Session E-1

Preprint 4313

Early Sound Field Control in Critical Listening Areas

Chris Morton
ARO Technology, Prospect, SA

Presented at
6th Australian uo,o
Regional Convention
10th - 12th September 1996 ®

World Congress Centre, Melbourne

Thispreprinthasbeen reproducedfromthe author'sadvancemanuscriptwithout
editing,correctionsorconsiderationby theReview Board. TheAES takesno
responsibility
forits contents.

Additionalpreprintsmay be obtainedby sendingrequestand remittanceto theAudio

EngineeringSociety,60 East 42nd Street,New York10165, USA

All rightsreserved.Reproductionof thepreprint,or anyportionthereof,is notpermitted

withoutdirectpermissionof the Journalof theAudioEngineeringSociety.

AN AUDIO ENGINEERING SOCIETY PREPRINT

 EARLY SOUND FIELD CONTROL
IN CRITICAL LISTENING AREAS
Chris W.Morton,Aro Technology,Adelaide,Australia

Abstract
In any critical listening area the properties of reflections occurring
immediately after the listener receives the direct sound are of vital
importance to the perception of sound quality. This paper covers some
practical studies, largely related to the acoustical treatment of small
listening rooms; however, many of the principles can be applied to
larger rooms also. Measurements are compared to listening tests,
where substantial differences in sensitivity were found.

1. Introduction
A room's acoustical performance cannot be viewed as passive, and is
theoretically never neutral. Whilst the acoustical requirements for each
room will vary depending upon its use and other factors, such as
personal taste, the acoustical environment within the room either can
be negative (audibly detrimental) or, conversely, can be positive, and
add beneficially to the listener's perception of the quality of sound
being generated within that room. [1]

To achieve the desired acoustical performance requires the correct

balance of the three physical acoustic properties available--reflection,
absorption and diffusion. It must be noted that, in almost every case
where there is an excess or an insufficiency of one or more of these
properties, the room's performance as a whole will decrease, and tend
to fall into the negative category.

Various studies of psychoacoustics have revealed the importance of

the properties of reflections arising at a listener'sears shortly after the
direct sound. [2, 3]

In larger rooms, all reflections up to around 80 mS after the arrival of

the direct sound are generally considered early reflections. In many
smaller rooms, however, early reflections are typically considered to be
high level, first order reflections from the walls, ceiling and floor,
which may occur with the first 20 mS or 30 mS.

The time level frequency phase and directivity of these early reflec-
tions are now considered important factors in determining a listener's
appreciation of the sound quality, along with other factors, such as the
reverb time/decay rate, etc.

This paper is intended to be a practical discussion of the various

means available for controlling the properties of these early reflec-
tions, and also of the differences found between listening tests and
acoustical measurements.

2. What Are the Options?

Rooms used for the reproduction of music are often relatively small,
frequently <100 m3 in volume. This can present a problem for the
listener where the program material is required to be audibly of the
highest quality or accuracy as the acoustical performance of the small
listening room can colour or mask many aspects of the quality of the
program material. A similar principle applies to rooms used for the
playing and recording of musical instruments, and also rooms used for
speech.

In considering the acoustical treatment of any critical listening room, it

must be realised that there are available essentially only three physical
room properties for controlling the sound filled within that room.
These are shown in Figure 1:
(i) Reflection, where sound energy is simply redirected with minimal
energy loss, and the incident and reflective angles are equal with
respect to the reflective surface.
(ii) Absorption, in which sound energy is converted into heat. Typical
absorptive materials are frequency variable in efficiency, and, if
backed by a reflective surface, any energy not absorbed is reflect-
ed in the specular direction.
(iii) Diffusion, where the sound energy is scattered over a wide area,
virtually irrespective of the angle of incidence. Diffusion can be in
the simple form of curved panels, or even stepped columns on a
wall or beams on a ceiling, which all have a diffusive effect.

