)


Where am I currently?

- I am at the half way point where about half the treatments have been built, they need to either be modified or finished, and mounted. Everything is floating currently and nothing is permanent. I have about 14 x 6" Roxul traps mostly places close to mix position at room boundaries.

Treatment Devices Specs:
***Note these are all DIY with inspiration from commercially available devices***
- 8 Pcs (Primacoustic FullTrap Style) 6" Depth 24"x48" Limp Mass Absorbers with Roxul Safe-n-Sound & MLV (.5lb and 2lb) with tunings of (4x 60Hz, 4x 140Hz)
- 2 Pcs 6" Depth 24"x48" Broadband Absorbers with 6" Roxul Safe-n-Sound and Open Back
- 14 Pcs Tube Traps 12" Diameter 42" Tall (Roxul Enerwrap 80)
- 4 Pcs Diaphragmatic Absorber (Dual Front Wall, Activated Carbon, 12" Depth, 5FT Tall)
- 12 Pcs (Primeacoustic MaxTrap Style) MLV Limp Mass Corner Traps
- 2 Pcs QRD 13 Slat Diffusers
- 6 Pcs QRD 11 Stick Diffusers (mounted to some of the Limp Mass absorbers)
- 6 Pcs QRD 3D Skyline Diffusers

I know this is allot, but after playing with it all, and having the issues which I am having, I think it necessary to have such extensive bass trapping and diffusion / absorption. I am here for any friendly smacking if it is called for. 

I hope I have provided enough information to give a basic concept of where I am and where I'd like to be.

I sincerely appreciate your help, and value your time - really, I mean it!

Cheers,

Daniel Curtean

[Soundman2020]

Hi Danny. Please read the forum rules for posting (click here). You seem to be missing a couple of things!

Photos / screen grabs of Sketchup drawing HERE

<--- That's one of them!

I have used this great resource in the past with a friend of mine when we built a fairly extensive studio with all the bells and whistles

What was your profile name back then? If you forgot your password I can re-activate that for you, as long as you still have access to the same e-mail address that you used back then.

- Review of what I've done and constructive criticism on what is wrong, what can be improved and so on - I am at your mercy

To be honest, to me it looks like you have over-treated and also under-treated the room at the same time! Over-treated minor things that didn't need it, and under-treated the big things that did need it.

You didn't provide the acoustic data for the room, so it's really hard to say what is wrong with it right now, but my suggestion would be to start again.

That might sound a bit harsh, but there's so much wrong with that room that it isn't realistic to try to tweak things here and there to make it work. It needs to be re-done with only the treatment that i actually needed, in the locations where it is needed.

To start with, your model is upside down, sideways, and back to front! (You have your axes in SketchUp all messed up, which makes it really hard to navigate the model.) I fixed that in my version.

Then there's the issue of room geometry and layout:
1. Your listening position is almost exactly at 25% of the room depth, which is the second worst location in the room.
2. Your listening position is way off-axis for your speakers (a whopiing 28° for the BM6's, and an even more whopping 33° for the unnamed "other" speakers.
3. The speakers are in the wrong locations, at the wrong angles, in the wrong orientations, and at the wrong heights!
4. You have massive video monitors in locations where they will be wreaking havoc with the speakers
5. You have a very large desk with shelves. that are causing reflections, comb-filtering, and likely the mid-range "bump" you mentioned.

Then there's the treatment:
1. You have a ginormous tuned diffuser just 55" from your head, and directly in front of your face!
2. You have insufficient bass trapping on the rear wall, and too much at the front of the room.
3. You have a pair of huge audiophile speakers at locations where they are messing with your psycho-acosutic perception of sound.
4. You have bass traps half way up the side walls!
5. You have carpet on the floor!

I could go on, but I think you get the picture...

- Understanding the constraints I am working with, such as using already built treatments, and incorporating them as much as possible

There's the problem. It seems to me you bought or built a bunch of stuff hoping it would work, and when it didn't you bought or built even more stuff that also doesn't work... so now you feel the obligation to use ALL of that stuff, instead of doing it right with maybe other stuff...

***Note these are all DIY with inspiration from commercially available devices***

Did you build them EXACTLY the same as the commercial products? Identical materials, dimensions, workmanship, and finish? Or did you just look at photos and sort-of more-or-less make something that kind-of looks similar?

