CHARACTERIZATION OF ACOUSTICAL MATERIALS

PETER D'ANTONIO
TREVOR COX

RPG Diffusor Systems, Upper Marlboro, U.S.A.

University of Salford, Salford, U.K.

In addition to measuring electronic hardware used for recording, it is also important to be

able to measure the performance of the listening room and the acoustical surface treatments
used in their design. Typically, the room's geometry and shell design is used to determine
the overall modal response. Surface treatment is then used to tailor the reflection pattern to
suit the room' s use. In practice surface treatments are either absorptive or diffusive or some
combination thereof. Absorptive materials have received considerable treatment since
Sabine's seminal research, however, diffusive surfaces have only recently begun to get the
attention they deserve. This paper describes the goals of a three year research grant funded by
the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council of the UK (EPSRC GR/L13124)
and RPG Diffusor Systems, Inc. to determine a room acoustic diffusion coefficient.

INTRODUCTION
Advances in digital electronics have contributed
significantly to the quality of audio. As the technology
develops more and more measures of quality are needed to
quantify performance. Because sound must eventually
travel the acoustical path from loudspeaker to listener,
advances in acoustical technology must also keep pace with
these electronic advances, so that these benefits can be
perceived in listening rooms and home theaters. Before we
can evaluate the acoustics of listening rooms, however, we
must evaluate the acoustical elements which comprise them.
Rooms are characterized by th_ mass, stiffness and damping
of their boundaries as well as the acoustical surface
treatment on these boundaries. When a sound wave
encounters a room boundary, it is transmitted, absorbed and
scattered to varying degrees depending on the natu re of the
boundary. The non-transmitted sound can be specularly re-
directed by a reflecting surface, attenuated by an absorptive
surface or uniformly diffused by a diffusing surface. The
sound which is absorbed has been the subject of
considerable research and measurement standardization.
The random incidence absorption coefficient is one of the
most commonly used indicators of acoustical performance.
However, at present no reliable, physically rigorous
definition exists for a coefficient to characterize the
scattering process. The Audio Engineering Society has
formed a working group SC-04-02 under the chairmanship
of D'Antonio to study this problem. Several papers have
reported progress on this project [1,2,3,4,5]. In addition, the
authors have initiated a research program to develop a room
acoustic diffusion coefficient funded by the Engineering and
Physical Sciences Research Council of the UK and PPG
Diffusor Systems, Inc. The objectives of the ESPRC grant
are to:
1. Define and validate a new diffusion coefficient for room
acoustics which is clear andphysically rigorous
2. Produce new, and refine existing methods for predicting
scattering from surfaces
3. Develop a method for measuring the coefficient
acceptable to industry
4. Evaluate existing diffuse reflection modeling techniques
in room acoustics computer models using the new definition.

94 THE MEASURE OF AUDIO - AES UK CONFERENCE

 CHARACTERIZATION OF ACOUSTICAL MATERIALS

WHAT IS IDEAL DIFFUSION?

Diffusion has been shown to play a pivotal role in the design I _. _..:
of rooms used for sound production and reproduction 0.9 ,- ',
[6,7,8,9]. Research by the authors [10,11,12,13] and others 0.8 ,,/' '"'
[14] has shown that a diffusion coefficient is now needed to / ,,
enable accurate predictions of room acoustics, and also to ,_ O.7 / ,
evaluate different diffusing surfaces. The definition of a _ o.6 / ',
parameter to characterize the diffusivity of common room _ o.5 ,, ',
-- lt _'_
surfaces, will facilitate innovation in the design and use of _ 0.4 , ,
diffusing surfaces. It will also enable the development of _ 0.3 / \
more physically meaningful diffusion modeling algorithms. 0.2 / ',
This will then enable architects and acoustic consultants to / ',
design and build better buildings. 0.1 :1/ \x
0 r I I I I I I I I { ! I I I I I I I

