I hope everyone likes my design/plans colour scheme which was inspired by the latest Naim products at Munich 
2 Likes
When I first started getting interested in hifi in the 80s I speaker brochure mention a list of (square) room proportions ranked 1 to 30 (or so) in order manage room resonances, and no. 1 was 1 - 1.9 - 1.4 (h-w-l). This combined with a fair size room to handle bass result in that one really should strive for higher than normal ceiling height, 3.5-4m should be ideal for rooms around 40m2. Example 38m2 would ideally be 7.2x5.3m and height 3.8m, not typical apartment proportionsâŚ
1 Like
This link gives info re room dimensions derived through modern research:
https://hub.salford.ac.uk/sirc-acoustics/architecture-and-building-acoustics/room-sizing-for-studios/
And the spreadsheet with most optimal room ratios:
Best room ratios
And a second spreadsheet with other choices
Room ratios - second best
At one point recently I was considering a house with a large square room, so I used the spreadsheets from the above link to plan internal walls to remove the squareness (while providing both extra storage and sound insulation, and walls suitable for âsoffit mountingâ the speakers. (But things changed and it didnât happen.)
2 Likes
Thanks for the link, Iâll look into that.
Or you can use AMROC which is based on similar, if not the same, calculations allowing you to obtain the dimensions of a room offering an harmonious distribution of room modes.
â amroc - THE Room Mode Calculator
This is a very nice tool that allows you to visualise the high pressure areas by frequency.
Itâs visual and easy to use. In addition, the tool is complemented with theoretical information to help understand the phenomena.
1 Like
I think the benefit of the data in the link I posted is that it has been assessed more thoroughly than the info presented by the likes of AMROC: this from the introductory text:
â Many optimum room ratios have been suggested over the years to minimize coloration. Essentially these methods try to avoid degenerate modes, where multiple modal frequencies fall within a small bandwidth, and the corollary of bandwidths with absences of modes. The starting point for these previous methods is usually the equation defining the modal frequencies within a rigid rectangular enclosure. Often the best dimensions are given in terms of the ratios to the smallest room dimension.â
âŚ
âThe new method has been produced based on producing the flattest possible modal frequency response for the room to determine the best room size. It uses a computer algorithm to search for best solutions [5]. Furthermore, the algorithm has been further advanced since reference [5] to look at room dimensions which are robust to changes in room size due to construction tolerances in terms of the room size and the properties of the construction material.â
2 Likes
In laymanâs terms without having a degree in tech speak, Quantum Mechanics or Nuclear Physics what does it actually mean in very simple terms?
Would a slightly off square room as in my design of 22 ft by 24 ft be OK or is more off square (more rectangular) better?
I downloaded the spreadsheets, and picked the ballpark room volume then tried to find a best fit starting with the one dimension I couldnât reduce (height). That was the â1â in the ratios, and so I multipled all the other numbers by the height (8 or whatever it was) using a spreadsheet, looked for one or other of the other two numbers that matched either width or length as long as the other number was less than the remaining one it had the potential for alteration.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
Most (all?) of the worldâs great concert halls are âshoeboxâ shaped, so thatâs what Iâve aimed for in my music room - although greatly reduced in scale, of course.
Iâm lucky that my music room has shoebox dimensions.
I have pondered putting acoustic tiles on the wall that has the shelves for the equipment (to soak up some - but not all - of the ambient sound bouncing off the walls), but I have never seen such tiles available for sale for the home. Does anyone have any ideas?
1 Like
There are several companies that deal in sound proofing and treating for home and professional settings. Iâve used one with diffusing ceiling tiles that have a sort of wave shape to them and deadening wall panels and high frequency absorbing wallpaper. Iâve used Daiken which as far as I know is only in Japan but Yamaha, and Kawaii both do room treatment internationally.
Iâd be a little careful though. I once had a totally dead room and it was great for movies but rubbish for music. Itâs the imperfections in the room that give music that live in your room feel. Remove those and itâs like being an ant trapped between massive headphones. The trick is to not overdo it. A light touch.
4 Likes
I asked Richard if heâd re open my old thread âThe perfect listening roomâ again as Iâve been tinkering with my design further and came up with a second option.
As you can see Iâm not really after the perfect acoustically perfect listening room (although that would be nice) but Iâm after the perfect room to listen to music in.
Itâs 50% a garden/day room to relax, lounge and chat with friends and 50% a hifi audio listening room.
The first design is just a large open plan room and the second is basically the same overall foot print but split into two separate spaces.
I was just wondering what forums members thought and if they had any further input.
Click on the images for a larger preview or click on the image again (twice) for an even larger preview.
Option 1
Option 2
View outside
2 Likes
@graham55
Thatâs really interesting to see.
Not just the main system, but the way you have your Quads.
Thanks for sharing 
1 Like
Forgive me if I am lagging a bit here in where you have got to. With the SL2s (keepers?) in such an environment, my intuition, and from having heard them playing (active) in a room with an 8ft ceiling, is:
1- better nearfield (say 1.1:1 â ish), which appears to be where you have the listening position sofa? i.e. so that any âmushâ gets lost behind here â and hopefully doesnât come/bounce back.
2- if you want to maintain the room as a living space then, in case of need, you can use free-standing treatment panels, and simply park these away when not required.
As others have said, a square-ish room presents the bigger challenges.
3- An apex-profile ceiling (offering much higher than 8ft/2.4M) would appear to help prevent awkward reflections â Iâd check with acoustsic consultants first.
Question â are you wedded to the SL2s, as such a space could accommodate an arguably (!!) better 'speaker, which would be better situated away from a rear wall. Solving the space with the SL2s seems fare easier and, obviously, keeps the 'speakers out of the way from a living perspective.
1 Like
Thanks. The NAT-01 and NA-PST should be sitting on the top and third shelf on the right, but are (or have been) with Naim for servicing at the moment.
I currently have six pairs of speakers, I just used the SL2âs as an example of where the speakers would be and where the listing position would be.
My current line up of speakers which Iâm happy with:
SBL (black ash)
SBL (cherry)
SL2 (cherry)
Neat Ekstraâs
Cube Nenuphar 10 inch
Living Voice OBX RW
I could arguably sell some of my speakers and get a bigger more expensive pair, I could also split the space further into three separate spaces by sectioning off the big/main room on Option 2 into two rooms.
If I split the main room on Option 2 in half Iâd have two rooms that were 11ft x 18ft which would give a separate day room and listening room instead of a large open plan day/listening room.
My current listening room is 22.2ft x 22.2ft and I find all my speakers work very well in this space.
Are they? If by âshoeboxâ you mean 3D rectangular, if it is the case, that the majority are that shape it may be simply due to simplicity in construction and lack of knowledge of acoustics. Certainly there are many that are not that shape, maybe the most common variation sloping or curved ceiling, then sloping floor not parallel to ceiling. Non parallel walls also not uncommonly feature, while many have tiered upholstered seats, boxes, ornate mouldings etc, that significantly scatter or absorb sound even when the absorbant effect of masses of bodies is not present. (Halls that immediately come to mind are Royal Festival Hall, Royal Albert Hall, Royal opera house, Cardiff opera house, and I believe several other internationally prominent opera houses, and that great former classical recording venue in London, Kingsway Hall (recordings from which often feature the periodic rumbling of underground trains beneath!)