- 8 Pcs (Primacoustic FullTrap Style) 6" Depth 24"x48" Limp Mass Absorbers with Roxul Safe-n-Sound & MLV (.5lb and 2lb) with tunings of (4x 60Hz, 4x 140Hz)

Which ones are those in your model? Most of your components are not labeled, and nothing is on layers. There's no details inside the acoustic components either, so it is impossible to see which is which, or how you built them.

How did you tune those devices to exactly 60Hz and exactly 140 Hz? Did you test them to make sure they really are tuned to that?

Are you aware that very large membrane traps and panel trap can actually make modes appear to ring longer, due to the large inertia (mass) of the membrane or panel?

14 Pcs Tube Traps 12" Diameter 42" Tall (Roxul Enerwrap 80)

why? What is the intended purpose of those, and why are they in the wrong place in the room?

- 4 Pcs Diaphragmatic Absorber (Dual Front Wall, Activated Carbon, 12" Depth, 5FT Tall)

Ditto: What frequency are those tuned to?

- 12 Pcs (Primeacoustic MaxTrap Style) MLV Limp Mass Corner Traps

Ditto.

- 2 Pcs QRD 13 Slat Diffusers

Where? For what purpose? What tuning?

- 6 Pcs QRD 11 Stick Diffusers (mounted to some of the Limp Mass absorbers)

Ditto.

- 6 Pcs QRD 3D Skyline Diffusers

What are the upper and lower cutoff frequencies for those? Why are the arranged in that manner?

I know this is allot,

Yup: The term "overkill" comes to mind... Sort of like seeing a spider in your room, and blasting it with both barrels of a 12-gauge shotgun, sort of hoping that maybe one or two pellets will actually hit it...

but after playing with it all, and having the issues which I am having,

In what way did you "play with it"? Please post your MDAT files from each point in the process, starting with the empty room, so we can see what changed at each point, with each device that you added.

I think it necessary to have such extensive bass trapping and diffusion / absorption.

I don't! Yes, it does need extensive bass trapping, because it is a small room, but it needs to be in the right place. Yes it might be able to benefit from some diffusion, provided that it is used correctly. And yes it will need plenty of absorption, once a because it is a small room, but the absorption needs to be placed correctly.

However, you also have other stuff in there, way beyond that, and who knows what it is doing!

I am here for any friendly smacking if it is called for.

Please consider yourself duly slapped, with plenty of friendship!

I hope I have provided enough information

We'll also need some photos of the actual room, much greater detail of how each device was built, and the entire sequence of MDAT files from each point in the process, as mentioned above.

But the basic way to fix this room is to take out everything and start again.

There's so much busy-stuff going on in there all over, that it is pointless to try to fix it as it is.

- Stuart -








- Stuart -

[danny@curtean.com]

I'll address the problems with your reply sequentially: I took your tone and replied in the same vein, just FYI! So if I read you wrong, sorry.

1. The screen grabs are available via the link I shared because the forum makes it damn near impossible to practically and easily upload files.
1b. I don't have measurements of the empty room, but REW Room Sim is bang on. I do have other measurements, however. Files are HERE https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=B ... =folder%2c
2. The old account was under the email dannycurtean@yahoo.com which I still have but I never use, thus the new name
3. Just like I haven't provided enough data, neither have you. "You're doing it all wrong" is not constructive what so ever - its just empty words dude. Let's get specific about what is in the wrong place, and why, and where it would be placed better, and why. I understand that there is some ambiguity as to what is what in the drawings, but lets start with some simple suggestions not just blasting people!
4. I haven't seen a single piece of information that points to tweaking or improving anything. You're too busy saying "its all crap", which I know for a damn FACT it is not!
5. I am open to criticism, but I wont stand for being kicked around without reason, and this is exclusively what you're doing, whether intentionally or unintentionally. If you have something to specifically see changed, well then let's to hear it. It isnt wrong until you show me what IS right! I mean cmon, read the tone of your reply dude - its one kick after another without any explanation for it! If you're missing data, then how the heck can you make ANY judgements at to what is right or wrong?!?

