HSU Research Forum (HRF)  

Go Back   HSU Research Forum (HRF) > Hsu Central > Hsu Research - Setup and Placement Recommendations
Become a member Forum Help Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 27th, 2018, 1:27 PM
rbpeirce rbpeirce is offline
Registered User
 
Member Since: Jan 2013
Posts: 38
rbpeirce is on a distinguished road
HB-1 placement

Years ago when I bought these speakers I followed your 1:1.26:1.60 placement recommendation, except I used the woofer height, 33.5", as the short dimension and set them 53.5" from the back wall and 44" from the side wall.

Now, I am re-arranging my room and got to wondering whether there might be some reason why you suggested the other setting. Is there something that makes it better?

On a related issue, when I designed my listening room (25 years ago!) I used a ratio of 1.62 all the way around, having read somewhere that this would greatly reduce room peaks and nulls. I turns out I have a sharp dip around 32hz but the room is otherwise pretty flat. Therefore, I wonder if you know how 1:1.62:2.62 would compare to 1:1.26:1.60, and in either case, whether speaker height would be best at any one of the three ratios?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old September 28th, 2018, 11:11 AM
Dr_Hsu Dr_Hsu is offline
Administrator
 
Member Since: Mar 2003
Posts: 798
Dr_Hsu is on a distinguished road
The idea of 1:1.26: 1.6 ration is to distribute the room modes 1/3 octave apart - the 1.26 dimension will have a standing wave 1/3 octave lower than the 1 dimension, and the 1.6 would be 2/3 octave lower. This distributes the peaks and dips more evenly.

The same argument applies for spacing the speaker from the nearest walls. The floor bounce, side and back wall bounce dips will be more evenly distributed.

My more recent suggestion of 1:2:4 ratio aims at the boundary bounces to cancel. At the frequency where the shortest distance cause a dip, the bounce from the 2 will cause a peak at that same frequency, thereby nulling out (one cancels, the other reinforces). The dip from the 2 is nulled out by the bounce from the 4. Then by arranging the dip for the 4 to be below the crossover, we will have no dip whatsoever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rbpeirce View Post
Years ago when I bought these speakers I followed your 1:1.26:1.60 placement recommendation, except I used the woofer height, 33.5", as the short dimension and set them 53.5" from the back wall and 44" from the side wall.

Now, I am re-arranging my room and got to wondering whether there might be some reason why you suggested the other setting. Is there something that makes it better?

On a related issue, when I designed my listening room (25 years ago!) I used a ratio of 1.62 all the way around, having read somewhere that this would greatly reduce room peaks and nulls. I turns out I have a sharp dip around 32hz but the room is otherwise pretty flat. Therefore, I wonder if you know how 1:1.62:2.62 would compare to 1:1.26:1.60, and in either case, whether speaker height would be best at any one of the three ratios?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old September 28th, 2018, 11:11 AM
Dr_Hsu Dr_Hsu is offline
Administrator
 
Member Since: Mar 2003
Posts: 798
Dr_Hsu is on a distinguished road
The idea of 1:1.26: 1.6 ration is to distribute the room modes 1/3 octave apart - the 1.26 dimension will have a standing wave 1/3 octave lower than the 1 dimension, and the 1.6 would be 2/3 octave lower. This distributes the peaks and dips more evenly.

The same argument applies for spacing the speaker from the nearest walls. The floor bounce, side and back wall bounce dips will be more evenly distributed.

My more recent suggestion of 1:2:4 ratio aims at the boundary bounces to cancel. At the frequency where the shortest distance cause a dip, the bounce from the 2 will cause a peak at that same frequency, thereby nulling out (one cancels, the other reinforces). The dip from the 2 is nulled out by the bounce from the 4. Then by arranging the dip for the 4 to be below the crossover, we will have no dip whatsoever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rbpeirce View Post
Years ago when I bought these speakers I followed your 1:1.26:1.60 placement recommendation, except I used the woofer height, 33.5", as the short dimension and set them 53.5" from the back wall and 44" from the side wall.