The traditional way to evaluate the directivity polar response

of a point source has been to measurethe angular response OBSERVATION
ANGLE

can1/nth-octave
in further be condensed
frequency into
bands.,,Q,,
a factor and directivity
These angular responses
index. While this approach is applicable to point sound
sources, there is a complication due to the finite size of
scattering surfaces. As a result of this finite size, there is an
angular range, illustrated between approximately 700 and
110° in Figure I and in Figure 2, called the specular zone
within which the scattering surface can specularly reflect
sound,
Thus as we extend the size of the reflective surface, the
angular extent of the specular zone will increase. In this
regard, for an omnidirectional source, an infinite baffle will
essentially provide specular scattering to all observation
positions, leading to a paradox in which an infinite baffle
represents uniform angular scattering. Of course, in practice
we know this not tO be true for real directional sources,
Thus, we can adopt the criterion that an ideal diffusor is a
surface which scatters incident sound from any direction
into all directions uniformly for all frequencies. This is the
--- LAMBERT ...... ZEROSPECULAR
_UNIFORM
Figure 1. Three definitions of ideal diffusion
This is represented by the dotted notch filter response in
Figure 1. For this definition an ideal diffusor would have a
diffusion coefficient of 1, where the diffusion coefficient is
the ratio of the reflected energy in non-specular directions
and the total reflected energy. Thus depending on your
application there is a different definition of ideal diffusion
and it would obviously be of interest to merge these
different approaches. In this paper we use directional
diffusion or diffusivity to describe and quantify the angular
response of a scattering surface and scattering coefficient to
refer to the percentage of energy scattered in non-specular
directions.
2oM

straight solid horizontal line in Figure 1. Lambert [ 15,1 6] 1oM- _..

showed that scattering from a flat plane diffusing wall MaCAeC
5AMPLE , ,.
s° calledis distributed
element ideally according
unif°rm c°verage defmiti°n to represented
the cosinesof
bYthe
a _o' [ I [°u°sP_'i'iiec '"'x o'
, * .r_29_,. *
angles of incidence and reflection. This is the often quoted _ _. . _, ' _ ,- I
Lambert cosine law shown asa dashed line in Figure 1. _ '_ -' _ ._"i_9 _ _-
However, commonly encountered diffusing surfaces are not 2 _...' [ i, '_'_'._.._ -

holds at each planar point, if such a point exists, but the total
)'x '_
planar or flat
scattering from
anda have
complex
complicated
topology surfaces.
which isLambert'slaw
desired to be ;.. x, SPECULA
'!_,._;i/y_L/i ' ' "" _ _. '
ideal is the uniform scattering definition. ._,.. ZONE _ ] 7':
' __//--' I! ,/

For some room modeling programs we have yet a different, __

9O
and at this time incompatible, definition of ideal behavior.
A working definition for room modeling programs is that an Figure 2. Full scale diffusion response measurement
ideal diffusor scatters zero sound into the specular direction, geometry

THE MEASURE OF AUDIO - AES UK CONFERENCE 9 5

D'ANTONIO & COX

4O .... i .... i .... i ....

MEASURING SCATTERED ENERGY

To measure the sound scattered by a surface we must 30
provide a source to excite and a series of receivers to record
the scattered energy. To extract the scattered energy
component we must find a way to remove the direct sound 2o
fi-om the stimulus. Two methods have been proposed by the
authors. One is a simple boundary measurement technique, a_ l0
illustrated in Figure 2, which yields only a 2-dimensional ,-.-1

polar balloon and the other, illustrated in Figure 3, to a, 0

determine the 3D polar scattering balloons. If the <
goniometer is set on a wire mesh in an anechoic chamber, -lo
then the directional absorption coefficient can also be

-20
tZfJEClr.*l
t_ tCT_.r'r,n

-¢'_ ............ _'_ ..... -30 , , , , I , , , t . . . _ . . .