Now on to specifics:
1. The speakers are at 48 inch for the tweeter in the final design, they may not precisely reflect it in the drawing, I didn't do everything THAT precisely there.
2. The tuned diffuser is there to control any front to back reflections and deal with them. It's not a necessity, but I figured with the window there it may be a good idea as most people like diffusers front to back.
3. No they're not. They certainly are not in the ideal place, of course, but this isn't changing, period! I made this clear in the OP. Not because I'm a dick, but because I have constraints. And besides, I moved the speakers around front to back by as much as 3 feet and although different, there are only tradeoffs.
4. They're diffusers also (remember, tube traps) and happen to also be bass traps which mounted right on the boundary surfaces of the room. There's quite allot of slap back in the room without anything there so untreated is better?? Again, give suggestions not just punches!
5. Yeah, carpet on the floor - its staying.

I built the first round for the room, trying to keep it minimal, and realized it wasn't cutting it. They're being converted to MLV traps which should.

Built them exactly, even cosmetically?
Why does it matter if I built them "cosmetically" as the commercial stuff?! Seriously?! And yes, I wouldn't spend dozens of hours building shit without calculating what the hell I'm building. What kind of question is this?!

I was aware that a limp mass absorber can do that, but the alternative is......."crickets"

Intended purpose of tube traps is as speaker stands, as diffusers on walls and as bass traps which they're damn good at. And none of them are placed in the wrong place. What does "the wrong place" mean anyways? I'd understand wrong place for a diffuser or even an broadband absorber, but there is hardly a "wrong place" for a bass trap man!

What are they tuned to?
All traps are tuned to 60Hz or 140 Hz

What tuning?
QRD 13 tuning.

Frequency range?
About 800 to 3K for Skyline diffusers

It's overkill!
If it's overkill, what about it is. SHIT, if I could build less stuff and spend less time and money, then GREAT! But again, specifics are MIA!

Now before you get all self righteous on me, remember bud, YOU set this tone!

Now lets talk specifics.

[Soundman2020]

Well, I tried. Good luck!

- Stuart -

[danny@curtean.com]

No you haven't! And I'm not just letting you go like this. You clearly had a reason to say everything you said, else you wouldn't have bothered. There's knowledge in that noggin, and I want it! Now spill the beans and don't piss me off

What is wrong about placement, about the traps, what questions do you have? I want the help, but I want the help not just broken bones. So go on, I'm listening.

[danny@curtean.com]

Speaking of more data, here are photo-realistic renders of the final product as I see it.

This should provide a bit more context.

https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=B ... =folder%2c

[mattsal]

Hey Danny, there's tons of resources on here for how the basic layout of a room should look, speaker placement, and typically what type of treatment should go where.
Start simple with bass traps in the corners floor to ceiling, absorption at first reflections, and speakers in correct placement for the room and listening height. Those were all huge improvements for me! From there add back wall and ceiling treatment and add/remove pieces as needed.

You can definitively utilize some of the treatment you have to make it better, but I'd say it's easier to start from scratch, one wall at a time, even with the constraints you have for the room.

You have some very nice renders, however it would be easier to plan the room with nothing in it though honestly. Listen to what Stuart has to say, I don't think being so aggressive and ignoring his advice is going to help though!

[danny@curtean.com]

Hi Matt,

Thank you for the calm response, and perhaps I was a bit too aggressive in my first response. However I feel I responded in kind, maybe even a tad too much in kind. I was frustrated by the lack of actual "help" - all I got was "its all bad", instead of the approach you took which is constructively providing guidance - "start with a wall at a time". Simple suggestions which are logically coherent are ingest-able for my mind, everything else is frustrating and useless. I can reason that out and it makes sense. That is essentially, however, what I am doing and have done to some degree already. Nothing is bolted in as of yet, its all floor standing for that particular reason.

I'll take your advise and tear everything out, and try adding one section at a time. That said, my end goal, budgets and overall plan is to create "that" room ultimately - so my question is, theoretically, instinctionally, experientially what if anything is grossly wrong with that design package from the members' perspective? Apart from testing, which is of course hugely important, the overall concept is either on the right track or not. I'm looking for the " it's not, and here's why" and the "here's how to fix it, or improve it" - makes sense?

We can get into measurements, and a bunch of largely useless data, but if we cannot answer the basic question of whether this package makes sense, then the rest is kind of pointless, isn't it? We have to have some sort of basic plan of attack, and this is mine. Before we dial it in, is the overall concept kosher?