Now, I am re-arranging my room and got to wondering whether there might be some reason why you suggested the other setting. Is there something that makes it better?

On a related issue, when I designed my listening room (25 years ago!) I used a ratio of 1.62 all the way around, having read somewhere that this would greatly reduce room peaks and nulls. I turns out I have a sharp dip around 32hz but the room is otherwise pretty flat. Therefore, I wonder if you know how 1:1.62:2.62 would compare to 1:1.26:1.60, and in either case, whether speaker height would be best at any one of the three ratios?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old September 29th, 2018, 7:16 AM
rbpeirce rbpeirce is offline
Registered User
 
Member Since: Jan 2013
Posts: 38
rbpeirce is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr_Hsu View Post
The idea of 1:1.26: 1.6 ration is to distribute the room modes 1/3 octave apart - the 1.26 dimension will have a standing wave 1/3 octave lower than the 1 dimension, and the 1.6 would be 2/3 octave lower. This distributes the peaks and dips more evenly.
OK. But what about which part of the ratio is the speaker height? Does it matter whether it is the short distance or the long or even the middle? I'm about to apply some room correction software and it would be a lot easier if the speakers were in the best spots. I've assumed it doesn't matter, but I don't know.

I'm also still wondering about the applicability of the 1:1.62:2.62 ratio for the same reason.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old September 29th, 2018, 8:24 PM
Dr_Hsu Dr_Hsu is offline
Administrator
 
Member Since: Mar 2003
Posts: 798
Dr_Hsu is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbpeirce View Post
OK. But what about which part of the ratio is the speaker height? Does it matter whether it is the short distance or the long or even the middle? I'm about to apply some room correction software and it would be a lot easier if the speakers were in the best spots. I've assumed it doesn't matter, but I don't know.

I'm also still wondering about the applicability of the 1:1.62:2.62 ratio for the same reason.
It does not matter. It just needs the distances to the three nearest surfaces to be in that ratio.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old September 30th, 2018, 8:07 AM
rbpeirce rbpeirce is offline
Registered User
 
Member Since: Jan 2013
Posts: 38
rbpeirce is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr_Hsu View Post
It does not matter. It just needs the distances to the three nearest surfaces to be in that ratio.
Thank you.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old Yesterday, 6:37 AM
rbpeirce rbpeirce is offline
Registered User
 
Member Since: Jan 2013
Posts: 38
rbpeirce is on a distinguished road
I was able to run a room response curve on the recommended setup. My room has no acoustic treatment, so the frequency response is a bit uncontrolled. Nevertheless, the total range was only(?) 23 db. The signal from 40Hz to close to 2kHz is in a 15db band, but then it flattens out at a lower level (about 7db) but only a 6db band to about 15kHz, kind of like a shelf.

Off the top of my head it looks like I can lower the gain in the ULS-15s a few db but there is a peak at 200Hz I have to figure out how to control. Cross-over is at 80Hz so this is probably some room reflection coming from the HB-1s. However, it is sharp enough I may be able to ignore it.
Attached Images
  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump
 


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 3:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Forum Rules The Golden Rule: Treat others as you would want to be treated.

Technical Support: The best way to get tech support for serious issues is to call or email us. Questions asked on the forum may not be answered by qualified professionals.

No "Flaming": Spiteful talk and flaming wars will lead to "time-outs" for parties involved.

Shootouts: Shootouts are comparisons between products. We need to know about shootouts before allowing them on the forum, so call us and talk to the director of Sales before posting. Otherwise, your shootout may be removed.

Add to Reputation: Once you are a registered member, you can click this icon to add to the tally of other members' Rep Points. You must vote for seven other people before you can vote for the same person twice.

Report Bad Posts: Once you register, click this icon to let Administrators know if they should review a post. Please be specific as to why action might be needed.

HSU RESEARCH IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR COMMENTS MADE BY THIRD PARTY INDIVIDUALS ON THIS FORUM.

Thanks for reading the rules. Have a good time :)

In Association With