Research in the mid-1970's by Dr Manfred Schroeder [4, 5, 6] resulted

in the development of broad-band number theoretic diffusers. Such
diffusers are characterised by a series of wells or steps at varying
depths, determined by mathematical formulae such as primitive root
and quadratic residue sequences. Two such diffusers are shown in
Figure 2. These diffusers work by creating phase interactions from the
direct and reflected sound energy between difference depth wells.
Schroeder diffusers offer a number of performance advantages over a
simple curved panel or polycylindrical diffuser, with a much wider
effective bandwidth and a more even spatial distribution over that
bandwidth.

In addition to spatial diffusion, Schroeder diffusers also give temporal

diffusion, with the reflected energy being spread over a time span
determined by the total depth of the diffuser. Figures 3a and 3b show
the spatial energy distribution of a Schroeder diffuser at various
frequencies and angles of incidence, compared to a specular reflection
off a flat panel of identical size. The temporal diffusion performance is
shown in Figure 4, also compared to a fiat panel, where the reflection
appears identical to the direct signal on an impulse response.

A Schroeder diffuser does have some absorptive properties, even

when constructed of rigid, non-absorbent materials. This effect has
been studied elsewhere [7, 8, 9], and can be summarised as losses
occurring between wells of different depths where air particle velocity
changes are greatest. In practice, it is found that this absorption is
greatest at the lower operating frequencies of the diffuser, and typic-
ally peaks at around one sixth of the wavelength of the panel depth.

The majority of sound energy is preserved, however, and simply

redirected in space and time. Because of this distribution, the reflec-
tion level will often be in the order of 6-10 dB lower than the level of
a specular reflection off a comparatively sized fiat surface. These
factors need to be considered when applying such diffusers as room
treatment. In a small room, when diffusion is increased there is also a
corresponding reduction in reverb time as the reflected energy "sees"
more of the absorbent surfaces within the room.

3, Comparing Three Rooms

Three small listening rooms are shown in Figures 5a to 5c, one being
totally reflective, and the other two having absorbent and diffusive
panels respectively. No furnishings have been included, to exaggerate
the effect, with the time (impulse) and frequency responses at the
listening position represented in the graphs below each room.

The fully reflective room is a poor choice for listeners, with the high
level reflections and long decay rate masking any acoustical informa-
tion in the material being reproduced, and distorting the perceived
stereo image.
The room with absorbent panels shows the smoothest frequency
response due to a lack of interfering reflections; however, in practice,
such a room will prove quite "dull" and "lifeless," with poor listening
enjoyment for most listeners' tastes, even though the stereo image may
show quite high positional accuracy.

The room with diffuser panels comes the closest to being preferred by
a typical listener. The energy distribution provided by the diffusers
increases the temporal reflection density, and reduces spatial variation
throughout the room. The decay rate falls between that of the pre-
vious two rooms, but in practice it would be found that a certain
amount of absorption would be needed to optimise the room's acous-
tics. This absorption is used both to control specific reflections and
also give the desired decay characteristic; therefore it must be selected
and position for this purpose.

4. Positioning of Absorption, Diffusion and Reflection

As mentioned earlier, the properties of early reflections reaching the
listener after the direct sound are very important to the overall
perception of sound quality, and listener enjoyment. Early reflections
are created by the nearest significant surfaces, which are generally the
room's side walls and floor, followed by the ceiling and end walls for a
conventional 'shoe box' room. It is important that the polar dispersion
characteristics of the sound source are known as this is vital when
calculating the level and response of early reflections at the listening
position. The treatment of these high level first order reflections is
normally the first priority, and results in the most significant difference
at the listening position. In a typical small listening room using conven-
tional direct radiator loudspeakers, the side walls adjacent to and in
front of the speakers often create the impression of a secondary
source when reflective. This causes strong comb filtering of the fre-
quency response, due to the phase difference between the direct and
reflected signals, as well as distortion or smearing of the stereo image
due to the confusion of the listener's auditory response created by the
perceived secondary source. Research by Davis [10, 11, 12] resulted in
the implementation of the 'live end-dead end' approach, where the
front portion of a listening room was made largely absorbent, and the
rear part diffusely reflective. Such rooms can have very accurate
imaging performance, and are certainly much preferred as a listening
environment over a room with absorption on all planes, as covered
earlier. The most significant problem with this approach is that the
decay rate will often be non-linear, and significant spatial variation will