[danny@curtean.com]

I've been working with some forum members and although only a few responses into our conversation, they gave me some great insight and ideas. The design has gone through many revisions and allot of failed ideas, like using limp mass absorbers and diaphragmatic absorbers using carbon technology. Really, this design package has simplified quite a bit!

So I updated the SKP file, and did 3 photo-realistic renders for quick visual reference. Here's the basic rundown. Keep in mind this is probably not final, and will probably need some tweaking, but I think it's definitely at least semi final material and should be a good design package for my needs.

Photo-Realistic Renders
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=B ... =folder%2c

Objectives to new design:

1. Incorporate all 6” broadband absorbers (22 total pieces, 10 of which are rectangular boxes 6” deep, the rest being corner units) as they are - so no MLV traps!

2. Incorporate allot more diffusion on side walls – reason is simple! Those walls, although boundaries, are not best candidates for absorption. I don’t like dead rooms, and I got close already with only 12 traps in front and at rear of room, so that's not good! I only need flutter control there, so that’s why diffusers. I picked a particular one, being the fractal design because it can control down to 500Hz and well up from there, and its a very granular design which I prefer. Kind of like that ZR Acoustics stuff - I like precision

3. I am toying with the idea of VPR units – 2 in front, behind speakers, and 2 slightly larger ones behind, in that closet. My biggest standing wave is a front to back axial node around 58 Hz. So the idea is that I get relatively broadband LF absorption in a non resonant panel which also “cuts the head and tail off of” the standing wave (1/4 wavelength rule). So I get great SBIR control for rear of speakers, which I find REALLY beneficial, and I get absorption at the modal resonances of the room – win, win. This is still a “beta” idea, but I don’t think a better device for this purpose exists on our green rock!

4. I moved my Skyline 3D diffusers to the front, and I couldn’t believe the subtle, but undoubtable change in openness of sound stage, wideness of sound stage, clarity and this sense of ease in reproduction. Not sure if it is 100% these, but I haven’t heard “this” in the dozen or so configurations I’ve tried in this room thus far. And that was the only change, excluding the removal of 2 broadband absorbers. So yeah, testing must confirm this, but those are staying! I like what they’re doing!

5. I’ve doubled my “cloud” from 2 units to 4 in a 2x2 cluster, so that’s good!

6. I’ve gotten rid of more than half the tube traps. I only have 6 units in this design, 4 of which are the “will build, I don’t care who says WHAT” group, and two are as bass traps/poly diffusers at rear corners - mainly a space consideration, and they're damn fine devices!

7. I’ve moved some of the corner traps around (I have 12 already built units, 6” Roxul only, open back) to allow for 2 units right behind mix position, between wall and ceiling, right above that projector and closet opening. The idea that is to use as much LF absorption at the back as I can (that’s why VPRs also – I need heavy guns back there)

There may be little things here and there, but otherwise any objections?

I know allot of this is based on theoretical research and ideas, and that’s not ideal but we must have some sort of goal, right? And this is mine, based on what I've learned to be sound (no pun intended) acoustic principles.

P.S:
I’ve also taken the extra time to update the SKP file with layers. So everything major is on one of a dozen layers or so for easy navigation. So check that out! https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=B ... file%2cskp

ALSO! Not everything in that Sketchup is 100% super duper precise down to MM accuracy! Some stuff is a placeholder for a specific design, while others are there for basic idea, like the VPRs. The diffusers are not exactly that design, but look similar and dimensionally are identical (LxW at least). But overall its pretty damn accurate within 6 inches I’d say!

Lets hear the questions, objections and improvements, shall we?

[Soundman2020]

There is an announcement at the top of the forum about what to do to assure getting as many responses as possible.
The announcement leads to this post (click here). Actually, several people, who are experts on this forum, will most likely not reply if you don't do what is written in that post. Many others who are very helpful, will most likely not reply out of respect for the moderators' wishes.

- Stuart -

[danny@curtean.com]

Soundman, just read that sticky again

It seems I have done a relatively good job of giving details, so that's good I guess. You don't know what you don't know, so I don't know what Im missing if I don't know

Im updating my profile now.

What other things do I need to do? I think I have plenty of empirical data for what I know so far - again, don't know what I don't know.

[danny@curtean.com]

Just for the record, this Forum is ridiculously out of date. It took me 10 minutes to get an avatar updated - that's time I don't have to piss on stupid requests. It's one thing to ask for data, and have the system in place to deliver it with some sort of ease, and another to have high demands and damn near zero ability to provide it.

