Jump to content

Absorbtion by Leather Over Stuffed Furniture


zuzu

Recommended Posts

It depends on allot of things!

Compared to what? Placed where? What color?

Whatever the color, don't count on it doing much to tame the room. If you are sitting in in in the listening position its total contribution is going to be very small. What color shirt will you be wearing? (If you need a more detailed analysis, let me know. And pardon the humor...)

[;)]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is humor but whose and for whom?. There is laughter. Always theraputic for all. Humor directed at others to offset a personal hole or flaw [recognized or not] in ones make-up, serves to maintain and even deepen the hole and is not laughter.Gandi never bragged or put others down. Perhaps he had no hole to fill! Fabric intuititively seems absorbent to me. Leather on the other hand intuititively seems kind of reflective. Your genious is applauded. Your humor far less than you might imagine. You can't fill the hole by dumping "humor" on someone else. Thanks mas for all your wonderful helpful "giving",posts. These are what endear you to me anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is humor but whose and for whom?. There is laughter. Always theraputic for all. Humor directed at others to offset a personal hole or flaw [recognized or not] in ones make-up, serves to maintain and even deepen the hole and is not laughter.Gandi never bragged or put others down. Perhaps he had no hole to fill! Fabric intuititively seems absorbent to me. Leather on the other hand intuititively seems kind of reflective. Your genious is applauded. Your humor far less than you might imagine. You can't fill the hole by dumping "humor" on someone else. Thanks mas for all your wonderful helpful "giving",posts. These are what endear you to me anyway.

Hahaha! Its one thing to explain humor and to ascribe cause and effect. But I must admit that works better when you have a clue as to what exactly you are referring! You don't. So if you don't get the joke, it is hard to evaluate it.

An answer follows the question that is asked. A well formed and defined question leads more often to well formed and defined answer.

Its one thing to not understand my humor. ...Say you don't get it. That's fine. You don't have to! But its another thing entirely to then go and to attempt to ascribe blame and conclusions based upon an even greater ignorance. You might want to do a bit of figuring out just who has done this! It would be nice if some simply failed to dig those holes to begin with. And if someone wants to create their own imagined slight, hey, have fun. But you might want to leave me, and maybe even Gandhi, out of the mix.

I am sorry if you do not see the issues in the question that provided me with plenty of fodder for playful logical conundrum. And you are definitely not Gandhi either, as I made NO attempt to put anyone down, and you certainly failed in your attempt to understand my ability to construct ironical constructs with what was given. I simply made light of the logical conundrum that having too little information made it possible for me to speculate on the issue in a myriad number of ways - including many which I suspect had no bearing on your goal - but which I was left with only to my imagination to ascertain! So the humor was my own, and the rest, including your ascription of meaning, is your imagination.

So, if you don't get the joke, it would probably be best if you don't try to explain it to others...

We can address issues of absorption and reflection and we can address issues of small acoustical spaces.But just asking how a surface covering behaves is a bit too little and too vague to answer to a conclusive answer without either making a bunch of assumptions or having other more substantial information provided.

You want the broad answer? Leather is both reflective and less reflective at different frequencies (and not really absorptive as a material thickness of , say, 1/16" except at frequencies none of us care about such as ~38.2kHz!). And the mass and composition of the entire couch becomes instrumental as well. In other words, its response varies with frequency and is non-linear. And the absorptive characteristics of he couch also depend upon many factors, ranging from mass to placement. And let's take this further, since you already fully understand my humor but not what it was predicated upon... If the couch is located in the primary listening position, as opposed to being located in a secondary location such as along a wall for additional seating in a general purpose room, then the role and effect upon the listening 'spot' can be significantly different. And since none of this was specified, we have lots of possibilities, limited only by my fertile imagination. And the possibilities are so broad as to render the question, without qualification, akin to asking what is the effect of the sun upon the weather.

So, rather than attempt to address every combination and permutation and their subsequent ramifications in a relational environment, I might suggest providing us with more specific information about the room and the placement of the couch in the room relative to the sound sources as well. And then we can attempt to make a few general predictions.

