Foam for at-home?

[Monsoon1]

And everyone should realize that he's talking about tracking fingerstyle guitar. Corner treatment will be of little concern here.

[Brent Hahn]

Originally Posted by Monsoon1

And everyone should realize that he's talking about tracking fingerstyle guitar. Corner treatment will be of little concern here.

For the playing, sure. But he's monitoring and mixing in that room, too.

[Monsoon1]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

For the playing, sure. But he's monitoring and mixing in that room, too.

We're talking about an acoustic recording, so i'd imagine the playback levels won't be typical recording studio volumes. So the foam corner traps will be enough.
Even if he has some minor corner issues occurring during playback, he can double check them with headphones.

[rick-slo]

Originally Posted by Monsoon1

We're talking about an acoustic recording, so i'd imagine the playback levels won't be typical recording studio volumes. So the foam corner traps will be enough.
Even if he has some minor corner issues occurring during playback, he can double check them with headphones.

Post one or more of your acoustic guitar recordings. Also a picture of your recording space setup would be nice.

[Monsoon1]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

Post one or more of your acoustic guitar recordings. Also a picture of your recording space setup would be nice.

lol, a challenge for something this simple?
i've been reading about audio for 40 years. I was an amateur speaker builder for close to 30 of those years where I read quite a few issues of Speaker Builder magazine, and I understand acoustics better than a good chunk of today's designers. I also know the math inside and out.
There is a formula that involves the speed of sound that can tell you the exact wavelength at any frequency right down to the single hertz. Using that information, you can optimize any space, anywhere.
For instance at the lowest frequencies, an acoustic guitar outputs a wavelength in excess of 4'. Now if you take a dreadnought which is 18" at it's widest point, you have a good bit more than half of the sound wrapping around the guitar and heading towards the rear wall where it bounces back. If this sound returns to the mic too soon, it will muddy the sound. This is why you never want to sit too close to the wall. The same applies to any output, whether it be a guitar amp, an acoustic guitar, or monitors.
edit* this is also why in a live end dead end recording solution, you have the foam panels behind you, because that's where the sound is going to be bouncing back from, and you want to absorb as much of that as you can.

[Brent Hahn]

Originally Posted by Monsoon1

lol, a challenge for something this simple?

Are you sure he meant you?

... at the lowest frequencies, an acoustic guitar outputs a wavelength in excess of 4'.

The lowest note of the fattest string, sure. Thump the top with your thumb and you go quite a bit lower. Aggressively strum a guitar and the thump component is significant. It's a stringed instrument, but it's also a drum.

[rick-slo]

Originally Posted by Monsoon1

lol, a challenge for something this simple?
i've been reading about audio for 40 years. I was an amateur speaker builder for close to 30 of those years where I read quite a few issues of Speaker Builder magazine, and I understand acoustics better than a good chunk of today's designers. I also know the math inside and out.
There is a formula that involves the speed of sound that can tell you the exact wavelength at any frequency right down to the single hertz. Using that information, you can optimize any space, anywhere.
For instance at the lowest frequencies, an acoustic guitar outputs a wavelength in excess of 4'. Now if you take a dreadnought which is 18" at it's widest point, you have a good bit more than half of the sound wrapping around the guitar and heading towards the rear wall where it bounces back. If this sound returns to the mic too soon, it will muddy the sound. This is why you never want to sit too close to the wall. The same applies to any output, whether it be a guitar amp, an acoustic guitar, or monitors.
edit* this is also why in a live end dead end recording solution, you have the foam panels behind you, because that's where the sound is going to be bouncing back from, and you want to absorb as much of that as you can.

Just what I thought.


Also I will add that the sound radiating from the guitar top does not diffract around the guitar itself (even the lowest frequencies), i.e. essentially go in reverse, and radiate backwards. The sound waves propagate forward. When they encounter a wall that which is not absorbed by the wall is reflected back. If the sound waves emitted from the guitar encounters an opening such
as a door some of the sound waves can then be diffracted around the edges of the opening (more so with longer wavelengths).

[rick-slo]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

Are you sure he meant you?



The lowest note of the fattest string, sure. Thump the top with your thumb and you go quite a bit lower. Aggressively strum a guitar and the thump component is significant. It's a stringed instrument, but it's also a drum.

A typical frequency spectrum of an acoustic guitar captured by a microphone. There are more higher and lower frequency energy amounts than you might expect.

[runamuck]

Originally Posted by Monsoon1

lol, a challenge for something this simple?
i've been reading about audio for 40 years.

Respectfully, I think Rick's request is reasonable. You may be extremely skilled with all things audio or you may have been making the same mistakes for 40 years and have no sensitivity to the subtleties of sound.

I'm not saying you're one of them at all, but there are plenty who talk a big game but when we hear what they're actually able to produce, there's been no connection.

[Monsoon1]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

Just what I thought.

ah, so you've realized that your challenge was in vein.
got it.

[Monsoon1]

Originally Posted by runamuck

Respectfully, I think Rick's request is reasonable. You may be extremely skilled with all things audio or you may have been making the same mistakes for 40 years and have no sensitivity to the subtleties of sound.

I'm not saying you're one of them at all, but there are plenty who talk a big game but when we hear what they're actually able to produce, there's been no connection.

it's like asking a top fuel driver to show you his garage to prove he knows how to drive.
it's called a non sequitur.

[rick-slo]

All hat and no cattle on the topic recording an acoustic guitar apparently.

[Monsoon1]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

Are you sure he meant you?



The lowest note of the fattest string, sure. Thump the top with your thumb and you go quite a bit lower. Aggressively strum a guitar and the thump component is significant. It's a stringed instrument, but it's also a drum.

the wavelength changes with every difference of a single hertz, so yes the lower frequencies are progressively larger in wavelength than the higher frequencies.
Basically everything below 700hz is going to have some of the frequency reflecting rearward. And all of this rearward reflecting sound is capable of muddying the recording.

[runamuck]

Originally Posted by Monsoon1

it's like asking a top fuel driver to show you his garage to prove he knows how to drive.
it's called a non sequitur.

No it's not because we've never seen you drive. Rick asked you to show how you drive(using your metaphor).

[Monsoon1]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

All hat and no cattle on the topic recording an acoustic guitar apparently.

you haven't made a single point that is any sort of rebuttal for what i've said.
maybe you could pick someone else to troll today?
because in the world of audio acoustics, I OWN this.