With ALL DUE RESPECT IN THE WORLD, if you expect me to sit here and f*** with the sizes of all the images and MDAT files and spend ridiculous amounts of time JUST to make it 1980's compatible, you're under the wrong impressions of how much time I have to piss away unnecessarily. Sorry, but this is just completely idiotic and I am damn frustrated! The fact that this forum has such strict requests and makes it a complete and utter PITA to do simple data posts of graphs and images, makes it a very effective deterrent to actually posting anything other than text - just my two cents, but what the hell do I know? I only do this shit for a living! BTW, if you're reading this, it's not meant AT you just be clear, it's my own opinion and I'd like to hear yours.

---Rant Complete---

[danny@curtean.com]

Arent you just something else here, eh? Good luck with your studio build mate

Well, I get your tone and Ill say this "prove that I'm wrong". Otherwise, thanks. I hope it works out, and it is so far. Any suggestions?

[tez]

This Forum has been hosted for many years, for free.
It might show it's age and be a little kludgy in requirements for posting pix and diagrams etc.
Other forums I visit all have their own idiosyncrasies, and most users have to adapt.
John L Sayers is not a major company or corporation and there's no corporate sponsorship to fund a new BBS system.
I don't have stats, but believe there's been a decline in studios over the years.
After looking at other Forums, I think this one provides more consistent "project" help, others might deal with issue by issue, sometimes from Pros, mostly by "enthusiasts"
There is pretty well only one resident acoustic design professional on the board regularly to provide "guidance" and "analysis" of the many members needing help.
This does depend on the amount of time he has available to spare from his Professional Work.
I may not agree with with the methods used, whereby general hints are provided, but not detailed specifics, and then later criticism if the hints weren't developed properly. This can be an expensive way of doing a build.. eg I've seen wrong glazing criticised, but no prior specification given, but that info could have been found in earlier posts.
It's a bit like saying run round the bend, then you trip over a hurdle, only to be picked up and roasted for not anticipating the hurdle. But, it's free.
I'm personally not happy that answers to a thread I started just stopped, and even several PMs got zero response. He must have decided he could help no more, or that I was a lost cause, or there were bigger and better topics to deal with. Such is life on the free-way BBS.
The easiest way to overcome your issues is to employ a designer, as I did.
I've likely spent as many hours as you on research, scale drawings, computations etc.
That didn't make me an expert, just still an amateur, not a Professional.. Refer your Web quote.
I've been an Audio Mixer in TV for 45 years, but that doesn't qualify me to design acoustic rooms.
Your own website quote re A Professional definition is a bit of a revelation...

If you want the best results , and often a good designer can save money by only specifiying just what is needed, I consider employing one a worthwhile investment.

Lastly, I note you refrain from aggressive chat on your own Website blogs to your clients.



[quote]
WHAT IS A PROFESSIONAL?

And so, we can start our discussion with the relative definition of what a professional is. A professional is an individual who makes their craft their profession. A profession is a full time job under which the involved parties make a living under. Therefore a professional, by definition is an individual who has an occupation full time within their profession. One cannot profess that their part time occupation is an fully engaged occupation, as a professional, when they have a different career which sustains them. A mechanic which works in a garage an average of 40 hours a week is defined as a professional mechanic. If that same individual were to not work the 40 weekly hours as a mechanic, but rather as a desk clerk while doing mechanic work on the side, they would not in turn be a professional mechanic, but rather a professional office clerk. Although they would still be given the title of mechanic, it is as an amateur and not as a professional - make sense?

DON'T LEAVE YOUR DAY JOB - GOOD ADVICE, THAT SAYS VOLUMES!

So then based on this foundation lets make it clear what a professional photographer is and what an amateur is. I don't care how good you are with a camera, if you do not do it full time, as a profession you are not a professional - you're an amateur. So please, stop this nonsense of telling everyone and their dog that you're a "professional photographer" - its a lie! And Im sick of hearing Joe Blow with his little T2i saying he's a "professional photographer". Dude, you wouldn't be using a consumer grade camera with a kit lens if you were! Stop it!

