The Future of Acoustic modeling

G

Grant Conklin

Freshman
Jan 12, 2011
87
0
6
St. Paul, MN
www.g-forceproaudio.com
Until now, LARA (from Integral Acoustics) has been sufficient for my 3d modeling needs. It requires that Ease 2 and 3 files be converted to text files using Polarview. It's cumbersome, and I don't think there's been an update to the software in the nearly 4 years since I bought it. It crashes at least once a night too. LARA Details

I've had my eye on Ray End for quite some time, as they said that a 3d version of their software would be coming. I check their website from time to time, still no 3d. Then I took a look at the version they created for Danley. What do you know, 3d! But, only for Danley products. Ray-End Acoustical Simulation Software
DDT Software | Danley Sound Labs, Inc.

Fulcrum's latest products only have GLL files, and that's my "go to" speaker line. So, with Ease GLL files gaining traction, it looks as though my days with LARA may be numbered. Perhaps what I really need to do is break down and buy a copy of Ease Jr, but I've been avoiding that for as long as possible mainly because of the expense, but also the learning curve. I know that CATT acoustic and others are out there, but unless I'm mistaken I don't think they solve either of these problems, and they're even less prevalent.

I guess I'm either looking for insider info on what might be coming next, or confirmation that EASE is where I need to head. And it might be cool just to have a fresh dialogue on subject of 3d modeling, and see what I/we can learn.

Thanks in advance,
Grant
 
Re: The Future of Acoustic modeling

Grant Conklin said:
Until now, LARA (from Integral Acoustics) has been sufficient for my 3d modeling needs. It requires that Ease 2 and 3 files be converted to text files using Polarview. It's cumbersome, and I don't think there's been an update to the software in the nearly 4 years since I bought it. It crashes at least once a night too. LARA Details

I've had my eye on Ray End for quite some time, as they said that a 3d version of their software would be coming. I check their website from time to time, still no 3d. Then I took a look at the version they created for Danley. What do you know, 3d! But, only for Danley products. Ray-End Acoustical Simulation Software
DDT Software | Danley Sound Labs, Inc.

Fulcrum's latest products only have GLL files, and that's my "go to" speaker line. So, with Ease GLL files gaining traction, it looks as though my days with LARA may be numbered. Perhaps what I really need to do is break down and buy a copy of Ease Jr, but I've been avoiding that for as long as possible mainly because of the expense, but also the learning curve. I know that CATT acoustic and others are out there, but unless I'm mistaken I don't think they solve either of these problems, and they're even less prevalent.

I guess I'm either looking for insider info on what might be coming next, or confirmation that EASE is where I need to head. And it might be cool just to have a fresh dialogue on subject of 3d modeling, and see what I/we can learn.

Thanks in advance,
Grant
Click to expand...
The Danley 3D model is NOT an acoustics model.

I guess you need to determine exactly what you mean by "acoustic modeling". To me it means building a room (down to every 6" or less if possible) and then looking at reverb time-reflections and so forth.

Now if you are talking about a simple coverage map (which the Danley 3D provides), then that is a different story.

One thing you HAVE to be careful of when looking at a 2D model-is the fact that it is NOT providing anywhere near an accurate coverage map. It ONLY provides a "coverage" in the plane of the loudspeakers.

So it you have loudspeakers mounted in the air and pointed down-,the you will not see what the coverage is on the floor-but rather what the SPL is as you "look through" the sound field.

This is often VERY different than what the coverage is on the floor.

3D is a lot more involved than 2D.

2D has its advantages, but as usual-it all depends on what you are looking for in a model.

You FIRST have to determine what kind of answer you are looking for-THEN choose the proper tool to help you.

It is like choosing a screw driver. FIRST you have to determine what KIND of screwdriver you need-THEN look at the other options.

You could have the best phillips driver out there-but it is worthless if your screw has a slot head.. Unless you are good at grinding. So yes- using a 2D model-and a good bit of knowledge/experience and different views, you can kinda get an idea of that the coverage is in a real 3D world. But this is NOT for the average user.

As with any model, you HAVE to understand exactly what the model is telling you-or you will make WRONG assumptions.
 
Re: The Future of Acoustic modeling

I've used EASE for a few years now and while the interface is a little cumbersome and occasionally buggy, I get a pretty good match between its direct-SPL plots and measurements in the room. I occasionally look at direct-to-reverb and other plots, but most of the church rooms I work in are pretty poor and just modelling better speaker locations (often in the air) makes a significant difference.