4
be found throughout the room. Whilst the undesired very early reflec-
tions are eliminated, the amount of absorption applied will often have
a substantial effect on the second and third order reflections, and
therefore the decay rate as a whole tends to become non-linear.
Having a highly diffuse rear wall is certainly beneficial as this creates
an impression of an enlargement of the space behind the listener, and
helps to increase the depth of image and reduce spatial variation
around the listening position. Davis later showed that large amounts of
absorption in the front portion of the room were not necessary if the
wall and ceiling geometries could be designed to direct very early
reflections away from the listener, with absorption used to control the
decay rate only. This approach may be Meal for a professional control
room design, however it is often too costly or impractical for many
people working within existing non-acoustically designed rooms.

5. Diffusing the Side Walls

Research by the author on the use of Schrocder diffusers to scatter
first order side wall reflections as compared to absorptive treatment in
small rooms has provided some interesting results. In implementing
such an approach, the designer needs to examine the distance and
angle between the direct and reflected signals at the listening position,
and also the polar performance of both the loudspeakers and the
diffusers at all frequencies of interest. With this approach, the sound
energy that would normally be lost by using absorption is instead
redirected or dispersed throughout the room.

This creates some interesting psychoacoustical effects at the listening

position, with the most significant being a substantial widening of the
stereo image, generally without perceivable colouration or unnatural-
ness. The effect varies considerably with the polar response of the
loudspeaker being used, and can prove particularly beneficial to
speakers with a narrow dispersion pattern.

It is interesting to note that acoustical measurements on the impulse

and frequency response differences between the two methods of
treatment often show only very subtle variations, despite the difference
being immediately apparent to untrained listeners. Often the diffuse
reflection will be 15 dB or more below the level of the direct sound,
and viewed in this way the diffuser can be thought of as a semi-
absorbent surface.
Care must be taken if positioning either absorptive or diffusive sur-
faces very close to a speaker as this can create sharp notches or 'suck
out' in the direct response, particularly for speakers with a wide
dispersion. This effect is often found in control rooms where absorp-
tive treatment on the top face of the mixing console can have an
adverse effect on the frequency response of nearfield monitors posi-
tioned above.

Figure 6a, b and c shows the frequency response measured at the

listening position of a typical home listening room, using speakers with
a very narrow polar dispersion. The three surfaces used (reflective,
absorbent and diffuse) were placed within 150 mm of the speaker to
exaggerate the effect, which still appears quite minimal due to the
narrow dispersion. A cancellation can be seen around 300 Hz with the
diffusive treatment, which is the result of its close proximity to the
speaker, and the grazing angle of the incident sound across the front
of the diffusers. In many situations, the Iow frequency absorption
characteristic of Schroeder diffusers can prove beneficial when posi-
tioned near loudspeakers which tend to be omnidirectional at these
frequencies.

In most cases where pinpoint positional accuraqt of the stereo image

is desired, such as in a mixdown suite or control room, side wall
reflection control is probably best achieved with wall geometry and/or
absorption if wide dispersion monitors are being used. In the majority
of other situations, however, the subtle widening of the sound stage
created by low level diffuse reflection from the side walls can positive-
ly add to the listening appreciation. Ando [131 found that interaural
cross-correlation (IACC) was lowest for sounds from 4-_55° with
respect to the listener's head where phase differences are the highest.
Applying a diffusive surface to the side walls of small listening rooms
introduces low level reflections around this angle, at which our audi-
tory system is most sensitive. Such an approach has been recently
applied to a CD Mastering Room using wide dispersion, flush-mount-
ed monitors. The engineer's initial reaction was that the image was
very broad, and felt "a million miles wide." Adding a minimal amount
of absorption was sufficient to audibly reduce the width, allowing
adjustment to be made to suit the listener's taste. Almost without
exception, the reaction from audiophiles and trained listeners has been
positive.

6
6. Applications in Larger Rooms
The beneficial effect of Schroeder diffusers on music performance
areas has been covered elsewhere [14, 15]. In an auditorium or
theatre, there is often a lack of support for performers on stage,
where early reflections are minimal, and the sound tends to be consist
mainly of reflections back from the main room. On a different scale,
some side wall positioned diffusion will frequently prove beneficial to
the performers, and, in the case of a reinforced performance, the
loudspeaker coverage can be enhanced, with reflections back to the
stage area being !ow enough to avoid triggering feedback.