I can say I am a professional photographer, because this is my profession and it is what I do full time. The title of "professional" does not make me any better than anyone else by itself, and in itself is a useless title, however it defines something very clearly - If I'm still in business, it means I'm good at what I do and people are willing to pay for my work. The amateurs out there may get paid work, and they should, but the fact that they do not commit full time to this profession tells a story as well - they're probably not good enough to survive in business if they crossed over. What does that say about the quality of their work, the confidence in their own product? Would any of their photographs be good enough for a serious publication like Time, Life or National Geographic? Most probably not! Because if they were, a profession in this field would follow quite quickly.



[quote]

[danny@curtean.com]

This Forum has been hosted for many years, for free.
It might show it's age and be a little kludgy in requirements for posting pix and diagrams etc.
Other forums I visit all have their own idiosyncrasies, and most users have to adapt.
John L Sayers is not a major company or corporation and there's no corporate sponsorship to fund a new BBS system.
I don't have stats, but believe there's been a decline in studios over the years.
After looking at other Forums, I think this one provides more consistent "project" help, others might deal with issue by issue, sometimes from Pros, mostly by "enthusiasts"
There is pretty well only one resident acoustic design professional on the board regularly to provide "guidance" and "analysis" of the many members needing help.
This does depend on the amount of time he has available to spare from his Professional Work.
I may not agree with with the methods used, whereby general hints are provided, but not detailed specifics, and then later criticism if the hints weren't developed properly. This can be an expensive way of doing a build.. eg I've seen wrong glazing criticised, but no prior specification given, but that info could have been found in earlier posts.
It's a bit like saying run round the bend, then you trip over a hurdle, only to be picked up and roasted for not anticipating the hurdle. But, it's free.
I'm personally not happy that answers to a thread I started just stopped, and even several PMs got zero response. He must have decided he could help no more, or that I was a lost cause, or there were bigger and better topics to deal with. Such is life on the free-way BBS.
The easiest way to overcome your issues is to employ a designer, as I did.
I've likely spent as many hours as you on research, scale drawings, computations etc.
That didn't make me an expert, just still an amateur, not a Professional.. Refer your Web quote.
I've been an Audio Mixer in TV for 45 years, but that doesn't qualify me to design acoustic rooms.
Your own website quote re A Professional definition is a bit of a revelation...

If you want the best results , and often a good designer can save money by only specifiying just what is needed, I consider employing one a worthwhile investment.

Lastly, I note you refrain from aggressive chat on your own Website blogs to your clients.

WHAT IS A PROFESSIONAL?

And so, we can start our discussion with the relative definition of what a professional is. A professional is an individual who makes their craft their profession. A profession is a full time job under which the involved parties make a living under. Therefore a professional, by definition is an individual who has an occupation full time within their profession. One cannot profess that their part time occupation is an fully engaged occupation, as a professional, when they have a different career which sustains them. A mechanic which works in a garage an average of 40 hours a week is defined as a professional mechanic. If that same individual were to not work the 40 weekly hours as a mechanic, but rather as a desk clerk while doing mechanic work on the side, they would not in turn be a professional mechanic, but rather a professional office clerk. Although they would still be given the title of mechanic, it is as an amateur and not as a professional - make sense?

DON'T LEAVE YOUR DAY JOB - GOOD ADVICE, THAT SAYS VOLUMES!

So then based on this foundation lets make it clear what a professional photographer is and what an amateur is. I don't care how good you are with a camera, if you do not do it full time, as a profession you are not a professional - you're an amateur. So please, stop this nonsense of telling everyone and their dog that you're a "professional photographer" - its a lie! And Im sick of hearing Joe Blow with his little T2i saying he's a "professional photographer". Dude, you wouldn't be using a consumer grade camera with a kit lens if you were! Stop it!

I can say I am a professional photographer, because this is my profession and it is what I do full time. The title of "professional" does not make me any better than anyone else by itself, and in itself is a useless title, however it defines something very clearly - If I'm still in business, it means I'm good at what I do and people are willing to pay for my work. The amateurs out there may get paid work, and they should, but the fact that they do not commit full time to this profession tells a story as well - they're probably not good enough to survive in business if they crossed over. What does that say about the quality of their work, the confidence in their own product? Would any of their photographs be good enough for a serious publication like Time, Life or National Geographic? Most probably not! Because if they were, a profession in this field would follow quite quickly.

Wow, I must say that I am impressed! You're right, about everything!