Tuning unusual rooms (practical advice wanted from pros)

[Marco Giustini]

This is not the first time I see a cinema where two random PA speakers were used because "2 is better than 1" - to be fair I was sceptical with Line Arrays too when they started being deployed in cinemas though those are a different beast compared to two speakers side by side, the coverage and the angles are precisely calculated.

Glad to have Meyer here to help and glad to see we all more or less agree on the basic concerns.

I think we can all agree on one thing: shift the focus of this project from the EQ to the room/acoustic/equipment. Invest time and money there. The EQ comes last.

[Ryan Gallagher]

Fundamentally I agree with the overall design/implementation concerns. But the truth is this room probably has less than 40 screenings left to run with this setup over the next year before it too goes away.

All those suggestions are excellent in the education department, but I lack the necessary DeLorean.

I can probably refocus some cabinets, or play with baffling. But rigging changes and alternative equipment won’t be in the financial priorities if my magic 8 ball is calibrated.

The splayed mains are probably due to them being rigged higher and more outboard than ideals to accommodate lighting needs, and I expect there was too much of a hole down front as a result. I might be able adjust some bad focus that crept in over time.

Flattening the splay of the center channel seems a worthwhile experiment though, but when walking the room you don’t hear much combing with it, more noticeable in the main, but there might still be frequency nodes due to splay in both.

[Marco Giustini]

It’s understandable, Ryan.

in your situation, and with Meyer’s approval (), I’d probably try to disconnect one of the centre speakers and just use one, aimed at the audience.

[Ryan Gallagher]

It’s understandable, Ryan.

in your situation, and with Meyer’s approval (), I’d probably try to disconnect one of the centre speakers and just use one, aimed at the audience.

Yeah I can definitely try that Monday easily if it is an adequate cabinet as a single. But Jay already alluded to a better 2011 period choice there, so I expect it might be overdriven as a single?

although arguably with the splay and coverage priority, most seats are only experiencing the SPL from one cabinet directly, so maybe dropping to a single for intelligibility is in the doable range.

[Marco Giustini]

without looking at the spec, if you don't push the volume too hard, I suspect you might be ok. In any case, with a difficult acoustic, lower is better than higher - and this comes from someone who used to run all his shows at reference level most of the time.

[Jay Wyatt]

At RLP, you'll lose about 6dB of amplitude below 1500Hz (where the two cabinets have summation) by going from splayed to one cabinet. Based on SPL predictions for a UPQ-D2 driven at max (18dBu pk) you'll be at a level that will reach in-band cinema targets. Coverage will suffer but thats a tradeoff worth making in my opinion -- again the D2 is the most narrow pattern model from the UPQ series so you're at the mercy of some poor model selections from years past.

Screenshot 2026-08-16 at 12.03.52 PM.png
Screenshot 2026-08-16 at 11.51.36 AM.png

So you'll probably end up flattening out that low shelf and some of the graphic EQ cuts to compensate for the loss of the second cabinet.
Screenshot 2026-08-16 at 12.08.38 PM.jpg

[Ryan Gallagher]

Did some experiments today with my maintenance shift. Better physically focused our mains that had been bumped out of focus over the years by electricians accessing the lights behind them. Our live engineer was much happier with the coverage and stereo imaging after doing so.

Had all 6 calibration mics out today in the house. (Although two were exhibiting problems/clipping/transients, that followed the mic, so ended up using 4 of them).

We also tried the experiment of dropping down to 1 cabinet for center. Wow does that make a clarity difference! We even listened to it with EQ totally flattened and it sounded better than with two active using an intense EQ effort trying to make it sound good. There is a whole upper range that just seems to vanish with the two cabinets active in that splayed configuration... as soon as you plug the second one back in all the sparkly details vanish, clarity goes to shit, and certain frequencies in the vocal range especially start constructively interfering. It was lessened with our dual cabinet EQ efforts, but still present compared to a single cabinet.

We subjectively still have some bounce off the stage deck problem, but the bulk of the audible struggle seemed to be the two cabinets not performing well as a center pair, as Jay and others predicted.