5 10 15 20
_w TIME (ms)

! =:1 Figure 4. On-axis speaker/microphone response

deconvolved from the measurement. In a multi-microphone

, . ,_?, measurement, each microphone/speaker combination must
be determined. To accomplish this, we place the speaker at
__ have to be characterized so that their response can be
_f_,__,_% _ .._,_ _ the center of the microphone and speaker semicircles and
¢:JF_3 '_._._[,_ ..¢ measure the on-axis response for each of the 37
'_¢_ q%C _,_v_ r j microphones by rotating the speaker so that it is normal to
.
M_o_09,w.) _,c_oM / the microphone speaker axis. The normalization response
......._" for the 450 microphone/speaker is shown in Figure 4. For
Figure 3. Goniometer for measuring 3D polar scattering normal incidence, the following series of graphs illustrate
balloons 15 ' .' i I

determined from the reflection factor. One of the problems

with these measurement methods is that it is impossible to
get into the far field for many receivers- the worst case being 1o
at grazing angles. Consequently, the scattered polar
response varies with choice of source and receiver position.
Ideally a standardized measurement should take place in the r.fl 5
far field where the polar response is invariant to receiver c2
radius,butthisisimpossible.
,-.3
0-_
A widerange of diffusingsurfacesdescribedlaterwill be _
< o _
t"
examined by both approaches. The 2D data will be
collected at RPG and the 3D data will be collected at Salford
University. -5

DATA REDUCTION
We will use the boundary measurement technique and an
in£mitebaffle to describe the data reduction procedureto -lo 0 .... ,
5 .... , ....
lO , ....
15 20
isolate the impulse of the sample at each angle of TIME(ms)
observation for a given angle of incidence. Before
scattering data is collected, the speaker and microphone Figure 5. Sample plus background response

9G THE MEASURE OF AUDIO - AES UK CONFERENCE

 CHARACTERIZATION OF ACOUSTICAL MATERIALS

15 .3 .... I I I ....
' ' ' I I I

10 .2

Ch
["" .1
_ 5
,-3 "J

<C <C

o _.,.._.. _ .o _-. :_ *_',-.--,--_-..r---'/--.-,,'_

--.1 .... I .... I .... I

--5 I I .... I ....

5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
TIME (ms) TIME (ms)

Figure 6. Background response Figure 8. Deconvolved and filtered sample response

how the impulse response at 450 is obtained. The sample is The total impulse response at 450 is shown in Figure 5. The
placed at the center of the concentric microphone and sample is then removed from the scattering position. The 37
speaker semicircles. Under computer control, a 131,072 scattering measurements are repeated to determine the direct
point Maximum Length Sequence stimulus is emitted by the sound and room response, which is called the background
source speaker and microphone number 1 is switched on. response. The background response at 45 o is shown in
The impulse response of the direct sound, the scattered Figure 6. Once normalization, sample plus background and
sound and the room, for a scattering angle of 45 °, is recorded background responses are collected, the data are
and saved to disc. The process is repeated for all of the automatically processed. The first step is to subtract the
scattering angles from 0 to 180 o automatically at 5o intervals, background response from the sample plus background
response. This isolates the scattered sound and makes it

15
' ' I I ' ' ' I ' .3
I I I I _ I I

lO

.2

,-1 _ .1
,.1

-5 .0 _ _ v

--10 .... I .... I .... I , .

0 5 lO 15 20 -. l , t , s , I , f , I , t , f ,
TIME (ms) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
TIME (ms)

Figure 7. Isolated raw sample response Figure 9. Sample response

THE MEASURE OF AUDIO - AES UK CONFERENCE 97

 D'ANTONIO & COX

easier to window. The raw sample response obtained is arise from such an approach. One of the problems is that
shown in Figure 7. The loudspeaker/microphone response is surfaces tend to bunch together so that values of low
then deconvolved from the raw sample response. The standard deviations are not produced.
resulting data are then filtered to remove artifacts outside the

is shown in 8 with the dotted window n Wp In i

---- )

done manually, and so the data reduction procedure

responsefrequency
positions. range of interest.
Windowing deconvolvedFigure
can beThis
alongfiltered
a time and
consuming exercise if _I 1 og( c, ,7 ,f i 212
automatically calculates the windowing for all 37
microphone positions and isolates the corrected sample (n- l)
responses. The 45 o sample response is shown in Figure 9.
The 37 impulse responses are Fourier transformed into the
frequency domain. Polar responses at any frequency tlr I

interval are then determined for diffusion response analysis. _f= ,..,'_' 'r,gi',gi ,f
QUANTIFYING THE DIFFUSION RESPONSE i /7

