SC-04-08 Richard Cabot posted an update in the group SC-04-08 2 months ago No folders found. Please create and select folder. Documents Folder Title Following special characters are not supported: \ / ? % * : | " < > Privacy Public All Members My Connections Only Me Cancel Create 000440.html 6 KB HTML - Click to view Options Copy Download Link [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting pre { white-space: pre-wrap; /* css-2.1, curent FF, Opera, Safari */ } [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Peter Mapp peter at petermapp.com Tue Dec 19 11:19:40 EST 2017 Previous message: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Next message: [SC-04-08] Document uploads & Background noise Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] It was agreed at the New York meeting that we would leave anything to do with frequency / spectral response assessment/measurement (and hence EQ) until after InfoComm have revised their document (I have yet to find anyone who thought it was any use). However, if you want to start working on an AES version that is more sophisticated Glenn - then I have no objection. Indeed the bare bones of what you think is needed would be good to have at the ready. So, as previously agreed Charlie. Cheers Peter -----Original Message----- From: SC-04-08 [mailto:sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org] On Behalf Of Charlie Hughes via SC-04-08 Sent: 19 December 2017 14:12 To: Vessa, Brian; Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms; Glenn Leembruggen AD; Peter Mapp Subject: Re: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting The InfoComm draft standard that was reviewed by some was a preliminary draft. Based on the comments from many reviewers, it has been changed substantially. It is still undergoing revision. I suggest that SC-04-08 not spend time or energy worrying about that particular document until the finished draft it is ready for review or has been published. Best regards, Charlie Hughes Excelsior Audio Gastonia, NC +1 704.675.5435 (tel) +1 704.678.6570 (mobile) www.excelsior-audio.com -----Original Message----- From: SC-04-08 [mailto:sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org] On Behalf Of Vessa, Brian via SC-04-08 Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 8:43 AM To: Glenn Leembruggen AD; Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms; 'Peter Mapp' Subject: Re: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Hi all, I agree with Glenn, I reviewed that document also. Cheers, Brian From: SC-04-08 <sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org> on behalf of Glenn Leembruggen AD via SC-04-08 <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> Reply-To: "Glenn at acousticdirections.com" <Glenn at acousticdirections.com>, Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> Date: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 at 4:57 AM To: "peter at petermapp.com" <peter at petermapp.com>, 'Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms' <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> Subject: Re: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Hi All I meant to post this a few weeks ago, but forgot. There was some discussion in about using the InfoComm standard for equalisation for parts of our standard. I was asked by InfoComm to review that document and I concluded it wasn't sufficiently sophisticated to represent a new stake in the ground that represented good progress in the art. It is essentially for field technicians to use. But we are engineers with a whole lot more knowledge and I believe our document should be commensurate with that knowledge. I therefore don't recommend that we use it. Cheers Glenn Glenn Leembruggen Acoustic Directions Pty Ltd Consultants in acoustics and electroacoustics tel: +612 9810 7033 mob: +61 418 207 085 _______________________________________________ SC-04-08 mailing list SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org <http://standards.aes.org/sc.cfm?ID=91> Previous message: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Next message: [SC-04-08] Document uploads & Background noise Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] More information about the SC-04-08 mailing list Expand 000441.html 5 KB HTML - Click to view Options Copy Download Link [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation pre { white-space: pre-wrap; /* css-2.1, curent FF, Opera, Safari */ } [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Peter Mapp peter at petermapp.com Tue Dec 19 11:35:05 EST 2017 Previous message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Next message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] T30 is effectively the same as T60 - just potentially easier to measure. So same equations. In practice, T20 can be a little different depending on the source directivity & diffuseness of the space but should give similar results. I have measured true T60 in some large and v quiet spaces (Cathedrals). pm -----Original Message----- From: SC-04-08 [mailto:sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org] On Behalf Of John Woodgate via SC-04-08 Sent: 19 December 2017 10:08 To: Peter Mapp; Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms; F.C.Schafer-Consulting Subject: Re: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation I agree with the extract quoted below. Whether a room is 'large' or 'small' depends on what frequency is being considered. One way to go is to define 'reverberant conditions' , where there is no sound below the Schroeder frequency and ' room mode conditions' where there is sound below the Schroeder frequency. These definitions may not be quite formal enough, bit if accepted in principle they can be 'polished'. I am not quite sure that an actual frequency can be defined, unless it's the Schroeder frequency itself. But that isn't rouble-free, because it uses T60, which Peter tells me is a convenient fiction because no room behaves theoretically down to -60 dB. Can the equation be modified to use T20 or T30, which I understand to be rather better established? John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk Rayleigh, Essex UK On 2017-12-19 