I'll have to get our other projectionist and TD to do an A to B listening test to make a decision. I think the choices are:

Two cabinets EQ: Center content sounds like shit to everyone.
vs.
Single cabinet EQ: Center content sounds great/good to most, not great to a few people due to coverage issues on extremes down front.

I did not get as far as doing a single cabinet X-curve rough EQ yet, but will do that first thing tomorrow so it's Apples to Apples.

We did start from scratch on a tuning EQ too (flattened starting points). I think it's close but still a work in progress by ear. Undecided on if my quick and dirty "clean up" of our prior EQs sounded better or worse.

He also had the insight to check if the house delays are active in the console file for films on the stereo feed to the mains. They were. They were summed mono so we took those out of there too.

At the suggestion of our audio engineer we also listened to some additional delay on the live desk to better time align the C to L+R. My ears are not as tuned but he thought it was an improvement with the 5.3ft of delay added to the mains. A rough choice based on the upstage downstage difference between the planes.

Will have to learn more how to use Smaart for time aligning to get more accurate. A little tricky when it's hard(er) to send a reference source to the CP750. But I suppose time aligning doesn't rely on the EQs, so could just temporarily route octa-capture or desk output there via a repatch maybe. Time aligning might be a fools errand in this goofy room since the distance delta is so different depending on where you sit.

Overall good day of learning what the room is actually capable of. Just some decisions and more time listening required to inch it forward.

[Jay Wyatt]

Using P.A specific speakers for cinema will NEVER work out properly for film sound, no matter how much EQ and other audio voodoo you try to pile on. I did some outdoor shows where I had no choice but to use P.A. gear (two of which were Meyers) and I just set everything by ear as I knew the x-curve would not work.

True, films are mixed on built multi-way point source loudspeaker systems purpose built for coverage and directivity in basic rectangular venues that are well damped acoustically.

I have a theory on line arrays and why they've garnered such a bad rap for film sound reproduction.
1) Economics: Line Arrays are incredibly expensive compared to a cinema screen channel. Like 10-20x. My suspicion is this can often steer end users towards "lesser" brands OR them ending up with far too few elements in their arrays than what's really needed. Or a combination of both. So instead of a 12-14 element array from a "big 3" manufacturer they end up with a 6-8 element array from a C/D tier option. Too few elements leads to exaggerated splay angles which results in spotty coverage front to back.
2) Knowledge Gaps: The practical knowledge of line array theory is not something you will find a typical cinema integrator well versed on -- we just don't encounter it all that often. Or it's a live sound rental firm that gets tasked with deploying and they may not have a good understanding of cinema practices. Either way a knowledge gap somewhere along the way has led to unsatisfactory results which has sullied or scared many off.

So yes, I do believe a line array making an LCR system if specified and deployed correctly can faithfully reproduce a cinema mix. For an example, several of the Arcadia Cinemas in Italy are a very well regarded for their audio quality and run line arrays (LINAs and Leopards). The Geffen at the Academy Museum is another (Vertec).

Are they necessary? Generally no, with exceptions for venues with steep & deep balconies that require vertical articulation on coverage or ones with dimensions that necessitate ultra long throw that a point source system cannot hit headroom targets on. Outdoor temp setups for studio wrap screenings or film festivals is another niche use case.

I don't believe the X-Curve has much to do with the line array vs point source topic. Most big gig mixers working on line arrays use target curves that are starting to resemble something not too far off our own X-Curve (if you squint a bit).

[Marco Giustini]

Glad to hear the single speaker idea was worth the time, Ryan.

Jay,
I have been involved with Line Arrays in cinemas myself (and I am aware of the Arcadia installations) and I was sceptical at first but then I realised that a good LA installation is - indeed - good. As you say, it's not as simple as dumping a speaker on a platform and take the microphone out - there is so much pre-during-post installation to do. But the coverage and final quality is indeed impressive.

Ryan,
For delay, Smaart can help but you can also use a laser meter. From the RLP, measure the distance to the centre speaker, then to the L and R speakers. Convert the delta in a time delay. That should take you pretty much there.

On EQ, consider the idea that the X Curve might not work well in your room with your equipment. I'd give it a go but I wouldn't see it as a holy grail to strictly follow in order to have the best of the best - that is often NOT the case in difficult environments.