The energy from the incident sound which is not transmitted

10 KHz I 3 Octave Angular Response
or absorbed is back-scattered from a surface with some
10.0 . ,

angular response. Sound diffusion occurs via two

o mechanisms-size diffraction and surface topology. At
/]')j_'_/ frequencies below the diffraction limit (that frequency
_ _ 0_0
/ , _ i r_, J_x._xa_a whose size is roughly equal to half a wavelength) sound is
,d ! ,'' { _ /
_, uniformly diffused. Above the diffraction limit,

The coherent interference between the scattered and incident

-2oo-
-3oo Spo:ul! Zone wavelengths
sound results of become
inthe comparable
diffusion to surfaceresponse
irregularities.
to the nature surface. with a frequency
Schroeder's seminal research related
on
-4oo the correlation of number theory with diffusion has
-50 0 , I I , , I , ,
stimulated 20 years of diffusor development [9]. Today,
45 90 135
,8o diffusors designed using number theory, fractai geometry,
ANGLE (DEGREES) modulation and optimization and found in almost all new
-- Q_o__.708dB music related construction, yet the acoustical community has
yet to develop a standardized method of characterizing these
Figure 10. 10 kHz 1/3-octave angular response important surfaces. The deviation from ideal uniform
The diffusion response is a measure of how flat the angular scattering for the 10 kHz 1/3-octave band for a scattering
response is as a function of frequency. Several researchers .............. Directional
Diffusion
Resp ....

[9]haveindicatedtheuseof someformof thestandard "iil ,.......

diffusion. We defme a diffusion parameter in dB, of, ' // _

deviation
which is derived
of the angular
from the
response
standard
todeviationof
evaluate thethe
degree
third-
of i-[''''] ,it'_'" ,o.o
....
octave polar response. I, is the energy at each of the n=37 12[ o-=4.16dB
· t _' 8,0

microphone positions shown in Figure 2, W, is a weighting '_"_'='"' I ·

function describing the ideal diffusion response as shown in E ' ' '_.. ' ---o
Figure 1. The diffusion response is defined asa plot of the ............
_ a .o ,...."'
standard deviation of the 1/3-octave angular responses / -, ,',. ', ^ | _'"
.O ....... . _ , . .
10000 _0000
performances
versusone
from
of surfaces the
frequency.
importantWhile
withstandard
flaw in that
very fewdeviation
anomalies, it suffers
it is unbounded.ranks
An ideal the ,-I
..... '
... _ = Z_dSTM
e 1 I _"EqUENC_e
(Hz)
+ qRD mean = 4.7 8rd = 1.4
diffusion coefficient should be bounded between 0 and 1, in .......
the same way as the absorption coefficient. It is possible to
normalize the standard deviation to the worst possible value Figure 11. Formation of the diffusion response from the
produced by the worst specular reflection, but problems 1/3-octave standard deviations

98 THE MEASURE OF AUDIO - AES UK CONFERENCE

 CHARACTERIZATION OF ACOUSTICAL MATERIALS

surface is shown in Figure 10. The diffusion response is an infinite baffle of scatterers. In addition periodicity
constructed, from the standard deviations at l/3-octave studies on 2QRDs will also be studied. A more thorough
frequenciesFigure 11. analysis at 5o increments in the angle of incidence and
observation will be carried out for both the 2D boundary
SAMPLES _ measurement technique as well as the 3D goniometer
Several fifth scale samples will be studied to quantify the technique on the following samples: 31 binary sequence
types of scattering from commonly used surfaces. As a random binary step profile, 127 binary sequence random
reference a flat panel of comparable size is always step profile, 31 bit periodic binary profile, seating, triangle,
measured. Periodicity effects at normal incidence, due to concave surface, 2D N=157 primitive root diffuser, binary
arraying similar samples, were measured by the boundary amplitude diffuser, square based pyramid, and cone.

