Issue link: https://digital.copcomm.com/i/1487666
46 W I N T E R 2 0 2 3 I C A S Q U A R T E R L Y one by a man named Dennis Foley who runs a YouTube channel called "Acoustic Fields." Armed with all this knowledge and research, I assumed that I would uncover the magical formula that would explain mathematically exactly which materials and proportions I would need to create a perfectly balanced room. My conclusion: While there is a ton of research, and predictions can be made based on this research, sadly, there is no magical formula. Even the pros ultimately need to make final adjustments in the field with both physical adjustments and EQ correction. Before we can even consider room correction EQ, the physical space must first be considered. Not only speaker placement, but also the room's shape and size. I like to think of the room as being your final speaker. Any monitor you play in your room will be colored by the physical space. On the "Acoustics Insider" YouTube channel, Jesco directed me to a website called amcoustics.com which has a room mode calculator. This site also introduced me to the concept of the "Bolt area" or Bonello Graph. In a nutshell, you enter in the dimensions of your room and if the intersection points fall within the Bolt area, you have a good chance of hearing more evenly distributed room modes. In my mind, that means before you even begin, if you have control over the room's dimensions, choosing an optimal ratio will get you started in the right direction. So, I plugged in my numbers, and by pure dumb luck, my room at home landed smack dab in the middle of the Bolt area. However, I did not discover this until after working full time in the room for over a year. But at this point, I had invested in some additional absorption panels and some purpose- built diffusers in addition to my "DIY bookshelf of random things" diffuser. And after running REW again, I was happy with the sound of my room, and my clients seemed happy, too. Knowing that speaker/room correction was a thing, I began searching Facebook groups dedicated to acoustics. I was surprised to see several people who were quite vocal in their negative opinions about EQ correction. So, sadly, I steered away from it longer than I should have. Thankfully, I saw a post from re-recording mixer and sound designer DeLaVanta Tabor applauding the detail he was hearing in his studio after running Sound ID. I respect his opinions, so I decided to give it a go myself. I bought the multichannel option and the official Sound ID microphone and ran the calibration. The steps were easy to follow, and my initial impression was that things felt a bit brighter. The week prior, I remembered trying to EQ a voiceover that was recorded at the artist's home. I'm not sure what her recording setup was, but I did know that I had to spend more time than usual trying to get her to sound the way I wanted. This seemed like the perfect test. I pulled in her raw takes and gave it another go from scratch. I got to a place where I was happy a bit quicker than last time. I listened to both the original and my new treatment in my living room off my phone. I thought the new one sounded better, but I was truly convinced when I played both for my wife and she preferred the new one as well. That was my experience with the more automatic style of EQ correction. However, I was really curious to get another mixer's perspective, specifically with the more manual approach of the Avid MTRX's SPQ option. I was able to have a nice conversation about the subject with Charles Dayton CAS, who was a bit ahead of the curve having built his studio nearly 20 years ago. I asked him to tell me about his process and experience.