Can someone explain what this graph means?

I recently put up some acoustic treatment and would like to know if it made any improvement. I ran a measurement with the Room eq wizard and this is one of the charts. I don't know what I'm looking at. If someone could tell me how to read these things and what the target should look like. I know it's a snap shot, but any help would be great.
 
 
" />
 
 

It's up. Been awhile since I posted a pic.

I believe this is a RTA graph of a sine sweep. Trying to figure out what this means for my room.

In a nutshell, that graph shows a pretty nice room. But to be truly useful, you'll want to be looking at waterfall graphs, which the software can also provide. They've got some pretty good advice on their website.

Here are some control room basic tips that you can do for cheap.
Put the console desk at the end of the long axis of a rectangular room. It should be right in the center of that wall. If possible keep your monitors a foot or two from the wall. The farther from the wall, the less you will have bass issues when mixing. If you can, put the monitors in the wall inside a soffit (infinite baffle). The monitors should be at ear level and spaced apart approx the same distance that your head is to one of the monitors (equilateral triangle). Point the monitors at where your head normally is while mixing. Put some acoustic material or panels  on the left and right walls at ear level. Center the panels at a point on the wall where (from you mixing position) you could see the monitor tweeter in a mirror if it were placed at that point. Do the same for the ceiling positioned even with the side panels. You are eliminating  early relections (phasing issues and hi-end cancellations) by doing this. Build or buy some bass corner traps and put them in all four corners if possible but at a minimum in the corners next to the monitors. if you have a really live room you may want some panels on the rear wall and the side walls near the rear.
If the room is un-carpeted you may want a throw rug or two on the floor and/or a few panels on the ceiling. 
Google 'DIY bass traps' and 'DIY acoustic panels'.
 
 
 

Hey Dave,
TrueRTA does waterfalls ? I bought it a few years ago (and a calibrated MIC) but I do not remember a waterfall feature. I have not used it since I set up my room. I will have to dig it out and take another look.

You graph starts from ~500Hz, as I can see, it is not right, the most problem interval is 0-500Hz.
Also usually more smoothing is used for such graphs.
You can find some tutorials how to use it.

This is a spectrum from the sine wave sweep. Much bigger picture." />

Thanks Microapp, I really appreciate your input. You seem very knowledgeable on this subject. Do you think I can use my ARC 2 to correct for the rest of the bass deficiencies?

One more thought. Try the ARC2 with a few mixes and get them to where you are satisfied..  Make demos. Listen to the demos in as many places and on as many different playback devices as possible. Do your mixes sound good and consistent in all cases? 
This is prob the most important determinant of how good your room is.
 
 
 
 

also check the position of your sub in relationship to you satilite speakers,run another trace and see if that helps the low end in your room.also a good mic to use is the behringer ECM8000,check the phase on your subs then use ARC2 to clean up.
 
Good Luck.

I've looked into subs but my room is 11.5' x 16'. Not sure if would help or hinder with those dimensions, width wise anyway.
 

Hi David, thanks for comments. You know , the more I research room measurements, acoustic treatment, etc, the more I get confused. It's really helpful to get advice from people who know about such things in this forum. I've researched bass traps and some sites claim foam in the corners will not be effective in absorbing lower frequencies. Others claim they do. It's an expense I would rather not gamble with. Which is why I thought the ARC 2 in addition to the acoustic treatment would be enough. I'm encouraged by the comments about my results. I'm not looking for perfect, just something close to acceptable.

Here is the waterfall graph. It reads at the bottom from 0 to 200hz.  Looks cool, have no clue how to read it." />

Yes, up the time scale > 300 ms so the ridges decay into the floor.
Here is a perfect room waterfall. (Don't freak, no one ever gets even near this in reality).

Ideally, the entire face of the mountain should fall off evenly as it moves toward you (out of the page). This means that all freqs in the room decay evenly. 
The ridges and crevices on the mountain face are caused (mostly) by room modes. The modes are caused by standing wave peaks and nulls that I mentioned before and these are due to the dims between parallel walls and ceiling to floor. 
If you add corner traps, some of the ridges would begin to smooth out... wall to celing corner traps would smooth yet more... wall to floor corner traps even more.
The tricky part here if you overkill the low end traps and the lows decay faster than the mids/highs, the romm will be overly bright. If the highs/mids decay faster the room will be dull or dead.
In your graph some of the freqs take longer to decay than the max of the test. This is why it looks like it was sliced at the front.
If ridges extend really far forward, the room will boom at that freq. Crevices indicate that that freq will be deadened. 
Rerun the test with the time scale lengthened until all the ridges decay into the floor and repost.