12 , !:i ii .'""
!_:i'-+ i-*--'
ii !' _
i"
:'-_ ii !i !i !i i --.--Cylinder
---Reflector MEASUREMENT
COEFFICIENT OF THE SCATTERING
10 ............................
: * : : : : '...................
: : : : :- -_-.BaffledHalf Recently, Mommentz and Vorlander [ 17] suggested a novel
:.':
i,'!
:
!
:
i
:
i
:
i
:
!
:
i
"_i
:_.:
i i
: : i
: _y. liodeL
_mnnReuame
. and elegant measurementschemefor determining a
8 _//' i .! i .... i i__i.i._ : _ : : scattering coefficient which will be useful in geometrical
i i ! i i i i i -'!--!:-l*'! ..... 1 ..... Half Cylinder room modeling programs. All of the figures, concepts and

: : : : I : : : : : : : _ : : : : : : : :
.... results presented in this section are from their research[17].
z . structured surfaces is the scattering coefficient b, which is
._ 6 -"i***ii'f_ ''i/'_ :}"i-i-*:i"'T'i..... ii'_i.... i-':i-'-"_i
-' A measure for the scattering properties ofrough or
4 --3 ¢'_-i .... ! -i-? -i.....:--'*<_.':?'-_:_-'_ -i-i--i.... }--:r-i--i- defined as the ratio ofnon-specularly reflected sound energy
i Or i"+-'-;-?'¢.'*-,-_, i :_.j.'*',., i i i ] i i i i and totally reflected energy (Figure 13). The scattering
i.':[
4{: ! i ! i i
............ :'*/a--4_.'_..;..,_.i_.:
_" ' - 'Il , ,
2 ......_-i-_.-;.... : _*.:---:-. 7__-_i_,,__
:___[' :*.-:-- coefficient does not include any information about the
: : i i { i / i i i ! : i i : _i i i i ! directivity of the scattered energy described earlier. The
i ! ! i i ? ! i i ! total energy, Etotah available to be scattered is given by
0 ! : i i { ! i ! i ! i i ! i ! i i ! i i ! i i where ctistherandomincidenceabsorptioncoefficient. The
0 5 lo is 20 2s specular component, E,_, can be described in terms of the
Number of scaRering units directional scattering coefficient,/5.

Figure 12. Periodicity study X /

measurement technique for flat panels, half cylinders in free incident .. (1-tx) (l-b)
field and infinite baffle, and full cylinders and compared to ] \, scarrereo 4t
the scattering of an infinite baffle. These results are '_ (1--tx) _ /"

collection geometry of Figure 2, approximately 17 1:5

illustrated in Figure 12. With reference to the data Xi .... '""i'"': / specularly
samples fit between the 0° and 1800 microphones. These X i: / reflected
with one narrow
data illustrate the unit, doesn't
paradox that work
a goodwhen manycoefficient
diffusion units are -L-X:x. / '/'_'_' energy
used in a wide surface treatment. Much of the work in ."-__/'"¢" .
diffusion characterization has concentrated on the case of
narrow diffusors where some receivers are in the specular roughsurface
zone and others are outside. There has been relatively little
work investigating the wide diffuser case where all receivers Figure 13. Scattering from a rough surface
are in the specular zone. It can be noted that periodicity The energies (normalized with respect to a reflection from a
effects produce a rapid decrease in diffusion up to about 4 rigid plane plate) can be expressed in terms of:
scattering units and then level off. As the flat panel
approaches an inf'mite baffle it approaches uniform
scattering as indicated earlier. The cylindrical samples also E_c = (1 - tx). (1 - _ -- 1 - a
approach somewhat less uniform scattering as they approach

The authors would like to thank Wongab Choi for his help 2 QRD is a registered trademark of RPG Diffuser Systems,
in collecting and processing the experimental data. Inc.