7. Conclusion
The designer of any critical listening room must have a clear under-
standing of not only the acoustical treatment available but also the
properties of the sound source(s), and the listener's personal taste.
Whilst there are only three basic acoustical properties available, their
interaction is often quite complex. The development of high perform-
ance diffusive treatment by Dr Schroeder has proved most advanta-
geous to designers and listeners alike. The application of the many
variations of the three basic acoustical properties to listening areas is
an ongoing field of research, and must always be related to psycho-
acoustical research; many times it has been proved that the solely
theoretical approach may not necessarily be appreciated by a listener's
ears.

8. References
[1] F E Olive & F E Toole The Detection of Reflection in 23ypical
Rooms. JAES vol 37 no 7/8 (1989) pp 539-553
[2] S Bech Perceptions of Reproduced Sound: Audibility of individual
reflectionsin a complete sound field, AES 96th Convention, Am-
sterdam (1994) Preprint 3849
[3] W M Wagenaars Localization of Sound in a Room with Reflecting
Walls,JAES vol 38 no 3 (1990) pp 99-110
[4] M R Schroeder Number Theoryin Science and Communications,
Springer, New York (1985)
[5] M R Schroeder Binaural Dissimilarity and Optimum Hearing for
Concert Halls: More lateral sound diffusion, JASA vol 65 pp 958-
963 (1979)
[6] M R Schroeder Progressin Architectural Acoustics and Artificial
Reverberation:Concerthall acoustics and number theory, JAES vol
32 no 4 pp 194-203 (1984)

7
[7] D Takahashi Sound Absorption of a QRD, Proc Wallace Clement
Sabine Centennial Symposium (1994) pp 149-152
[8] D E Commins, N Auletta, B Suner Diffusion and Absorption of
Quadratic Residue Diffusers, Proc IOA vol 10 part 2 (1988) pp
223-232
[9] C Morton Low Frequency Control and Acoustical Optimising of
Small Rooms Using the Schroeder Diffusion AES 5th Australian
Regional Convention, Sydney (1995) Preprint 4034
[10] D Davis The Role of the Initial 77me Delay Gap in the Acoustic
Design of Control Rooms for Recordingand Reinforcement_stems,
AES 64th Convention, New York (1979) Preprint 1547
[11] D Davis The LEDE Concept, Audio (Aug 1987)
[12] C Davis & G Meeks The History and Development of the LEDE
Control Room Concept, AES 72nd Convention, Anaheim (1982)
Preprint 1954
[13] Y Ando ConcertHall Acoustics, Springer, New York (1985)
[14] P al'Antonio & J H Konnert The Role of ReflectionPhase Grating
Diffusers in Critical Listening and Performing Environments, AES
78th Convention, Anaheim (1985) Preprint 2255
[15] P d'Antonio Perfomlance Acoustics: The importance of diffusing
surfaces and the variable acoustics modularperformanceshell, AES
91st Convention, New York (1991) Preprint 3118

Acknowledgments
The author wishes to thank the many colleagues and listeners who
have contributed comments and conducted their own experiments in
this area, and also Duntech Audio, who provided the use of their
R&D listening rooms.
 REFLECTIOH

ABSORPTION

DIFFUSIOH

Figure 1: Diagrams depicting the acoustical performance of reflec-

tion, absorption and diffusion.

9
 t i i

i I
J

· I

t Ii
Figure 2: Cross-section of an N = 11 QR diffuser (left) and a PR
diffuser (right).

10
 !
(06) O.a

,..?,:.............................
,-.?._.
4}.l,e.: ''' ..."":; /"._.._ '?....... '..,:43.e.