09:38, Peter Mapp via SC-04-08 wrote: > I would like to suggest that rather than try to definitively characterize a large vs small room we utilize these two references, to define the lowest frequency that is considered statistically valid for a particular test situation. _______________________________________________ SC-04-08 mailing list SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org <http://standards.aes.org/sc.cfm?ID=91> Previous message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Next message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] More information about the SC-04-08 mailing list Expand 000442.html 6 KB HTML - Click to view Options Copy Download Link [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation pre { white-space: pre-wrap; /* css-2.1, curent FF, Opera, Safari */ } [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Thomas Lagö thomaslagoqirra at gmail.com Tue Dec 19 11:48:53 EST 2017 Previous message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Next message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] Dear All, If it is a “Sabine Room” (diffuse sound field) it is true. If not, it depends how “linear" the RT curve is. A curved curve will change the value. Best regards, Thomas > On 19 Dec 2017, at 17:35, Peter Mapp via SC-04-08 <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> wrote: > > T30 is effectively the same as T60 - just potentially easier to measure. So same equations. In practice, T20 can be a little different depending on the source directivity & diffuseness of the space but should give similar results. I have measured true T60 in some large and v quiet spaces (Cathedrals). > > pm > > -----Original Message----- > From: SC-04-08 [mailto:sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org] On Behalf Of John Woodgate via SC-04-08 > Sent: 19 December 2017 10:08 > To: Peter Mapp; Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms; F.C.Schafer-Consulting > Subject: Re: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation > > I agree with the extract quoted below. Whether a room is 'large' or 'small' depends on what frequency is being considered. One way to go is to define 'reverberant conditions' , where there is no sound below the Schroeder frequency and ' room mode conditions' where there is sound below the Schroeder frequency. These definitions may not be quite formal enough, bit if accepted in principle they can be 'polished'. > > I am not quite sure that an actual frequency can be defined, unless it's the Schroeder frequency itself. But that isn't rouble-free, because it uses T60, which Peter tells me is a convenient fiction because no room behaves theoretically down to -60 dB. Can the equation be modified to use T20 or T30, which I understand to be rather better established? > > John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only > J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk Rayleigh, Essex UK > > On 2017-12-19 09:38, Peter Mapp via SC-04-08 wrote: >> I would like to suggest that rather than try to definitively characterize a large vs small room we utilize these two references, to define the lowest frequency that is considered statistically valid for a particular test situation. > > _______________________________________________ > SC-04-08 mailing list > SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org > <http://standards.aes.org/sc.cfm?ID=91> > > _______________________________________________ > SC-04-08 mailing list > SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org > <http://standards.aes.org/sc.cfm?ID=91> Previous message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Next message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] More information about the SC-04-08 mailing list Expand 000443.html 7 KB HTML - Click to view Options Copy Download Link [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation pre { white-space: pre-wrap; /* css-2.1, curent FF, Opera, Safari */ } [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Floyd Toole soundnwine at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 19 14:18:05 EST 2017 Previous message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] Complicating matters is the fact that the "small" rooms in which we listen for recreation and in which recordings are mixed do not have consequential "diffuse" reverberant sound fields. There is simply too much absorption. The sound arriving at a listener from a normally directional forward-firing loudspeaker is dominantly direct sound at high frequencies, and a combination of direct and a few early reflections through the mid frequencies. This is true also in typical cinemas where the direct sound is dominant above about 600-800 Hz. This is explained, with examples, in the third edition of my book "Sound Reproduction"(Focal Press 2017) and in the cited references. If RT is measured using an omni sound source, the result is an irrelevant number in typical small-room listening situations. If RT is measured using a typically directional loudspeaker, it is not RT in the classic sense- the sound field is not diffuse. The calculated Schroeder frequency is incorrect for typical small rooms - it is too high - because Schroeder described the frequency as being applicable in large auditoriums. I call it a "transition" frequency, for lack of a better term. We need some new metrics: Cumulative energy time? On Tuesday, December 19, 2017 8:49 AM, Thomas Lagö via SC-04-08 <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> wrote: Dear All, If it is a “Sabine Room” (diffuse sound field) it is true. If not, it depends how “linear" the RT curve is. A curved curve will change the value. Best regards, Thomas > On 19 Dec 2017, at 17:35, Peter Mapp via SC-04-08 <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> wrote: > > T30 is effectively the same as T60 - just potentially easier to measure. So same equations. In practice, T20 can be a little different depending on the source directivity & diffuseness of the space but should give similar results. I have measured true T60 in some large and v quiet spaces (Cathedrals). > > pm > > -----Original Message----- > From: SC-04-08 [mailto:sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org] On Behalf Of John Woodgate via SC-04-08 > Sent: 19 December 2017 10:08 > To: Peter Mapp; Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms; F.C.Schafer-Consulting > Subject: Re: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation > > I agree with the extract quoted below. Whether a room is 'large' or 'small' depends on what frequency is being considered. One way to go is to define 'reverberant conditions' , where there is no sound below the Schroeder frequency and ' room mode conditions' where there is sound below the Schroeder frequency. These definitions may not be quite formal enough, bit if accepted in principle they can be 'polished'. > > I am not quite sure that an actual frequency can be defined, unless it's the Schroeder frequency itself. But that isn't rouble-free, because it uses T60, which Peter tells me is a convenient fiction because no room behaves theoretically down to -60 dB. Can the equation be modified to use T20 or T30, which I understand to be rather better established? > > John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only > J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk Rayleigh, Essex UK > > On 2017-12-19 09:38, Peter Mapp via SC-04-08 wrote: >> I would like to suggest that rather than try to definitively characterize a large vs small room we utilize these two references, to define the lowest frequency that is considered statistically valid for a particular test situation. > > _______________________________________________ > SC-04-08 mailing list > SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org > <http://standards.aes.org/sc.cfm?ID=91> > > _______________________________________________ > SC-04-08 mailing list > SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org > <http://standards.aes.org/sc.cfm?ID=91> _______________________________________________ SC-04-08 mailing list SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org <http://standards.aes.org/sc.cfm?ID=91> Previous message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] More information about the SC-04-08 mailing list Expand 000444.html 7 KB HTML - Click to view Options Copy Download Link [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation pre { white-space: pre-wrap; /* css-2.1, curent FF, Opera, Safari */ } [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Floyd Toole soundnwine at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 19 14:18:05 EST 2017 Previous message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Next message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] Complicating matters is the fact that the "small" rooms in which we listen for recreation and in which recordings are mixed do not have consequential "diffuse" reverberant sound fields. There is simply too much absorption. The sound arriving at a listener from a normally directional forward-firing loudspeaker is dominantly direct sound at high frequencies, and a combination of direct and a few early reflections through the mid frequencies. This is true also in typical cinemas where the direct sound is dominant above about 600-800 Hz. This is explained, with examples, in the third edition of my book "Sound Reproduction"(Focal Press 2017) and in the cited references. If RT is measured using an omni sound source, the result is an irrelevant number in typical small-room listening situations. If RT is measured using a typically directional loudspeaker, it is not RT in the classic sense- the sound field is not diffuse. The calculated Schroeder frequency is incorrect for typical small rooms - it is too high - because Schroeder described the frequency as being applicable in large auditoriums. I call it a "transition" frequency, for lack of a better term. We need some new metrics: Cumulative energy time? On Tuesday, December 19, 2017 8:49 AM, Thomas Lagö via SC-04-08 <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> wrote: Dear All, If it is a “Sabine Room” (diffuse sound field) it is true. If not, it depends how “linear" the RT curve is. A curved curve will change the value. Best regards, Thomas > On 19 Dec 2017, at 17:35, Peter Mapp via SC-04-08 <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> wrote: > > T30 is effectively the same as T60 - just potentially easier to measure. So same equations. In practice, T20 can be a little different depending on the source directivity & diffuseness of the space but should give similar results. I have measured true T60 in some large and v quiet spaces (Cathedrals). > > pm > > -----Original Message----- > From: SC-04-08 [mailto:sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org] On Behalf Of John Woodgate via SC-04-08 > Sent: 19 December 2017 10:08 > To: Peter Mapp; Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms; F.C.Schafer-Consulting > Subject: Re: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation > > I agree with the extract quoted below. Whether a room is 'large' or 'small' depends on what frequency is being considered. One way to go is to define 'reverberant conditions' , where there is no sound below the Schroeder frequency and ' room mode conditions' where there is sound below the Schroeder frequency. These definitions may not be quite formal enough, bit if accepted in principle they can be 'polished'. > > I am not quite sure that an actual frequency can be defined, unless it's the Schroeder frequency itself. But that isn't rouble-free, because it uses T60, which Peter tells me is a convenient fiction because no room behaves theoretically down to -60 dB. Can the equation be modified to use T20 or T30, which I understand to be rather better established? > > John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only > J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk Rayleigh, Essex UK > > On 2017-12-19 09:38, Peter Mapp via SC-04-08 wrote: >> I would like to suggest that rather than try to definitively characterize a large vs small room we utilize these two references, to define the lowest frequency that is considered statistically valid for a particular test situation. > > _______________________________________________ > SC-04-08 mailing list > SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org > <http://standards.aes.org/sc.cfm?ID=91> > > _______________________________________________ > SC-04-08 mailing list > SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org > <http://standards.aes.org/sc.cfm?ID=91> _______________________________________________ SC-04-08 mailing list SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org <http://standards.aes.org/sc.cfm?ID=91> Previous message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Next message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] More information about the SC-04-08 mailing list Expand 000445.html 9 KB HTML - Click to view Options Copy Download Link [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation pre { white-space: pre-wrap; /* css-2.1, curent FF, Opera, Safari */ } [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation John Woodgate jmw at woodjohn.uk Tue Dec 19 14:28:09 EST 2017 Previous message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Next message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] Hi, Floyd. Re: We need some new metrics: Cumulative energy time? I'd agree, if I knew what it meant. It's just a bit too terse for me. I think of summoning my resources from 7 AM onwards so that I can actually get out of bed at 7.30. CET = 30 min. John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk Rayleigh, Essex UK On 2017-12-19 19:18, Floyd Toole wrote: > Complicating matters is the fact that the "small" rooms in which we > listen for recreation and in which recordings are mixed do not have > consequential "diffuse" reverberant sound fields. There is simply too > much absorption. The sound arriving at a listener from a normally > directional forward-firing loudspeaker is dominantly direct sound at > high frequencies, and a combination of direct and a few early > reflections through the mid frequencies. This is true also in typical > cinemas where the direct sound is dominant above about 600-800 Hz. > This is explained, with examples, in the third edition of my book > "Sound Reproduction"(Focal Press 2017) and in the cited references. > > If RT is measured using an omni sound source, the result is an > irrelevant number in typical small-room listening situations. If RT is > measured using a typically directional loudspeaker, it is not RT in > the classic sense- the sound field is not diffuse. The calculated > Schroeder frequency is incorrect for typical small rooms - it is too > high - because Schroeder described the frequency as being applicable > in large auditoriums. I call it a "transition" frequency, for lack of > a better term. > > We need some new metrics: Cumulative energy time? > > > On Tuesday, December 19, 2017 8:49 AM, Thomas Lagö via SC-04-08 > <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> wrote: > > > Dear All, > > If it is a “Sabine Room” (diffuse sound field) it is true. If not, it > depends how “linear" the RT curve is. A curved curve will change the > value. > > Best regards, > Thomas > > > > On 19 Dec 2017, at 17:35, Peter Mapp via SC-04-08 > <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org <mailto:sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org>> wrote: > > > > T30 is effectively the same as T60 - just potentially easier to > measure. So same equations. In practice, T20 can be a little different > depending on the source directivity & diffuseness of the space but > should give similar results. I have measured true T60 in some large > and v quiet spaces (Cathedrals). > > > > pm > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: SC-04-08 [mailto:sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org > <mailto:sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org>] On Behalf Of John > Woodgate via SC-04-08 > > Sent: 19 December 2017 10:08 > > To: Peter Mapp; Working group on Measurement and equalization of > sound systems in rooms; F.C.Schafer-Consulting > > Subject: Re: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of > Demarcation > > > > I agree with the extract quoted below. Whether a room is 'large' or > 'small' depends on what frequency is being considered. One way to go > is to define 'reverberant conditions' , where there is no sound below > the Schroeder frequency and ' room mode conditions' where there is > sound below the Schroeder frequency. These definitions may not be > quite formal enough, bit if accepted in principle they can be 'polished'. > > > > I am not quite sure that an actual frequency can be defined, unless > it's the Schroeder frequency itself. But that isn't rouble-free, > because it uses T60, which Peter tells me is a convenient fiction > because no room behaves theoretically down to -60 dB. Can the equation > be modified to use T20 or T30, which I understand to be rather better > established? > > > > John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only > > J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk Rayleigh, Essex UK > > > > On 2017-12-19 09:38, Peter Mapp via SC-04-08 wrote: > >> I would like to suggest that rather than try to definitively > characterize a large vs small room we utilize these two references, to > define the lowest frequency that is considered statistically valid for > a particular test situation. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > SC-04-08 mailing list > > SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org <mailto:SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org> > > <http://standards.aes.org/sc.cfm?ID=91> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > SC-04-08 mailing list > > SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org <mailto:SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org> > > <http://standards.aes.org/sc.cfm?ID=91> > > _______________________________________________ > SC-04-08 mailing list > SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org <mailto:SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org> > <http://standards.aes.org/sc.cfm?ID=91> > > Previous message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Next message: [SC-04-08] Definition of Large vs Small Room - Line of Demarcation Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] More information