正在瀏覽這個版面的使用者: 沒有註冊會員 和 19 位訪客
Raymond Wan 寫:
Please feel free to take any photos or data that I have posted here.
I do not mind you sending to other Forum and asking for information.
If you can find any useful information, please do share with us.
minime 寫:Raymond Wan 寫:
Please feel free to take any photos or data that I have posted here.
I do not mind you sending to other Forum and asking for information.
If you can find any useful information, please do share with us.
Thanks.
Here you go: Realtrap placement question
Please feel free to chime in for more info.
學到一點就是 Ethan 的realtraps 與一般的panel trap 設計原理略有差異.
因此建議的設置方式是離牆或角落一小段距離(10-30cm都OK), 讓兩邊都能有氣流通過,
更有效發揮吸音的功能.
因此他不建議前後堆疊. 而是分散佈置到各牆角.
Raymond Wan 寫:
minime: 學到一點就是 Ethan 的realtraps 與一般的panel trap 設計原理略有差異.
這是己知 --> 因用的物料不同,所以我才有興趣嘗試,只是你說 RealTraps 是"壓力型"
minime: 因此建議的設置方式是離牆或角落一小段距離(10-30cm都OK), 讓兩邊都能有氣流通過,更有效發揮吸音的功能.
這也是在 RealTraps 網的建議離牆 3" 以上,我也提及,我也是這樣作測試及比較,只是你相反地說離牆效能會更差
小弟並未提及離牆距離實際值, 僅估計它們不宜離太遠. 3-4"是可理解,不過達到30cm則非預期.
因為以典型的tuned panel trap (我所謂的"壓力型"設計), 離牆愈遠 LF absorption 效果愈低.
Realtraps 自有其設計上獨到處, 至於是否為您所謂
"It is just a panel with Tailor-Made High Density Fibre of 3.25" (MiniTraps) or 4.25" (MondoTraps) thick
"
就不知道了.
如果是如此, 這與一般的rigid fiberglass board 有何不同?
不建議堆疊的用法, 與一般的rigid fiberglass board 作用並不同.
minime: 因此他不建議前後堆疊. 而是分散佈置到各牆角
請注意,及翻閱我所測試的十分多的不同組合,已是有分佈在各牆角,且有分佈在各牆邊,我只是在買入 BareTraps 後,在歸還 MondoTraps 及 MiniTraps 前,作終極一試,用未試過的前後堆疊法,目的是希望增大 RealTraps 作為 Corner Bass Traps 效能,但事實也發現是無效!且現實在香港的環境狹窄居室中,前後堆疊法根本不可行,有地方建做 Bass Trap 在牆角更有效,前後堆疊只是為測試而測試而已,不用太執着!
Based on Realtrap Q&A,A: With enough traps it's possible to make a substantial improvement at 40 Hz and even lower. Although each trap may not absorb 100 percent at very low frequencies, combined they will still help a lot. Obviously the goal is a flat response and reduced ringing at all frequencies. But flatness is much more important above 80 Hz, which encompasses the fullness and "speaking" ranges for bass instruments.
您的想法:From above, it is clear that RealTraps also recommends to use Combined Arrangements to Increase the Absorption Power
前後堆疊的想法應該與一般的velocity absorbers (例如rigid fiberglass board)
的使用觀念一致.
據稱 Realtraps 的設計是屬hybrid design, 多方實驗以找出最佳效果, 確也是
用家用心之處.
不過以您空間中的各角落空間來看, 放在門邊的這一個位置推測大概是效果最差的.
因為有門, 低頻反射量甚低, 在此處放置bass trap 效益必然低, 這是很明顯的道理.
所以我一開始就問是否能在此測試增加Realtraps only 的數值, 以利圖表結果重疊比較.
不過實驗能做到怎樣的程度, 也是隨人喜歡. 小弟只是提出以為參考, 實際上可不可行, 就留待您自行決定.