65L5["
/7¥:, .......... ,,
" .'"'. .I._7 ¥"_ ." '. ', ",-6_.5'
: ""..'· ..' .._. .;.-- I--·.- i :_ ... _.·.,·.:
. . ...:,....._:.'.:-'"?':.:..,'_....,...
_ ..
' ,' : :&....j "...:v...L.." L...._,' '. : ·
' ; ' r ":_..·._;':'.".
:-._.;....._"',_ ' :
9,,_'""":'""'L"I'_.
"'(""':[_'"';"I:'"'_'"'-'_'""_'"'";"'"'L,
,.
,. ', I ; N. /' ' s - m .
i '. _ ·· .......* : ; - J ,
; '_ '.. 'Sall(I OCTAVECEHTRE,' ' .' :

(gO) O l*

· ..:'"'._..._ _ ......
'_' ..,... '..

"·"':'"..,:.
; _,...',:-..,:-'-
......
......______¥<,T.'"...'?./:'.....,.-'
,: , ....%.._...-....- ,"'·',_... "'"'
._ _ '".
.

, ,_..+..,-+,/.::.'-
, .· _:_ ___/ : ....
........' !,
/ _::._.,,
- ,.
·, 'lkHi OCTAVE
cEalitE :· :' .' '

l
(ce) I.l IP
_a.5,....'-'71'*'_; ·.......-_a·5'
· ..': / / _ ';"..

,,,::: ... :..-F_,-,..

I---_:,,_.
· !,. ··, :..,.,,.,.
; _ : ,_, .,_· *: , ·

9L_q'"'"*'.'""'['"'"'i"
,. . , · % I / : ';"'"':"'"T""·':-,
' ·,·
_. :. '6,kai OCTAVE
CE#IRE
..' .: .'

Figure 3a: On-axis spatial scattering performance of an Aro 770 dif-

fuser compared to a fiat panel of identical dimensions
(dotted line)·

11
 (08) II. Iie

.. ,........... .?...,.._.../,_..........,.
,..
: "'_:4 '...... "", "-
,, ,. ...................................
· , . , ."....".'. '... _ s ·
.....""- .J., · _. , aa Ao

', : _eea_ (]CLAVE CEHTR[ ,' ; ;

(06) II. II

_8..S_.:........................... -_._, /

,,.... :,_ :
'" '"i °'
I" "'...""' : .',,q
S7. S*" 4_.o::.'"_....C:
"_ ,""" .... _ i.iii}...................._
'_'-;:" :-....;'-liT.
"', 5"

' ,,._...::.,-
' ......
., .:......,... ..-o:,.,..1y,,..,,
., ...,, ..- ._......,
.:-..,..':_._. ,
: _ · r ;...... ?.:'...

,,.,...:.
... _ _.._ .-.,_.::
·
.,__'"
;
..., . _ : ..
'_'_:::...i'_'r....._......_......:.,
'. _ '. '.......-
/.
.
.:
·
,
.
.
_
_
:
: ·

:. ... _ 'lkHi OClllVI (:EIITRE o." .:' :; .J

(gO) I. (P

,.0::,.::
....:.
............
:.-.:_:,.
/
45.1'./''' ...."'" '............... /'. '"".-45.9 °
/.,. -._, .. ............... · ..... .. ',.
· _::.,: ,_.¥ ':*.... · ·
:' "..... ..x I_... __.,c
.... .: _'. '. .',.."" '
·' / '":,.....,,'_,'.. -.-, ..'::,::"_.......,:..'
_. -.
: _ . , ...... · ..._.. '..' ._...' : _

,,.,, ..,: ,,.t;;

'
:
_
.
:
· t
_
:
?'., /..... _ ..... .
"... .. .
,
*
·
*
.:..:.,,.,,
_
·
:
·

. '.. ',. 6kNi OClfiVE CEilllti; / ; ;

Figure 3b: 45 degrees off-axis spatial scattering performance of an Aro

770 diffuser compared to a fiat panel of identical dimen-
sions (dotted line).