In my research day job, we have CATT. (I haven't personally used it.) I'm told it doesn't have a good library of speaker models. EASE seems to have the edge here.

Best,
Michael
 
Re: The Future of Acoustic modeling

Thanks Ivan,
I know what I want. It's the software developers who need to quit using the word "acoustic," when what they really mean is mapping. I was just parroting what Ray End calls their software. I have LARA which does 3d coverage maps. That's all I need to do, but it looks like I need to be able to use the new GLL format. If that's the case, then I guess means I've answered my own question: I need EASE Jr.

Unless there's a new software developer out there that's about to take the world by storm with a new format. That's what I'm wondering. Will Ray End's 3d version eventually be released to the public with the ability to model most brand's products? Will Rational Acoustics come up with something for 3d coverage modeling? Is there a sleeper I'm unaware of? The real issue is having a file format that a particular piece of software can use. For a while I thought CLF would gain traction. If more manufacturers supported that format, and if good usable 3d mapping software came available for $500, I'd snatch it up.

Grant
 
Re: The Future of Acoustic modeling

Grant Conklin said:
Thanks Ivan,
I know what I want. It's the software developers who need to quit using the word "acoustic," when what they really mean is mapping. I was just parroting what Ray End calls their software. I have LARA which does 3d coverage maps. That's all I need to do, but it looks like I need to be able to use the new GLL format. If that's the case, then I guess means I've answered my own question: I need EASE Jr.

Unless there's a new software developer out there that's about to take the world by storm with a new format. That's what I'm wondering. Will Ray End's 3d version eventually be released to the public with the ability to model most brand's products? Will Rational Acoustics come up with something for 3d coverage modeling? Is there a sleeper I'm unaware of? The real issue is having a file format that a particular piece of software can use. For a while I thought CLF would gain traction. If more manufacturers supported that format, and if good usable 3d mapping software came available for $500, I'd snatch it up.

Grant
Click to expand...
Danleys 3D is based on the CLF data that is independently gathered.
 
Re: The Future of Acoustic modeling

According to a local Autodesk rep, at one point Autodesk was apparently considering integrating acoustic modeling of some form into AutoCAD and Revit. I think that somebody got the idea that they were already capable of 'modeling' all the surfaces and finishes, so it shouldn't be a big deal. My guess is that somebody then realized how complex it can really be, the support it would require and the fact that most AutoCAD and Revit users would have no idea of what they were doing.

I also believe that EASE 5.0 is going to add boundary element method analysis for low frequency modeling. BEM may also be relevant to improved modeling of the absorption, scattering and diffusion characteristics of materials. Think of something like a speaker polar/balloon but what you see is how sound is reflected off a material surface for different frequencies and with a sound source at different angles relaitve to the material face.
 
Re: The Future of Acoustic modeling

Grant Conklin said:
Do the independent labs (am I correct that there are only 2 in the US?) have the ability to collect data for multiple formats at once, or to convert data to other formats?
Click to expand...
I know ETC and NWAA do typically provide the data in multiple formats. Also note that there are actually two versions of CLF data, CLF 1 with 10 degree and one octave resolution and CLF 2 with 5 degree and one-third octave resolution, the latter is more common and more directly comparable to EASE data files.

It is important to understand that the SPK and CLF formats look at a loudspeaker or array as a single entity while the GLL format allows looking at the individual drivers as separate sources and the enclosure as a physical thing as well as including the effects of filters and delays. For example, say you have a two-way box with a rotatable horn and you want to look at it modeled with it rotated. With CLF and SPK files you either had to have a separate file for the box with the horn rotated or you simply rotate the entire box in your model, which is not really the same as rotating just the horn. With a full GLL file one could potentially rotate just the HF horn and see not just the HF pattern rotate but also how the interactions with the LF driver change, which you could then further modify by changing the crossover or adding delay and seeing the predicted results of those changes.

Since SPK and CLF files look at a speaker as a single entity they do not include all the data required for that functionality and thus I don't believe you can convert from SPK or CLF to GLL. However, I believe that with the Pro version of SpeakerLab it is possible to export the results of a GLL speaker as SPK or CLF files or as tabular data.
 
Top Bottom