Reverberant fields help performers produce louder output, so musicians favor live rooms

Evidence

Clearly the level of the reverberant field is strongly affected by the level of average absorption. The first example would be typical of an extremely “dead” acoustic environment, as found in some studios, whereas the second is typical of an average living room. — David M. Howard, Jamie Angus, Acoustics and Psychoacoustics, 1776 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

An interesting result from Equation 6.6 is that it appears that the level of the reverberant field depends only on the total absorbing surface area. In other words it is independent of the volume of the room. However, in practice the surface area and volume are related because one encloses the other. In fact, because the surface area in a room becomes less as its vol­ ume decreases, the reverberant sound level becomes higher for a given aver­ age absorption coefficient in smaller rooms although the reverberation time in the smaller room will always be shorter. Another way of visualizing this is to realize that in a smaller room there is less volume for a given amount of sound energy to spread out in, like a pat of butter on a smaller piece of toast. Therefore the energy density, and thus the sound level, must be higher in smaller rooms. However, there are more impacts per second with the surface of a smaller room, which gives rise to the more rapid decay than in a larger room. — David Howard, Jamie Angus, coustics and Psychoacoustics, 1806 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Reverberation gives performers a perceived output lift, so they prefer live rooms; Smaller rooms produce louder reverberant fields but shorter reverberation times — David Howard, Jamie Angus, coustics and Psychoacoustics, 1806; Reverberant fields supply most perceived loudness in normal rooms — David M. Howard, Jamie Angus, Acoustics and Psychoacoustics, 1776 (+1 more)

Broader Connections