about the SC-04-08 mailing list Expand 000436.html 10 KB HTML - Click to view Options Copy Download Link [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting pre { white-space: pre-wrap; /* css-2.1, curent FF, Opera, Safari */ } [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Glenn Leembruggen AD Glenn at acousticdirections.com Tue Dec 19 07:56:04 EST 2017 Previous message: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Next message: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] Hi All I meant to post this a few weeks ago, but forgot. There was some discussion in about using the InfoComm standard for equalisation for parts of our standard. I was asked by InfoComm to review that document and I concluded it wasn't sufficiently sophisticated to represent a new stake in the ground that represented good progress in the art. It is essentially for field technicians to use. But we are engineers with a whole lot more knowledge and I believe our document should be commensurate with that knowledge. I therefore don't recommend that we use it. Cheers Glenn Glenn Leembruggen Acoustic Directions Pty Ltd Consultants in acoustics and electroacoustics tel: +612 9810 7033 mob: +61 418 207 085 www.acousticdirections.com -----Original Message----- From: SC-04-08 [mailto:sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org] On Behalf Of Peter Mapp via SC-04-08 Sent: 01 December 2017 05:54 To: Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> Subject: Re: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Just a gentle reminder that the end of the year deadline is approaching and if this project is to move on, some input will be needed " In order to make and maintain progress, the chair asked for volunteers to head up the writing of the topics listed above and set a deadline of the end of the year for initial drafts of the sections" Regards Peter Mapp -----Original Message----- From: Peter Mapp Sent: 03 November 2017 11:13 To: 'Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms' Subject: RE: Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting I meant to have added, If others not present at the New York meeting would like to contribute their expertise & material, and if they have a particular topic in mind, then please contact me. Best regards Peter Mapp -----Original Message----- From: SC-04-08 [mailto:sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org] On Behalf Of Peter Mapp via SC-04-08 Sent: 03 November 2017 11:09 To: sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org Subject: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting SC-04-08 Working Group on Sound Systems in Rooms, Meeting Report, New York - 143rd Convention, 18 October 2017 The meeting was chaired by Peter Mapp In attendance were: Richard Cabot, AES Standards Manager Jeffery Bamford, Engineering Harmonics David Murphy, Krix loudspeakers Joel Brito, Vikel Charlie Hughes, Excelsior Audio Peter Mapp, Peter Mapp Associates Bruce Olson, Olson Sound Design Neil Shaw, Menlo Scientific Ramakrishnan M K, R&S Electronics India Brian Vessa, Sony Pictures Entertainment Fred Schafer, F C Schafer Consulting Kazuho Ono, NHK Eddy Brixen, EBB Consult Steve Martz, THX David Blore, Bose David Weinberg, Tobias Engineering Aldo Soares, ARS Tecnologia As there was no formal meeting of the group at the previous convention in Berlin, there were no minutes to approve, other than Peter Mapp had agreed to chair the group AES -X218 - Measurement & Calibration of sound systems in rooms The chair pointed out that since the last meeting in New York (31-10-2015) there has been no progress. Despite the agreement of those present at the New York meeting to comment on the list of parameters proposed at the meeting and assign themselves to writing groups relating to these parameters, no response whatsoever had been received. On this basis, the parent committee, SC04 had therefore debated whether to close the group but had decided to give it one more go as it was felt to be an important topic. The Chair went through the list of agreed measurement parameters as below : * Frequency Response * Sound Pressure Level (SPL) * Max SPL * Coverage * Speech Intelligibility * Distortion * Background Noise (Acoustical) * System Noise (Acoustical) * Reverberation Time * Gain Structure * Temporal Response / Impulse Response After discussion it was decided to temporarily leave writing the section on Frequency Response, as it was understood that the InfoCom draft spectral balance standard was being revised and there was no point in duplicating effort. Additionally, it was agreed that the Temporal Response / Impulse response item would not be considered at the moment as there would likely be duplication with AES-X219 (Method of measurement for frequency and impulse response of sound systems in auditoria) though echoes / generation of focused late reflections may be considered. The size of room to which the project relates was discussed and although not restricted it was felt that the objective was for large rooms (as opposed to small rooms). Cinema could / would be a specific subset of the work The scope relates to what to measure and how to measure not what the result should be (though some basic commentary may be provided). May need to split into basic & advanced tests, bearing in mind the likely test equipment that an average contractor is likely to have. In order to make and maintain progress, the chair asked for volunteers to head up the writing of the topics listed above and set a deadline of the end of the year for initial drafts of the sections. The chair also commented that unless the attendees at the meeting took an active role, there was little point in them being there! The table below lists the topics to be covered and writing group members Topic Task leader / author Comment Frequency Response* - Awaiting InfoComm draft* - Sound Pressure Level SPL Steve Martz A or C weighting? What signal(s) to use? Max SPL Charlie Hughes Operating level definition ? Coverage David Murphy NB InfoComm document Speech Intelligibility Peter Mapp Distortion Hughes and Murphy David Murphy - electronic distortion Background Noise (Room) Neil Shaw System Noise (Acoustic) Neil Shaw System