[Marcel Birgelen]

Hasn't Meyer put in a ton of LCR line arrays into the larger CinemaxX (primarily German cinema chain) rooms over the last decade and a half? I haven't been the biggest fan of the chain itself due to multiple reasons, but never had any complaints about the audio.

Also, earlier Dolby Cinema setups also use mini-line arrays, even for their surrounds...

And there is no general reason line arrays don't work in a cinema environment, to the contrary, I think that Line Arrays can actually be very useful in very large and complex venues, especially multi-use venues. They can help eliminate reflections from walls and dramatically increase stereo coverage. I do know quite a few venues that could actually benefit from line arrays compared to the system they're driving now. But most rooms used for cinema aren't merely big enough, are equipped with sound-absorbing surfaces as such that line arrays simply aren't needed. I also don't think this room is sufficiently big to justify line arrays, even though it is a challenging setup.

@Ryan
Like others mentioned: The X-Curve assumes a somewhat normal room and imho is a shortcut. You're not taking the shortcut anymore as this room is not a "normal room", so I would not bother with it.

If running on a single center speaker improves clarity so much, I'd just leave it. Do you expect to sell out those shows? If not, then simply block off the seats in the problem zone or if you sell reserved seating, block them off right there and only unblock them if you really start to sell out.

I think you owe your paying customers a good show, being able to understand what people are saying is part of it... unless you're only going to show Christopher Nolan movies produced after 2010, but then you better start stacking up extra subwoofers.

[Ryan Gallagher]

@Ryan
Like others mentioned: The X-Curve assumes a somewhat normal room and imho is a shortcut. You're not taking the shortcut anymore as this room is not a "normal room", so I would not bother with it.

If running on a single center speaker improves clarity so much, I'd just leave it. Do you expect to sell out those shows? If not, then simply block off the seats in the problem zone or if you sell reserved seating, block them off right there and only unblock them if you really start to sell out.

I think you owe your paying customers a good show, being able to understand what people are saying is part of it... unless you're only going to show Christopher Nolan movies produced after 2010, but then you better start stacking up extra subwoofers.

Ryan,
For delay, Smaart can help but you can also use a laser meter. From the RLP, measure the distance to the centre speaker, then to the L and R speakers. Convert the delta in a time delay. That should take you pretty much there.

On EQ, consider the idea that the X Curve might not work well in your room with your equipment. I'd give it a go but I wouldn't see it as a holy grail to strictly follow in order to have the best of the best - that is often NOT the case in difficult environments.

The seating question is easy... we are general admission. It would just be a matter of training ushers to encourage people away from the down front extremes (until the room fills up that is). We average 1/2 to 2/3rds for most film engagements, and because our flat and scope formats are electively central-ish on the 4:3 screen, the down-close seats are mostly avoided already, also because of that center channel hot zone. But a handful do sell out.

Noted on the X-Curves not being considered a good goal. I just may not have the ear yet or the right familiar material to know where to go exactly from there. I can hear the problems and work on those, but I feel like I need a place to start, mostly due to inexperience, and X-curve targets are that place for now.

Yeah, I do have a laser disto at work so that method is accessible, just pick a middle seat and measure the distance delta. That is the poor mans time-alignment I'll deploy today and give it a listen.

I don't think it will transpire, but it would be really interesting to get a tech in to "critique" our self-imposed efforts soon, and show us what they would have done comparatively. Our TD did pursue quotes when the problem was first generating complaints this season before encouraging some in-house solutions.

[Marco Giustini]

On X-Curve, I didn't mean to say to ignore it. You can use it as a starting point of course. But don't feel it's an untouchable goal and that dialling it 100% will give you the best of the best. It might, it might not. Try it, then play with it. Variations are usually the amount of HF, the point where HF "hinges" and the amount of LF - and maybe where the LF hinges too.

On measuring distances with a laser meter, I'm not sure I'd consider that an inaccurate method It should give you 80-90% Considering the delay will vary depending on where you are seating, it's probably ok for your use!

[Steve Guttag]

True, films are mixed on built multi-way point source loudspeaker systems purpose built for coverage and directivity in basic rectangular venues that are well damped acoustically.