THE MEASURE OF AUDIO - Ars UK CONFERENCE 99

D'ANTONIO& COX

a = 1 - iRspec 2, Etota/ = (l - Ct) 1.2

The quantity a can be called "specular absorption i

From these equations, the scattering coefficient can be

;__ 0.8
V Reflectionsfromroughsurface· _ ffi _._
c°efficient"andR-specisthespecularreflecti°nc°efficient' 'i ;iiiiii! i 'iii_-_-'''""-__'.'
_
8 7,
4 I[[ I. '_
0.4._

-4o- yUllllllVx o 100 1000 10000

Figure 15. Random incidence absorption and diffusion

Figure 14. Exemplary reflected pulses (10 kHz 1/3-
octave band) obtained for different sample orientations
determinedby:
Espec
8 - a - t_ = l - --
1 -- t_ EtotaI
The principle of both the free-field and reverberation
methods can best be shown in the time domain, looking at
the effect of a structured surface on reflected, band-limited
pulses. Figure 14 shows three reflected pulses obtained in
front of a surface covered with randomly distributed
rectangular battens. The curves were measured for different
orientations of the sample. It can be seen that the first part
of the reflection shows a high correlation. This corresponds
to the specularly reflected component. In contrast, the
scattered part contains delayed sound waves which depend
on the structure of the sample. This is changed by varying
the orientation and hence the scattered components may be
assumed to be incoherent. By means of phase-locked
averaging of n pulses (n_lO) obtained for different
orientations of the sample, the incoherent scattered sound is
eliminated by destructive interference and the coherent
specularly reflected sound component is obtained. The total
reflected energy can be estimated by the averaged pulse
energy. In the free field measurements are made at various
angles of incidence. At each angle of incidence the sample
is rotated in 10° increments. Paris' formula can be used to
average data collected at different angles of incidence. In
the reverberation chamber three reverberation times have to
be calculated, the empty room, the room with sample
inserted and the room after phase-locked superposition of
many different room impulse responses. The diffusion and
coefficient foraQRD
absorption coefficients, Figure 15, for a scaled QRD have
been determinedby Behler, Mommertzand D'Antonioat
the Institut fur Technische Akustik [18], Using the
reverberation room method. The simplicity of the
Mommertz method in concept, it's close relationship to what
is implemented in geometric acoustic computer models and
the use of existing reverberation chambers are the strengths
of this approach. Consequently, it will be examined as part
of the EPSRC grant. The role of edge effects remains to be
investigated as well as the ability of the method to rank
surfaces correctly for a wide variety of surface types. At the
moment the authors do not know of a method to replicate
the measured results in predictions. It is important that a
diffusion coefficient is predictable given the cost and time
required to carry out measurements.
Lam [19] has suggested a measurement system for surfaces
based on the diffusivity of a room. A non-diffuse space is
created- for example a reverberant room with a large
amount of absorption on one surface. The degree of non-
diffuseness is quantifiedbymeasuringpressuredistributions
around the room. The diffusing surface to be evaluated is
introduced into the room and the improvement in room
diffuseness measured. From this a diffusion coefficient is
derived. The method is simple in concept, but needs further
evaluation. For example, as with the Mommertz method, it
may make predicting the performance of surfaces difficult
and it is not known whether the method ranks surfaces
correctly for a wide variety of surface types.
SUMMARY
This paper describes the progress in developing
measurement techniques and diffusion metrics to establish a'

