One important ‘rule’ I forgot to mention is that you don’t want room absorption to become an “EQ” of sorts. And that means that you want to absorb as much of the frequency spectrum as possible when you add a panel. If you only absorb some of the frequencies then you are effectively adding a low pass filter to that area of your room.

With that said, a 4″ panel will scrub down to around 250Hz while a 2″ panel will scrub only to 500Hz (these are rough numbers). BUT… If you take a 2″ panel and mount it 2″ off the wall you not only get a nice shadowbox effect/look, but you get very close to the effect of a 4″ panel. I highly recommend doing this if at all possible.

I’m really glad Clint was able to step in on such short notice! I would’ve loved to have taken part, but my audio would’ve been a mess of coughs and sniffles :p Virus hit me out of nowhere on Monday 🙁 Not fun.

I loved hearing the SubDude get mentioned. It seems as though all of my harassment about the importance of decoupling is starting to pay off! Bwa-ha-hahaha! I’ve even heard Ara over at the HTGuys mention it a few times after I bugged him so much that he actually bought one (and loved it)! 😀

3D is just a shambles, IMO. I went and saw Thor last week (it’s very entertaining, by the way. Chris Hemsworth really owned the role and made for a very convincing Thor). I made a point of seeing it in 2D after being so unimpressed by the underwhelming 3D in Tron: Legacy. The viewing experience was so much better in 2D!

I’ve only seen two 3D movies where the 3D actually added something. And those were Piranha 3D and Jackass 3D! When the whole premise of the movie is built around 3D, then the gimmick works! But in every other case, I’d much rather have the brighter, sharper, non-blurry 2D version.

At home, there are the Panasonic 3D plasmas with their active shutter glasses, and then there’s everything else. But bottom line, no 3D display is really good enough.

On MS buying Skype, Skype’s financials are at http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1498209/000119312511056174/ds1a.htm

Without looking too hard, it’s not impossible to think these numbers make sense, but Skype needs a lot of growth.

Skype only has about 9 million paying customers, who give them revenue of almost $900 million per year, growing really, really fast. Their free cash flow is about $150MM per year, which, as many have noted is totally insufficient to support a $8.5B valuation. But if they can keep growing the customers for a decade or so from what is a pretty small worldwide base, they’ve got a chance to make it pay off financially, without any tricky MS synergies required, which are probably mostly illusory anyway.

Loved the Star Wars roast! I was 14 whenthe first movie came out. I remember being overwhelmed by the total awesomeness of it, to the point that I pulled some more hard-earned cash out of my jeans and bought another ticket to the next showing. All I want are the original three theatrical cuts, restored with remastered multichannel audio. I could tolerate minor CG enhancements, like better views of X-wing fighters, windows in Cloud City, no orange blob under the speeder, cleaned up matte lines, etc. But not all of the infamous substantive alterations to the story and scenery.

Segment on room treatments was great. That’s something I really want to do.

I have a question about the theory. If for example a performer is mic’d close tp their mouth, that signal is direct and has not been influenced by the recording room. When that signal comes out of my speaker, it will be acted upon by my room. Isn’t that how human voices naturally reach us (in a real room)? If I treat my room so that the close-mic’d signal reaches my ear largely undisturbed, won’t that sound like the person is talking right into my ear?