But put simply, if you are simply sitting on the couch, it may cause some early reflections to be directed off the surface of the couch towards you and additional diffusion of those reflective surfaces which directed (as in source) these specular reflections at this couch surface would generally be beneficial. But one could also say that if this is planned for from inception, that the early specular reflections would already be addressed. Again, the framing of the conditions impacts the response. As far as room mode absorption, some benefit may be obtained, but probably not allot if it is located in the primary listening position. More detail is available if this is close to what you were wondering. Or with more detail we can speculate on more specific effects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I was watching some of the Lexus adverts with Diana Krall and Elvis Costello. Anyway, the engineer was talking about how they fine tune the sound system and they even consider the sonic qualities of various kinds of leather used in the upholstery. I thought, wow, how much difference could one leather make over another, but they are looking at this pretty close. The guy laughs and says he tuned his home HT to sound like his Lexus, it was so good.

Wish I had something to offer in terms of technical understanding, but it makes sense to me that fabric would be more absorbing of sound and leather more reflective. I suppose the conventional wisdom is right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an old pic of my livingroom. I can't tell if the leather chairs act to deaden the room more or less than fabic furniture but they do seem react more to music. It's like sitting in a massage chair. Fabric chairs in the same position just didn't do that. I'm not sure why, but I'm just guessing that since the leather is relatively impermeable and the chair contains dead air/stuffing space, it can compress and expand in reaction to accoustic pressure a little like a passive resonator - especially the chair back, which is pretty well sealed. The floor and chair frames are very solid so I don't think it's structurally transmitted vibration.

post-17394-1381933425209_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neither the thickness of cloth itself nor the thickness of leather itself involved will provide ANY appreciable absorption at frequencies we are about. The primary differences will be in the frequencies that are reflected - in other words, how the reflected sound is non-linearly EQd, with slightly more mids being reflected by the leather. And still, regarding absorption, the differences will be minimal at the frequencies we care about. Absorption will be a function of the mass of the couch, not the surface material.

Provided a material is ~1/16" thick, at a 45 degree angle of incidence, the 1/4 wave length correlation is ~38.2 kHz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sputnik, the sealed nature of the leather furniture would tend to cause it to react differently than a porous vehicle. But predicting exact behavior would be difficult, as we would not know the porosity of the leather body nor how sealed it is (ie the bottom). And also, since the membrane cannot vibrate freely without contact of the absorbent damping material (stuffing), it would not act like a good membrane Helmholtz resonator.

This is a case where it is easier to simply measure the effect than to calculate it.

As an absorber, the actual amount of absorbent material in the chair/couch is not going to be substantial. At best it is going to be extremely low Q and inefficient; especially if placed in the 'center' of the room near a preferred listening position.

Bottomline, as an absorber, the leather doesn't really matter.

The color of the leather will have a greater impact upon the room aesthetics than the leather will on the absorptive characterisitics.


Its greatest potential impact in the listening position, would be to act as a reflective source that might redirect some other early specular reflections toward the listener. And again, this is most easily addressed by simple surface diffusion prior to the reflection impacting the couch surface.

Addendum:

Here are the general absorptive coefficients of cloth and leather furniture. The differences are trivial. The cloth furniture will be slightly less reflective in the mid frequencies. Sorry for the hash of the cut and paste - The advance editor here just freezes after dropping the Excel frames into it and hence attempts to adjust it have resulted in a double post.

63 Hz

125 Hz

250Hz

500Hz

1kHz

2kHz

4kHz

8kHz

Category



Material

63

125

250

500

1k

2k

4k

8k

Category

















0.40 0.40 0.50 0.58 0.61 0.58 0.50 0.50 Miscellaneous
Empty chairs,
upholstered with leather cover
0.44 0.44 0.60 0.77 0.89 0.82 0.70 0.70 Miscellaneous
Empty chairs,
upholstered with cloth cover
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an old pic of my livingroom. I can't tell if the leather chairs act to deaden the room more or less than fabic furniture but they do seem react more to music. It's like sitting in a massage chair. Fabric chairs in the same position just didn't do that. I'm not sure why, but I'm just guessing that since the leather is relatively impermeable and the chair contains dead air/stuffing space, it can compress and expand in reaction to accoustic pressure a little like a passive resonator - especially the chair back, which is pretty well sealed. The floor and chair frames are very solid so I don't think it's structurally transmitted vibration.

