Sunset Center, Carmel, California

Renovated Hall Layout A

Case C. Multiple sources (#1 through #5) located across the stage. Listener #1 on the left side of the hall half-way back; Listener #2 near the left rear corner; Listener #3 at the center of the hall.

Figure 1. Parametric view of hall and stage; red lines from “1”, “2”, “3”, “4”, “5” are the sound sources. Listeners #1, #2, and #3 are shown in blue.

Figure 2. Plan view of hall and stage; red lines from “1”, “2”, “3”, “4”, “5” are the sound sources. Listeners #1, #2, and #3 are shown in blue.

Figure 3. Early Decay Time (EDT) throughout the hall for source “1” to “5”. Decay times are quite uniform throughout, a dramatic improvement over the results seen in the Oct. 2000 Hall configuration. Typical Decay times of 1.6 to 2.0 seconds are considered very good.

Figure 4. Reverberation Time (T30) of 1.8 to 2.4 seconds is longer than in the Oct. 2000 Hall configuration. It is quite close to the optimal range for T30 of 1.8 to 2.2 seconds.

Listener #1 (Left Side of Hall)

Figure 5a. Reflectogram (no direct sound; delay ~0.11 sec) Figure 5b. Sound Rose

This result is similar to the result for the same seat in Oct 2000 configuration of the hall.

Listener #2 (Left Side, Rear of the Hall)

Figure 6a. Reflectogram (no direct sound; delay ~0.12sec) Figure 6b. Sound Rose

This result is similar to the same case run for the hall in its October 2000 configuration.
Listener #3 (Center of Hall)

Figure 7a. Reflectogram Figure 7b. Sound Rose

Figure 8. Sound Roses in Figures 5b, 6b, and 7b, suggest that the Lateral Fractions (LF) for this design are poor. Here we see poor LF for a major portion of the hall. This means there is little sense of envelopment. The vaulted ceiling is the likely cause. Small scale decorations would help. Alternatively, a reflector design within the “transparent” beams might help. Speakers around the audience will certainly help if they do not distort the sound.