事實是,用在我家,經合理比較及測試後,作為調音及低頻處理
全用 DAAD 調音柱,效果最佳
全用 RealTraps 調音板,效果不及 DAAD 調音柱
用 DAAD 調音柱加 RealTraps 調音板,效果亦不及只用 DAAD 調音柱
我的最終決定,只用回原來的 DAAD 調音柱組合
但亦另新買入 4 塊 RealTraps BareTraps 作第一反射點吸音 (因效果較 DAAD2 為好)
達到以上決定及選擇,是花心思,花時間,花氣力,花精神,花金錢的真正實踐及親身經驗
並非只用網上搜尋器找資料而來的,未試過 RealTraps,根本不知它是用在我家是無效的
網上資料只是可用作參考,不宜盡信,細心分析後才作引證則較為明智,不要段章取義
從這些realtraps的吸音數值表現:
除Mondotraps 在100Hz表現稍好, 基本上觀察這圖表就能判斷, 若要達到100Hz以下夠大的LF absorption,
必須數量夠多(尤其是Mondotrap), 覆蓋愈多角落愈佳.
以數量不足的mondotrap, 加上LF absorption 多在100Hz 以上的其它 Realtraps,
來判斷其低頻吸收功能, 應該要focus在100Hz以上的低-中低頻部份.
個人相信此與ethan 設計它們為broadband LF absorbers, instead of tuned panel traps
的設計走向所做的取捨有關.
因tuned bass traps 相對窄頻的設計, 才能在100Hz以下有較明顯的效果.
您所稱"用在我家,經合理比較及測試後,作為調音及低頻處理全用 DAAD 調音柱,效果最佳",
只能說是在此空間, 如此的設置方式在低頻的表現上較符合您個人的期待.
至於比較條件與設置方式是否公平完善, 足以判斷Realtraps 的實效, 是令人存疑的.
最後再次多謝 Eddie 兄慷慨借出 RealTraps 我嘗試
為答謝他的好意,故也花了很多時間詳細列出大部份測試内容及結果
供大家參考,並分享我的個人體驗
minime 寫: Hey man, I beat you to it
How are your subs going?
jjj 寫: Me not expert but I think the extra Real Traps did not show improvement in Raymond hing's house (although still can affect imaging on real life listening) may due to ;
1)Real traps placed on opening area(door)
--Try on front/rear right corners(enclosed area) maybe(may not) better
--I feel with existing Raymond DAADs placements, only hang all extra Real Traps on ceilings(scatter around with 45degree to corners) then able to see better improvement.
--Consumer bass traps did not design to trap low low frequency + most rooms are not big enough
2)DAADs already done a nice job
--Bring all DAADs out of the room and replace by Real Traps then can compare the both .
Through my little experience, only scatter bass traps all around the corners(including ceiling) then will see good results .
Raymond hing may also want to just open 1 of the doors slightly(to leak out some bass) and measure(just try for fun ).
I am just passing by , please do not shoot me , I beat myself first
(Note: I did not use any of Raymond hing's bass traps product and those EQ software before :sorry)
luckybeanbean 寫:minime 寫: Hey man, I beat you to it
How are your subs going?
looks like you already knew jjj
minime 寫:
您所稱"用在我家,經合理比較及測試後,作為調音及低頻處理全用 DAAD 調音柱,效果最佳",
只能說是在此空間, 如此的設置方式在低頻的表現上較符合您個人的期待.
至於比較條件與設置方式是否公平完善, 足以判斷Realtraps 的實效, 是令人存疑的.
Raymond Wan 寫:minime 寫:
您所稱"用在我家,經合理比較及測試後,作為調音及低頻處理全用 DAAD 調音柱,效果最佳",
只能說是在此空間, 如此的設置方式在低頻的表現上較符合您個人的期待.
至於比較條件與設置方式是否公平完善, 足以判斷Realtraps 的實效, 是令人存疑的.
Please note, I have just limited availability of the RealTraps Products and DAADs Production.