noise transmitted into room Reverberation Time Eddie Brixen) Inc EDT etc (ISO standard) Use of SS for excitation? Gain Structure Bruce Olson Temporal Response - - In Abeyance Room Acoustic Analysis Peter Mapp Will probably include Impulse Response Test Equipment Required & mic locations / types etc Should be covered in individual sections but general discussion/ section probably required * But keep thinking about how to do this Working Group members are to provide outline / draft text ASAP and by Dec 26 at the latest. The Chair will pursue Working Group members to provide their respective contributions. A template which can be used for document development can be found at: http://www.aes.org/standards/development/guides.cfm AES X219 - Method of measurement for frequency and impulse response of sound systems in auditoria Project remains postponed, as per 2015 NY meeting, until there is some output of X218, which may or may not involve impulse response Liaisons Nothing to report New Projects No new projects were proposed New Business No new business was proposed Next Meeting The next physical meeting will be in conjunction with the 144th AES Convention in Milan, May 2018. Virtual meetings will be held as required in advance of the Milan meeting once some content has been developed for the group to discuss. _______________________________________________ SC-04-08 mailing list SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org <http://standards.aes.org/sc.cfm?ID=91> _______________________________________________ SC-04-08 mailing list SC-04-08 at standards.aes.org <http://st... Expand This file was truncated for preview. Please download to view the full file. 000437.html 15 KB HTML - Click to view Options Copy Download Link [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting pre { white-space: pre-wrap; /* css-2.1, curent FF, Opera, Safari */ } [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting John Woodgate jmw at woodjohn.uk Tue Dec 19 08:09:57 EST 2017 Previous message: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Next message: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] Normal for InfoComm. John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk Rayleigh, Essex UK On 2017-12-19 12:56, Glenn Leembruggen AD via SC-04-08 wrote: > Hi All > I meant to post this a few weeks ago, but forgot. > There was some discussion in about using the InfoComm standard for > equalisation for parts of our standard. > > I was asked by InfoComm to review that document and I concluded it wasn't > sufficiently sophisticated to represent a new stake in the ground that > represented good progress in the art. > It is essentially for field technicians to use. But we are engineers with a > whole lot more knowledge and I believe our document should be commensurate > with that knowledge. > I therefore don't recommend that we use it. > > Cheers > Glenn > > Glenn Leembruggen > Acoustic Directions Pty Ltd > Consultants in acoustics and electroacoustics > tel: +612 9810 7033 > mob: +61 418 207 085 > www.acousticdirections.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: SC-04-08 [mailto:sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org] On Behalf Of > Peter Mapp via SC-04-08 > Sent: 01 December 2017 05:54 > To: Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms > <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> > Subject: Re: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting > > Just a gentle reminder that the end of the year deadline is approaching and > if this project is to move on, some input will be needed > > " In order to make and maintain progress, the chair asked for volunteers to > head up the writing of the topics listed above and set a deadline of the end > of the year for initial drafts of the sections" > > Regards > > Peter Mapp > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Mapp > Sent: 03 November 2017 11:13 > To: 'Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in > rooms' > Subject: RE: Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting > > I meant to have added, If others not present at the New York meeting would > like to contribute their expertise & material, and if they have a particular > topic in mind, then please contact me. > > Best regards > > Peter Mapp > > -----Original Message----- > From: SC-04-08 [mailto:sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org] On Behalf Of > Peter Mapp via SC-04-08 > Sent: 03 November 2017 11:09 > To: sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org > Subject: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting > > SC-04-08 Working Group on Sound Systems in Rooms, Meeting Report, New York - > 143rd Convention, 18 October 2017 The meeting was chaired by Peter Mapp In > attendance were: > Richard Cabot, AES Standards Manager > Jeffery Bamford, Engineering Harmonics > David Murphy, Krix loudspeakers > Joel Brito, Vikel > Charlie Hughes, Excelsior Audio > Peter Mapp, Peter Mapp Associates > Bruce Olson, Olson Sound Design > Neil Shaw, Menlo Scientific > Ramakrishnan M K, R&S Electronics India > Brian Vessa, Sony Pictures Entertainment Fred Schafer, F C Schafer > Consulting Kazuho Ono, NHK Eddy Brixen, EBB Consult Steve Martz, THX David > Blore, Bose David Weinberg, Tobias Engineering Aldo Soares, ARS Tecnologia > As there was no formal meeting of the group at the previous convention in > Berlin, there were no minutes to approve, other than Peter Mapp had agreed > to chair the group AES -X218 - Measurement & Calibration of sound systems in > rooms The chair pointed out that since the last meeting in New York > (31-10-2015) there has been no progress. Despite the agreement of those > present at the New York meeting to comment on the list of parameters > proposed at the meeting and assign themselves to writing groups relating to > these parameters, no response whatsoever had been received. On this basis, > the parent committee, SC04 had therefore debated whether to close the group > but had decided to give it one more go as it was felt to be an important > topic. > The Chair went through the list of agreed measurement parameters as below : > > * Frequency Response > > * Sound Pressure Level (SPL) > > * Max SPL > > * Coverage > > * Speech Intelligibility > > * Distortion > > * Background Noise (Acoustical) > > * System Noise (Acoustical) > > * Reverberation Time > > * Gain Structure > > * Temporal Response / Impulse Response > After discussion it was decided to temporarily leave writing the section on > Frequency Response, as it was understood that the InfoCom draft spectral > balance standard was being revised and there was no point in duplicating > effort. Additionally, it was agreed that the Temporal Response / Impulse > response item would not be considered at the moment as there would likely be > duplication with AES-X219 (Method of measurement for frequency and impulse > response of sound systems in auditoria) though echoes / generation of > focused late reflections may be considered. > The size of room to which the project relates was discussed and although not > restricted it was felt that the objective was for large rooms (as opposed to > small rooms). > Cinema could / would be a specific subset of the work The scope relates to > what to measure and how to measure not what the result should be (though > some basic commentary may be provided). > May need to split into basic & advanced tests, bearing in mind the likely > test equipment that an average contractor is likely to have. > In order to make and maintain progress, the chair asked for volunteers to > head up the writing of the topics listed above and set a deadline of the end > of the year for initial drafts of the sections. The chair also commented > that unless the attendees at the meeting took an active role, there was > little point in them being there! > The table below lists the topics to be covered and writing group members > Topic > > Task leader / author > > Comment > > > > > > > > Frequency Response* > > > - > > Awaiting InfoComm draft* > > > > > - > > > > Sound Pressure Level SPL > > Steve Martz > > A or C weighting? What signal(s) to use? > > > > > > > > Max SPL > > Charlie Hughes > > Operating level definition ? &... Expand This file was truncated for preview. Please download to view the full file. 000438.html 15 KB HTML - Click to view Options Copy Download Link [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting pre { white-space: pre-wrap; /* css-2.1, curent FF, Opera, Safari */ } [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Vessa, Brian Brian_Vessa at spe.sony.com Tue Dec 19 08:42:35 EST 2017 Previous message: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Next message: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] Hi all, I agree with Glenn, I reviewed that document also. Cheers, Brian From: SC-04-08 <sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org> on behalf of Glenn Leembruggen AD via SC-04-08 <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> Reply-To: "Glenn at acousticdirections.com" <Glenn at acousticdirections.com>, Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> Date: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 at 4:57 AM To: "peter at petermapp.com" <peter at petermapp.com>, 'Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms' <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> Subject: Re: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Hi All I meant to post this a few weeks ago, but forgot. There was some discussion in about using the InfoComm standard for equalisation for parts of our standard. I was asked by InfoComm to review that document and I concluded it wasn't sufficiently sophisticated to represent a new stake in the ground that represented good progress in the art. It is essentially for field technicians to use. But we are engineers with a whole lot more knowledge and I believe our document should be commensurate with that knowledge. I therefore don't recommend that we use it. Cheers Glenn Glenn Leembruggen Acoustic Directions Pty Ltd Consultants in acoustics and electroacoustics tel: +612 9810 7033 mob: +61 418 207 085 https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.acousticdirections.com&d=DwICAg&c=fP4tf--1dS0biCFlB0saz0I0kjO5v7-GLPtvShAo4cc&r=aY5xG12L3nZAuDxNSOU6Gl2PbhrlbWVvWyoTKMLPFno&m=To6m07cMTpW2XrMjGKQiPS3h0L66hJM0msrwKS-tXeg&s=9nLrtQtMk6QDGIfZoMeCH3z3aPURqWKCLXrcTxX2TUQ&e= -----Original Message----- From: SC-04-08 [mailto:sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org] On Behalf Of Peter Mapp via SC-04-08 Sent: 01 December 2017 05:54 To: Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org<mailto:sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org>> Subject: Re: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Just a gentle reminder that the end of the year deadline is approaching and if this project is to move on, some input will be needed " In order to make and maintain progress, the chair asked for volunteers to head up the writing of the topics listed above and set a deadline of the end of the year for initial drafts of the sections" Regards Peter Mapp -----Original Message----- From: Peter Mapp Sent: 03 November 2017 11:13 To: 'Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms' Subject: RE: Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting I meant to have added, If others not present at the New York meeting would like to contribute their expertise & material, and if they have a particular topic in mind, then please contact me. Best regards Peter Mapp -----Original Message----- From: SC-04-08 [mailto:sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org] On Behalf Of Peter Mapp via SC-04-08 Sent: 03 November 2017 11:09 To: sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org<mailto:sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> Subject: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting SC-04-08 Working Group on Sound Systems in Rooms, Meeting Report, New York - 143rd Convention, 18 October 2017 The meeting was chaired by Peter Mapp In attendance were: Richard Cabot, AES Standards Manager Jeffery Bamford, Engineering Harmonics David Murphy, Krix loudspeakers Joel Brito, Vikel Charlie Hughes, Excelsior Audio Peter Mapp, Peter Mapp Associates Bruce Olson, Olson Sound Design Neil Shaw, Menlo Scientific Ramakrishnan M K, R&S Electronics India Brian Vessa, Sony Pictures