Talk:Echo chamber

message: Why does this article include no mention of the fact that Wikipedia itself is often criticised for being subject to echo chamber effects? Whether or not you agree with the criticism, it should at least be mentioned, if only to serve as an example.
-- unsigned by 202.76.150.120 at 07:31, 9 July 2007
: How do you mean? -Phoenixrod (talk) 09:25, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia criticism 

message: I'm no expert on this subject, but isn't the term echo chamber a misnomer, at least in modern production terminology?  Surely reverb chamber would be a more accurate term, as I don't see how a basement would produce distinct diminishing repetitions of sound required to be classed as echo. Still, anyone with more knowledge about this subject, feel free to correct me.
I'm not suggesting we rename the article, but if my assumption is correct, then could we mention this potential misnomer somewhere in the article?
Straussian (talk) 07:32, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me. Redddogg (talk) 16:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Echo vs Reverb 

message: The chronology of the stuff described in this paragraph is unclear, due to the stringing-together of multiple ideas in single sentences and the lack of attention to existing text when adding new material. Someone needs to pick the commas out and put some full stops in, and to make the sequence of events clear - I can't do this myself because I don't know the story. Can anyone help? Regards to all. Notreallydavid (talk) 10:46, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  'The original echo chamber...' paragraph 

message: Looks like a Reverberation room is for scientific measurements and an Echo chamber is for music production. These rooms are built differently with different requirements and purposes. Perhaps they could be covered in a single article but I don't see that as a useful exercise at this time. ~Kvng (talk) 17:03, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: has canceled this proposal stating, "Removing stale merge proposal from May 2014; no support over almost 3 years, no case made, argument against made." ~Kvng (talk) 13:24, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge from [[Reverberation room]] 

message: I believe the creation of slapback echo was deliberate rather than "unintentional" or "inadvertent". It took the deliberate routing of the signal to a second tape machine. Stratopastor (talk) 18:20, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually I guess you shouldn't need a second tape machine at all. It should just be a matter of the space between the recording head and the playback head, and of the tape speed. It's only when you add a feedback loop to the circuitry that you go from a simple slapback to multiple echos. And on a tangent: when the tape ran too fast for a nice delay time, someone put his finger on the flange of the tape reel to slow it down, and suddenly discovered flanging. --BjKa (talk) 02:00, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sun Studios 

message: The article mentions an "Ad-n-echo". I don't know if it was actually spelt this way at some point, but what I have seen was spelt "ADINEKO". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6kv7I4cPQc 
Also: See Morley Pedals#'60s - Tel-Ray Electronics for some content overlap.
--BjKa (talk) 02:00, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tel-Ray Oil Can Delay