I have a theory on line arrays and why they've garnered such a bad rap for film sound reproduction.
1) Economics: Line Arrays are incredibly expensive compared to a cinema screen channel. Like 10-20x. My suspicion is this can often steer end users towards "lesser" brands OR them ending up with far too few elements in their arrays than what's really needed. Or a combination of both. So instead of a 12-14 element array from a "big 3" manufacturer they end up with a 6-8 element array from a C/D tier option. Too few elements leads to exaggerated splay angles which results in spotty coverage front to back.
2) Knowledge Gaps: The practical knowledge of line array theory is not something you will find a typical cinema integrator well versed on -- we just don't encounter it all that often. Or it's a live sound rental firm that gets tasked with deploying and they may not have a good understanding of cinema practices. Either way a knowledge gap somewhere along the way has led to unsatisfactory results which has sullied or scared many off.

So yes, I do believe a line array making an LCR system if specified and deployed correctly can faithfully reproduce a cinema mix. For an example, several of the Arcadia Cinemas in Italy are a very well regarded for their audio quality and run line arrays (LINAs and Leopards). The Geffen at the Academy Museum is another (Vertec).

Are they necessary? Generally no, with exceptions for venues with steep & deep balconies that require vertical articulation on coverage or ones with dimensions that necessitate ultra long throw that a point source system cannot hit headroom targets on. Outdoor temp setups for studio wrap screenings or film festivals is another niche use case.

I don't believe the X-Curve has much to do with the line array vs point source topic. Most big gig mixers working on line arrays use target curves that are starting to resemble something not too far off our own X-Curve (if you squint a bit).

Ohhh...I'll jump in on this one...

Here are some things I'll put my experience up against anyone else's...

• Film soundtracks are best reproduced by point-source speakers. Line-arrays are, inherently, not point-source and will smear the sound (reduce directivity and make the speaker feel "large" relative to what it is trying to reproduce. Multiple cabinets/horns/sources work against your goal.
• While a decent uniformity in frequency in the seating area should be the goal, uniform SPL is not. Your ears and brain use things like delay and level to determine directionality. Things that alter those audible cues also reduce directionality and also reduce believability in the track. If your theatre is of a typical size (100-feet [30m] long or less, you shouldn't need to worry about either coverage or level uniformity, providing you set up your room properly (good acoustics, tuned as per SMPTE specs). I also disagree with setting Left/Right to the same level as center as it artificially elevates Left/Right in level to compensate for their further distance. This also means the level of imbalance will vary depending on where you are sitting. If a person, in real-life walks across a stage (without a mic), their voice doesn't magically get louder as they get to the left/right. The only argument for setting them the same at the RLP is that is how the dub stage was likely set up so we are matching and the level difference should be "baked-in" if the rooms are identical.
• 2-ways, by and large, are better than 3-ways or 4-way speakers. This is not a universal statement but a general rule. a 3-way speaker, almost always, puts a crossover right in the middle of a key dialog area. You REALLY need great driver matching (and DI) to pull it off. Very few speakers do (the SC-423C and SC-424 do). A JBL 4675 from yesteryear beats most speakers being sold/installed today. It has its own problems, for sure, as every speaker does, but it gets far more right than wrong. And another shocker...an Altec A5 or A4 will best most speakers today for dialog intelligibility too (particularly if using a Mantaray horn...the multicell has horrible seat-to-seat uniformity).
• The D2 (or even the R2) analyzer, for tune ups is better that whatever you are using. That is, it's uniformity from unit-to-unit, tune-up to tune-up beats most any other rig...for what it does. It does not measure as much as SMAART but for what it does measure, I'll take the D2's response over what someone will get with SMAART. Furthermore, you can take five D2 rigs and with 5 different techs...measure the room and compare the five, they will all pretty much look the same...I don't see that with other RTA systems. They are more dependent on the person and the mics that were used.

With respect to Line Arrays, I put them into the classification that you should never design a standard cinema system around them. That is, if you have a "typical" theatre with a 100-foot or less throw (30m) and ratio >1.4:1, use conventional cinema (point-source) speakers. Where line arrays and other non-cinema speakers come into play is when you have a non-typical cinema in size, shape, acoustics. Mind you, they will never sound as good as a purpose built space where faithful sound reproduction was a primary concern.