12
 ?...,P ,t
! 7963#sec
I
............
:"..............
!............
!..........
::..............
;.......
!..............
!1
,._-_
HelreS
_.
i
.i. .... :.... :.... :...:...:...:i .i
I

! .I
24.49 dS i SOUHO' SOURCE !
!. .?............................ i
z .I

Svaep Rate:
f i II
t_' '[' 'Il ' ' ': .... :.... :' I ......
""'"'"":i : ' ' ' :_
1692Hz/S _ : I/ . [4 i
d[_ . II ' ....H ;
JOan, _. .i..,! .... :.... :.... :.IL..: .... :t
Tine Span: i i :
i. I · : : '6JIStC
8144_)1'SecJ] ':': I':fi
. ...........................
. i
_st Sl,,on: . [ '_ ..... i
e so +e = : .......
I uh,_.,!I"
"'"" ' ':'_ 'l':'J":....
/.qlt. :..............
: : lift
: ! T

,.,Rs,,,,,
, . ,,u,.
t9.563
i.
i

I
..: ..................
·
| .....
'1_[
/' Illld .....
:..:.. :i
, i

.so._ss L__J_J...-...!.U_ _. TE_., 'i

;_9,]Psec t i I: :l
1793 _ ,:. .t ..................... I
"""' 1' ' ! II....... I
M. ee dO [ i I_: SOUND'SOUOCG : : : :1
t,.... i' :_:'": .... :.... :.... :'":"':1
,.,,.,,, ,_-.: ...............
I1_ h......:..:1
,o,,0, _.... i .II:L
............. :'Ii ..........

,,,,_r,f:_l
%%1;',"!....i:: 'l:l_'":l..._
:....: ....:'llk:ll_":'":'"i
i
,:oM,It,....!. ....::.... !..[Ifil
'r.",.': :...i...
. ,i
Hr*ires ! : I . Ill . . . ] Illlllil . . [

,,,,.4. _.:_Lt:__._:.___.__F,._U
_

Figure 4: Temporal energy spread reflected from an Aro QR diffuser

with a flat panel (specular) reflection shown for compari-
son.

13
 iJIiJJrJllrr
j
TIME' )' FREQUENCY )l

Figure Sa: Small listening room with all reflective walls. Graphs
represent time and frequency response at the listening
position.

14
 I i

' T
E

_ IIIIILlah,
i,,,,, g

Figure Sb: Small listening room with absorbent panels. Graphs

represent time and frequency response at the listening
position.

15
 T
! IIJ!l[l,ld[ffjitlj
TIME
Jill[
! ,
lrlf L
FREQUENCY '

Figure5c: Small listening room with diffusive panels. Graphs

represent time and frequency response at the listening
position.

16
 TransferFunctionMagnitude
- dBvolts/volts
i i ; iii;'_ ! ! ! ; i;:: M
5,0 : : : :::: L
i iiiill S
o.o i i i ilii S
-5.0 : : : : :;:

-10,0

-Iff ,0

-20.0

-25.0

-30,0

-25,0

-40.0

-4_.0 .... _ ......

auto
50.0 100,0 1000.0 10000.0

log Frequency- Hz

Reflection alongsidespeaker.

Figure 6a: Response at listening positionwith reflectivesurface along-

side the speaker.

17
 Transfer FunctionHagnltude- dRvolts/volts
i ! _ _ _ __ : : : : : :: !
5.0'

o.o
....
ti-kil-i! _:: i__ii_ S
-5.0. * ...... A

-tO.O

-15.0

-ao.o '"H'"":.._.
-25 .O ·
':_-: ii
-30.0

-35,0

-40.0

-45,0

auto

50,0 100,0 1000.0 10000.0

log Frequency- Hz

Absorptionalongside speaker.

Figure 6b: Response at the listening position with absorptive surface

alongsidethe speaker.

18
 Transfer FunctionHagnitude
- dBvolts/volts

s.o ....... L
0,0 '"t
ii i ii::i i ! i i i*_*_ S
-5.0 .... ' : : : : : :: A

-10.0 .... ' ......

_ : : : :::

-ls.o ....;.
i

-20,0.

-_.0 .... !.
i
_......_...;...;....i.
-i
:. _ iiii
-30.0 *

-3_ ,0 .... ;
I

·-45,0 .... 1 ......

auto

50.0 100,0 1000.0 10000,0

1o9Frequency- Dz

Diffusion alongside speaker.

Figure 6c: Response at listening position with diffusive surface along-

side the speaker.

19