Niels W. Adelman-Larsen has made an effort over the past years as to discover further what kind of acoustics are recommendable for amplified music concerts. Strangely before that there had been little, if any, scientific investigations regarding acoustics for pop and rock music.
Essential findings are recommendable T30 for a given size empty hall and also which tolerances around T30 are acceptable and recommendable at various octave bands. Absorption coefficcients for a standing audience were also identified.
Within the genre of rock and pop music, bass frequency tones are often played rhythmically syncopated and amplified to loud levels. Unlike higher frequency sound, bass frequencies cannot be aimed at the audience to the same degree, but propagates somewhat away from the speaker cabinets in other directions too.
All surfaces in the hall will hence contribute to the creation of LF reverberation if not LF absorptive. Further, audience absorbs 4-6 more mid-hi frequency sound than low. Not surprisingly T30 at bass frequencies of the empty hall must be low in order to form a great venue for an amplified music concert.
Niels authored a book for Springer Verlag on acoustic and architectural design for pop and rock venues.
Buy book here
Download research papers here:
Importance of bass clarity at amplified music concerts
On a new variable absorption product and acceptable tolerances around T30 for amplifed music concerts
Suitable RT in halls for rock & pop music
RT in 50 European venues that present amplified music
Variable LF absorber for multi purpose halls
The practice of peer review is to ensure that good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out on all reputable scientific journals. Our referees therefore play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of Applied Acoustics and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.
Special issues and/or conference proceedings may have different peer review procedures involving, for example, Guest Editors, conference organisers or scientific committees. Authors contributing to these projects may receive full details of the peer review process on request from the editorial office.
Initial manuscript evaluation
The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to at least 2 experts for review.
Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will be informed within 2 weeks of receipt.
Types of Peer Review
This journal employs single blind reviewing, where the referee remains anonymous throughout the process.
Referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise. Our database is constantly being updated. We welcome suggestions for referees from the author though these recommendations may or may not be used.
Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript :
- Is original
- Is methodologically sound
- Follows appropriate ethical guidelines (where appropriate)
- Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
- Correctly references previous relevant work
Referees are not expected to correct or copyedit manuscripts, although some referees may do so. Language correction is not part of the peer review process. How long does the review process take?
Typically the manuscript will be reviewed within 2 months. Should the referees' reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed a further expert opinion will be sought. All our referees sign a conflict of interest statement. Revised manuscripts are usually returned to the initial referees within 2 weeks. Referees may request more than one revision of a manuscript.
A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees.
Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.Becoming a Referee for Applied Acoustics
If you are not currently a referee for Applied Acoustics but would like to be added to the list of referees for this title, please contact one of the journal editors. The benefits of refereeing for Applied Acoustics include the opportunity to see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to be acknowledged in an annual statement in Applied Acoustics. You may also be able to cite your work for Applied Acoustics as part of your professional development requirements for various Professional Societies and Organisations. As an academic, being asked to carry out journal paper reviewing is an acknowledgement of your esteem.