However, when get into very big rooms (like Radio City Music Hall, the Colosseum in Vegas), a typical cinema speaker has no chance at covering those spaces. A degree of acknowledging that you are now applying mitigation tactics to overcome the space as much as trying to reproduce the movie. Those are spaces where I understand using things like line-arrays...balcony delays...and so forth. Heck, it doesn't even have to be a huge room...just very oddly shaped. I had one where it was something like 80-feet to the screen but the seating area was about 20-feet wide. Surrounds were the tricky channel there.

What does a Line Array do? Does it help with directionality? Nope...so right there, it isn't a great solution for Left/Right effects. But...when you get into massive spaces, you aren't going to cover it with a point source speaker. The line array really opens up the coverage of the space. That is, you can cover a lot with them. If you are doing a sound reinforcement for your rock show or even your church, it could be just the ticket. You aren't trying to "sell" the concept that what people are seeing (the person talking/singing) is coming just from their mouth...it sound like a speaker system. In cinema, we are selling the concept that what you see on screen is what is happening and the sound should reinforce that, not be a show unto itself to pull you out of the movie. So, yes, they do have valid applications in some cinematic spaces but, as a rule, no, they work against you. If you can get a point source speaker to cover the seating area, that is your better choice.

As for the Geffen theatre...yeah, it uses Vertecs and it sounds like it (they have distinguishable sound that I can best describe as metallic). And again, you get a smeared sound stage. Were they a good choice for that space? I don't know. It is a large, and particularly wide, room (it is spherical). The Geffen had me not wanting my spaces to sound like it. Then again, I heard it when it was still probably in its shake-down phase of construction. I wish I could have heard the Mann theatre...that one looked promising. And ask yourself...which sounds better to you...The Geffen or the Samuel Goldwyn theatre? Which theatre is going to deliver better dialog as well as effects? In my opinion, it isn't a close call (and that is before or after the recent speaker upgrade in the Goldwyn).

[Marco Giustini]

• The D2 (or even the R2) analyzer, for tune ups is better that whatever you are using. That is, it's uniformity from unit-to-unit, tune-up to tune-up beats most any other rig...for what it does. It does not measure as much as SMAART but for what it does measure, I'll take the D2's response over what someone will get with SMAART. Furthermore, you can take five D2 rigs and with 5 different techs...measure the room and compare the five, they will all pretty much look the same...I don't see that with other RTA systems. They are more dependent on the person and the mics that were used.

I'm curious: what makes the D2 special now that Smaart also allows to set a reference microphone so the average is not skewed by the loudest microphone? I'm not questioning what you say - I have both so I can use whichever I like

[Marcel Birgelen]

With respect to Line Arrays, I put them into the classification that you should never design a standard cinema system around them. That is, if you have a "typical" theatre with a 100-foot or less throw (30m) and ratio >1.4:1, use conventional cinema (point-source) speakers. Where line arrays and other non-cinema speakers come into play is when you have a non-typical cinema in size, shape, acoustics. Mind you, they will never sound as good as a purpose built space where faithful sound reproduction was a primary concern.

I think we generally agree. Line arrays are for the complicated, big rooms. Especially those with balconies with big overhang, a lot of reflective walls or temporary venues like large exhibition halls. Where we might differ is what constitutes a "big room".

As far as line arrays not being a point source, you're right, they're almost always used as a vertical strip. The honest question is, do you really register it that way, especially if you don't know that the source is a line array, as most humans aren't that good at registering the "height" of a sound. That's also why most immersive audio systems primarily focus on the horizontal surround field.

It would really be interesting to a blind A B test on that one.

The argument I usually hear is: Line arrays are for PA systems and they all sound like a rock concert. Which I think, is a dumb argument. For me, the IMAX sound system, which uses oversized point sources as their speaker layout, gives me rock concert vibes...

As for Smaart v.s. D2... I guess the D2 has the advantage it comes "fully calibrated", whereas your Smaart measurements are just as good as the weakest element in the chain. In Ryan's case, that's probably the Octa Capture.