Groovy lamps Sputnik, and I dig that 'pie slice' coffee table between the chairs. Can you share where you got that uber-retro floor-to-ceiling lamp at far right? I have a stone hearth (Indiana Limestone in my case) and that would look super cool!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is humor but whose and for whom?. There is laughter. Always theraputic for all. Humor directed at others to offset a personal hole or flaw [recognized or not] in ones make-up, serves to maintain and even deepen the hole and is not laughter.Gandi never bragged or put others down. Perhaps he had no hole to fill! Fabric intuititively seems absorbent to me. Leather on the other hand intuititively seems kind of reflective. Your genious is applauded. Your humor far less than you might imagine. You can't fill the hole by dumping "humor" on someone else. Thanks mas for all your wonderful helpful "giving",posts. These are what endear you to me anyway.

Hahaha! Its one thing to explain humor and to ascribe cause and effect. But I must admit that works better when you have a clue as to what exactly you are referring! You don't. So if you don't get the joke, it is hard to evaluate it.

An answer follows the question that is asked. A well formed and defined question leads more often to well formed and defined answer.

Its one thing to not understand my humor. ...Say you don't get it. That's fine. You don't have to! But its another thing entirely to then go and to attempt to ascribe blame and conclusions based upon an even greater ignorance. You might want to do a bit of figuring out just who has done this! It would be nice if some simply failed to dig those holes to begin with. And if someone wants to create their own imagined slight, hey, have fun. But you might want to leave me, and maybe even Gandhi, out of the mix.

I am sorry if you do not see the issues in the question that provided me with plenty of fodder for playful logical conundrum. And you are definitely not Gandhi either, as I made NO attempt to put anyone down, and you certainly failed in your attempt to understand my ability to construct ironical constructs with what was given. I simply made light of the logical conundrum that having too little information made it possible for me to speculate on the issue in a myriad number of ways - including many which I suspect had no bearing on your goal - but which I was left with only to my imagination to ascertain! So the humor was my own, and the rest, including your ascription of meaning, is your imagination.

So, if you don't get the joke, it would probably be best if you don't try to explain it to others...

We can address issues of absorption and reflection and we can address issues of small acoustical spaces.But just asking how a surface covering behaves is a bit too little and too vague to answer to a conclusive answer without either making a bunch of assumptions or having other more substantial information provided.

You want the broad answer? Leather is both reflective and less reflective at different frequencies (and not really absorptive as a material thickness of , say, 1/16" except at frequencies none of us care about such as ~38.2kHz!). And the mass and composition of the entire couch becomes instrumental as well. In other words, its response varies with frequency and is non-linear. And the absorptive characteristics of he couch also depend upon many factors, ranging from mass to placement. And let's take this further, since you already fully understand my humor but not what it was predicated upon... If the couch is located in the primary listening position, as opposed to being located in a secondary location such as along a wall for additional seating in a general purpose room, then the role and effect upon the listening 'spot' can be significantly different. And since none of this was specified, we have lots of possibilities, limited only by my fertile imagination. And the possibilities are so broad as to render the question, without qualification, akin to asking what is the effect of the sun upon the weather.

So, rather than attempt to address every combination and permutation and their subsequent ramifications in a relational environment, I might suggest providing us with more specific information about the room and the placement of the couch in the room relative to the sound sources as well. And then we can attempt to make a few general predictions.

But put simply, if you are simply sitting on the couch, it may cause some early reflections to be directed off the surface of the couch towards you and additional diffusion of those reflective surfaces which directed (as in source) these specular reflections at this couch surface would generally be beneficial. But one could also say that if this is planned for from inception, that the early specular reflections would already be addressed. Again, the framing of the conditions impacts the response. As far as room mode absorption, some benefit may be obtained, but probably not allot if it is located in the primary listening position. More detail is available if this is close to what you were wondering. Or with more detail we can speculate on more specific effects.