100 THE
MEASURE
OFAUDIO
- AES
UKCONFERENCE

standard in evaluating scattering surfaces. Much has been
accomplished and much is left to be done. It is our hope that
this research will advance the science of diffusor design and
also increase the predictive capability of computer room
modeling programs.
· Measureofthe AcousticQualityof ConcertHalls",Proc.Of
FIGURE CAPTIONS
Figure 1. Three defmitions of ideal diffusion ....................... 2
Figure 2. Full scale diffusion response measurement
geometry ......................................................................
Figure 3. Goniometer for measuring 3D polar scattering
balloons ........................................................................ 3
Figure 4. On-axis speaker/microphone response .................. 3
Figure 5. Sample plus background response ........................ 3
Figure 6. Background response ............................................ 4
Figure 7. Isolated raw sample response ................................ 4
Figure 8. Deconvolved and filtered sample response ........... 4
Figure 9. Sample response ................................................... 4
Figure 10. 10 kHz 1/3-0ctave angular response ................... 5
Figure 11. Formation of the diffusion response from the 1/3-
octave standard deviations ........................................... 5
Figure 12. Periodicity study ................................................. 6
Figure 13. Scattering from a rough surface ........................... 6
Figure 14. Exemplary reflected pulses (10 kHz 1/3-octave
band) obtained for different sample orientations ......... 7
Figure 15. Random incidence absorption and diffusion
coefficient for a QRD .................................................. 7
REFERENCES.
1 P. D'Antonio and J. H. Konnert, "Directional Scattering
Coefficient: Experimental Determination", J. Audio Eng.
Soc., Vol. 40, No. 12, pp. 997-1017 (December 1992).
2 PI D'Antonio, "Report of Working Group SC-04-02,
Characterization of Acosutical Materials: Directional
Scattering Coefficients, Project AES-X06", J. Audio Eng.
Soc., Vol. 41, No. 3, p. 157 (March 1993).
3 P. D'Antonio, J.H. Konnert and P.S. Kovitz, "The DISC
Project: Experimental Measurement of the Directional
Scattering Properties of Architectural Acosutic Surfaces",
Proceedings of the Sabine Centennial Symposium, Paper
l pAAd2, pp. 141-144 (June 1994).
4 J. H. Konnert and P. D'Antonio, "The DISC Project:
Theoretical Simulation of the Directional Scattering
Properties of Architectural Acoustic Surfaces, Proceedings
of the Sabine Centennial Symposium, Paper lpAAdl, pp.
137-140 (June 1994).
5 J.H. Konnert and P. D'Antonio, "The DISC Project:
Simulating the Low-Order Impulse Response of Rooms with
Finite Complex Scattering Surfaces", Proceedings of the
THE MEASURE OF AUDIO -AES UK CONFERENCE
CHARACTERIZATION OF ACOUSTICAL MATERIALS
Sabine Centennial Symposium, Paper l pAAc5, pp. 133-136
(June 1994).
6 Haan, C.N. & Fricke, F.R., "Surface Diffusivity as a
Australia and New Zealand Architectural Science
Association Conference, Sydney (1993).
7 Haan, C.N. & Fricke, F.R., "The Use of Neural Network
2 Analysis for the Prediction of Acoustic Quality of Concert
Halls", Proc. Of WESTPRAC V'94, 543-550, (Seoul
1994).
8 D'Antonio, P. & Konnert, J., "The Reflection Phase
Grating Diffusor: Application in Critical Listening and
Performing Environments", Proc. of the 12th ICA, E4-6
(July 1986).
9 P. D'Antonio, "Two Decades of Diffusor Design and
Development", 99 _ AES Convention, Invited Lecture,
Preprint 4114 (P-1), New York (October 1995)
I0 Cox, T.J. & Lam, Y.W., "Evaluation of Methods for
Predicting the Scattering from Simple Rigid Panels",
Applied Acoustics, 40, 123-140 (1993).
11 Cox, T.J. & Lam, Y.W., "Prediction and Evaluation of
the Scattering from Quadratic Residue Diffusers", J. Acoust.
Soc. Am., 95, 297-305 (1994).
12 Cox, T.J., "Predicting the Scattering from Diffusers using
2D boundary Element Methods", J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 96
(2), 874-878 (1994).
13 Cox, T.J., "Optimization of Profiled Diffusers", J.
Acoust. Soc. Am., 97(5), Pt. I, 2928-2936 (1995).
14 Vorlander, M., "International Round Robin on Room
Acoustical Conputer Simulations", Proc. Of the 15th
International Congress on Acoustics, Vol. II, 689-692 (June
1995).
15 Kuttruff, H., Room Acoustics, Applied Sciences
Publishers, Ltd. (1979).
16 Konnert, H. & D'Antonio, P., "Comments on "Diffusing
Surfaces in Concert Halls: Bane or Boon?", J. Audio Eng.
Soc. 37, No. 10, 83%844 (October 1989).
17 Mommertz, E. & Vorlander, M., "Measurement of
Scattering Coefficients of Surfaces in the Reverberation
Chamber andin theFree Field", Proc. Of the 15th
International Congress on Acoustics, Vol. II, 577-580 (June
1995).
18 B. Behler, E. Mommertz (Private Communication)
19 A.C.Pantelides. MSc Thesis, University of Salford,
(1995) "The Effect of Absorbing and Diffusing Surfaces in a
Rectangular Shaped Recording Studio"
101