Namely:
RealTraps MondoTraps x 2
RealTraps MiniTraps x 2
RealTraps BareTraps x 4
DAAD3 x 4
DAAD2 x 5
I do not have unlimited supply of RealTraps products.
From reality point of view, what I can do is just based on those products available on hand to do the test in my little home.
Please also be advised that I have not said RealTraps is not useful at all.
Please read my past post, I have just pointed out that RealTraps is not working at my home.
In particular, I have pointed out that RealTraps may work on other brothers home using same model and same quantities of RealTraps with the suggestion of asking they to consider and try them out by their own.
My intention of the exercise is doing for myself to find possible enhancement.
The posting of the data and results are purely for sharing purposes for consideration by others.
I do not have any intention to PROVE or REJECT the general effectiveness of RealTraps products.
I believe this is the task of the agent of RealTraps as a manufacturer.
For acoustic treatment & products, there are so many combinations as well as so many variation in the actual environment they are going to be placed and tested.
No one get the actual results based on the simple test data and graphs from RealTraps.
At least, I cannot find the frequency improvement at my home related to the claimed results from RealTraps.
The test data of RealTraps is true data but just cannot repeated at my home only.
Sound Acoustic is a science as well as art, you may or may not able to predict its patterns.
Real Tests are the only way to show the Real Performance at your Own Home.
minime 寫: Hey man, I beat you to it
How are your subs going?
luckybeanbean 寫:minime 寫: Hey man, I beat you to it
How are your subs going?
looks like you already knew jjj
Raymond Wan 寫:jjj 寫: Me not expert but I think the extra Real Traps did not show improvement in Raymond hing's house (although still can affect imaging on real life listening) may due to ;
1)Real traps placed on opening area(door)
--Try on front/rear right corners(enclosed area) maybe(may not) better
--I feel with existing Raymond DAADs placements, only hang all extra Real Traps on ceilings(scatter around with 45degree to corners) then able to see better improvement.
--Consumer bass traps did not design to trap low low frequency + most rooms are not big enough
2)DAADs already done a nice job
--Bring all DAADs out of the room and replace by Real Traps then can compare the both .
Through my little experience, only scatter bass traps all around the corners(including ceiling) then will see good results .
Raymond hing may also want to just open 1 of the doors slightly(to leak out some bass) and measure(just try for fun ).
I am just passing by , please do not shoot me , I beat myself first
(Note: I did not use any of Raymond hing's bass traps product and those EQ software before :sorry)
Hi Jason
Long time no see ! How's your AV life in Singapore ?
I am not just testing at the door/wall corner. But also at wall/wall corners at the front left and right.
If you have time to review all my tests on RealTraps, I did nearly all the possible combinations of using RealTraps and DAAD individually and together on both corners and walls.
試用 RealTraps 產品 --> viewtopic.php?f=7&t=155185
RealTraps 吸音板和 DAAD 調音柱測試 --> viewtopic.php?f=7&t=155928
再試 RealTraps 用作牆角 Bass Trap 低頻陷阱 --> viewtopic.php?f=7&t=157529
In all case, the findings are
(1) DAAD is slightly better than RealTraps in my home
(2) Adding additional RealTraps will not achieve improvements
(3) Use RealTraps at first reflection point at the side walls is better than present DAAD2
(4) Use RealTraps placed along the walls at scattered locations will improve the RT60 slightly
The aim of trying the RealTraps is to find possible improvement on dealing better control on the bass frequency to flatten a little bit as well as handle the existing room mode of 26Hz.
However, I cannot achieve the goal from the various tests.
Anyway, I finally find a useful adoption of RealTraps is to use in the first reflection points.
Hence, I end up with the purchase of 4 units of RealTraps BareTraps.
Hope the above can give you full picture of my past tests and some basic findings leading to the conclusion and adoption of RealTraps and DAADs for my own home environment based on the present acoustic conditions.