Much ado about nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is humor but whose and for whom?. There is laughter. Always theraputic for all. Humor directed at others to offset a personal hole or flaw [recognized or not] in ones make-up, serves to maintain and even deepen the hole and is not laughter.Gandi never bragged or put others down. Perhaps he had no hole to fill! Fabric intuititively seems absorbent to me. Leather on the other hand intuititively seems kind of reflective. Your genious is applauded. Your humor far less than you might imagine. You can't fill the hole by dumping "humor" on someone else. Thanks mas for all your wonderful helpful "giving",posts. These are what endear you to me anyway.

Hahaha! Its one thing to explain humor and to ascribe cause and effect. But I must admit that works better when you have a clue as to what exactly you are referring! You don't. So if you don't get the joke, it is hard to evaluate it.

An answer follows the question that is asked. A well formed and defined question leads more often to well formed and defined answer.

Its one thing to not understand my humor. ...Say you don't get it. That's fine. You don't have to! But its another thing entirely to then go and to attempt to ascribe blame and conclusions based upon an even greater ignorance. You might want to do a bit of figuring out just who has done this! It would be nice if some simply failed to dig those holes to begin with. And if someone wants to create their own imagined slight, hey, have fun. But you might want to leave me, and maybe even Gandhi, out of the mix.

I am sorry if you do not see the issues in the question that provided me with plenty of fodder for playful logical conundrum. And you are definitely not Gandhi either, as I made NO attempt to put anyone down, and you certainly failed in your attempt to understand my ability to construct ironical constructs with what was given. I simply made light of the logical conundrum that having too little information made it possible for me to speculate on the issue in a myriad number of ways - including many which I suspect had no bearing on your goal - but which I was left with only to my imagination to ascertain! So the humor was my own, and the rest, including your ascription of meaning, is your imagination.

So, if you don't get the joke, it would probably be best if you don't try to explain it to others...

We can address issues of absorption and reflection and we can address issues of small acoustical spaces.But just asking how a surface covering behaves is a bit too little and too vague to answer to a conclusive answer without either making a bunch of assumptions or having other more substantial information provided.

You want the broad answer? Leather is both reflective and less reflective at different frequencies (and not really absorptive as a material thickness of , say, 1/16" except at frequencies none of us care about such as ~38.2kHz!). And the mass and composition of the entire couch becomes instrumental as well. In other words, its response varies with frequency and is non-linear. And the absorptive characteristics of he couch also depend upon many factors, ranging from mass to placement. And let's take this further, since you already fully understand my humor but not what it was predicated upon... If the couch is located in the primary listening position, as opposed to being located in a secondary location such as along a wall for additional seating in a general purpose room, then the role and effect upon the listening 'spot' can be significantly different. And since none of this was specified, we have lots of possibilities, limited only by my fertile imagination. And the possibilities are so broad as to render the question, without qualification, akin to asking what is the effect of the sun upon the weather.

So, rather than attempt to address every combination and permutation and their subsequent ramifications in a relational environment, I might suggest providing us with more specific information about the room and the placement of the couch in the room relative to the sound sources as well. And then we can attempt to make a few general predictions.

But put simply, if you are simply sitting on the couch, it may cause some early reflections to be directed off the surface of the couch towards you and additional diffusion of those reflective surfaces which directed (as in source) these specular reflections at this couch surface would generally be beneficial. But one could also say that if this is planned for from inception, that the early specular reflections would already be addressed. Again, the framing of the conditions impacts the response. As far as room mode absorption, some benefit may be obtained, but probably not allot if it is located in the primary listening position. More detail is available if this is close to what you were wondering. Or with more detail we can speculate on more specific effects.

Much ado about nothing.

That was exactly my point.

^2

...And maybe why your furniture hasn't solved your modal issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mas can you tell us another joke?

I promise to laugh, even if it's not funny.

Roc, most were lost and got their panties in a serious wad when I simply alluded to the existence of drummer jokes. And look at the uproar that caused! (Of course, I don't know if they were wearing leather or not...hmmm...)

If I tell a joke its for my amusement. And why would you bother to laugh or try to explain it if you don't get it?

Besides, there are quite enough posts on this forum at which to laugh...whether they are intended to be humorous or not... [*-)]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...