Entertainment Fred Schafer, F C Schafer Consulting Kazuho Ono, NHK Eddy Brixen, EBB Consult Steve Martz, THX David Blore, Bose David Weinberg, Tobias Engineering Aldo Soares, ARS Tecnologia As there was no formal meeting of the group at the previous convention in Berlin, there were no minutes to approve, other than Peter Mapp had agreed to chair the group AES -X218 - Measurement & Calibration of sound systems in rooms The chair pointed out that since the last meeting in New York (31-10-2015) there has been no progress. Despite the agreement of those present at the New York meeting to comment on the list of parameters proposed at the meeting and assign themselves to writing groups relating to these parameters, no response whatsoever had been received. On this basis, the parent committee, SC04 had therefore debated whether to close the group but had decided to give it one more go as it was felt to be an important topic. The Chair went through the list of agreed measurement parameters as below : * Frequency Response * Sound Pressure Level (SPL) * Max SPL * Coverage * Speech Intelligibility * Distortion * Background Noise (Acoustical) * System Noise (Acoustical) * Reverberation Time * Gain Structure * Temporal Response / Impulse Response After discussion it was decided to temporarily leave writing the section on Frequency Response, as it was understood that the InfoCom draft spectral balance standard was being revised and there was no point in duplicating effort. Additionally, it was agreed that the Temporal Response / Impulse response item would not be considered at the moment as there would likely be duplication with AES-X219 (Method of measurement for frequency and impulse response of sound systems in auditoria) though echoes / generation of focused late reflections may be considered. The size of room to which the project relates was discussed and although not restricted it was felt that the objective was for large rooms (as opposed to small rooms). Cinema could / would be a specific subset of the work The scope relates to what to measure and how to measure not what the result should be (though some basic commentary may be provided). May need to split into basic & advanced tests, bearing in mind the likely test equipment that an average contractor is likely to have. In order to make and maintain progress, the chair asked for volunteers to head up the writing of the topics listed above and set a deadline of the end of the year for initial drafts of the sections. The chair also commented that unless the attendees at the meeting took an active role, there was little point in them being there! The table below lists the topics to be covered and writing group members Topic Task leader / author Comment Frequency Response* - Awaiting InfoComm draft* - Sound Pressure Level SPL Steve Martz A or C weighting? What signal(s) to use? Max SPL Charlie Hughes Operating level definition ? Coverage David Murphy NB InfoComm document Speech Intelligibility Peter Mapp Distortion Hughes and Murphy David Murphy - electronic distortion Background Noise (Room) Neil Shaw System ... Expand This file was truncated for preview. Please download to view the full file. 000439.html 5 KB HTML - Click to view Options Copy Download Link [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting pre { white-space: pre-wrap; /* css-2.1, curent FF, Opera, Safari */ } [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Charlie Hughes charlie at excelsior-audio.com Tue Dec 19 09:11:37 EST 2017 Previous message: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Next message: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] The InfoComm draft standard that was reviewed by some was a preliminary draft. Based on the comments from many reviewers, it has been changed substantially. It is still undergoing revision. I suggest that SC-04-08 not spend time or energy worrying about that particular document until the finished draft it is ready for review or has been published. Best regards, Charlie Hughes Excelsior Audio Gastonia, NC +1 704.675.5435 (tel) +1 704.678.6570 (mobile) www.excelsior-audio.com -----Original Message----- From: SC-04-08 [mailto:sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org] On Behalf Of Vessa, Brian via SC-04-08 Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 8:43 AM To: Glenn Leembruggen AD; Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms; 'Peter Mapp' Subject: Re: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Hi all, I agree with Glenn, I reviewed that document also. Cheers, Brian From: SC-04-08 <sc-04-08-bounces at standards.aes.org> on behalf of Glenn Leembruggen AD via SC-04-08 <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> Reply-To: "Glenn at acousticdirections.com" <Glenn at acousticdirections.com>, Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> Date: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 at 4:57 AM To: "peter at petermapp.com" <peter at petermapp.com>, 'Working group on Measurement and equalization of sound systems in rooms' <sc-04-08 at standards.aes.org> Subject: Re: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Hi All I meant to post this a few weeks ago, but forgot. There was some discussion in about using the InfoComm standard for equalisation for parts of our standard. I was asked by InfoComm to review that document and I concluded it wasn't sufficiently sophisticated to represent a new stake in the ground that represented good progress in the art. It is essentially for field technicians to use. But we are engineers with a whole lot more knowledge and I believe our document should be commensurate with that knowledge. I therefore don't recommend that we use it. Cheers Glenn Glenn Leembruggen Acoustic Directions Pty Ltd Consultants in acoustics and electroacoustics tel: +612 9810 7033 mob: +61 418 207 085 Previous message: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Next message: [SC-04-08] Minutes & Actions of New York Meeting Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] More information about the SC-04-08 mailing list Expand 0 Comments Public All Members My Connections Only Me PublicAll MembersMy ConnectionsOnly Me Public All Members My Connections Only Me