I had an audio buddy of mine over tonight, and we listened to the RM/X's for an extended period. He convinced me that what has been bothering me about the RM/X's lately is the collapse of the soundstage toward the center, and so we "untoed them" from the "toe in so that they crossfire two feet in front of you" (probably something like 30 degree angles) to something more like 5-10 degrees angled, and the soundstage opened up considerably. What am I missing here? Why, in my room, do the RM/X's have a better soundstage when played almost parallel to the side walls? I'll describe my room dimensions if anyone cares....thx,
Ted_B
.
Hi Ted, It is not so much the angle of toe in, as it is the angle of "convergence" to the sweet spot and the angle of deflection/reflection to the side walls.
The angle of convergence you select will depend on the type of listneing you do, the distance from the speaker, and your listening preferences.
Because of the limited dispersion of the ribbons, you can sit well away from them with excellent results, but listening "off axis" (in either direction) will slightly "soften" and "warm" the sound.
This is what might be confusing to those who hear people say that they are running their pots at 2:00
, which sounds too HI, until you realize that they have set the speaker up to converge 2 feet in front of them, or two feet behind them, and sit 12 feet away.
For the ultimate in detail, sit nearfeild, on axis, and adjust the pots to taste (generally around 11:00-12:00)
For more warmth or to reduce harsh electronics, sit further away, converge in front of, or behind you, and dial the pots up (probably to 1:00 plus)
If your sidewalls are acoustically treated, the width of soundstage will be determined by how wide your speakers are placed. Occasionally certain CD's may sound wider due to phase relationships in the recording that shift perception outside the speaker width.
If your sidewalls are not acoustically treated, then side reflection can also provide this perception, generally at the expense of sound quality (IMO).
In judging "soundstage" width, use a wide variety of material.
Generally solo vocals like Diana Krall, Nora Jones, James Taylor, Michael Buble, or whoever will be "dead center" with many of the instruments at various places on the soundstage.
Orchestral works should have a complete speaker to speaker soundstage, with at least the ability to tell where the violin section, the Cellos, and Bass Violins, and various brass and woodwind instruments are placed over the width of the stage and even to a degree to the depth of the stage.
The "amplitude" or volume of all the instruments from stage right to stage left, should be reasonably consistant.
Properly set up there should be "blackness" in between "single" instruments on most jazz, rock, or studio recordings. Sometimes (too frequently) the engineers will "flavor" the track with echo enhancement, which with the VMPS resolving powers is quite evident, so some of that will fill the blackness.
But I guess the general rules to remember are:
1) pots are dialed up or down depending on how "on axis" or "off axis", you are. More on axis = lower, More off axis = higher
2) pots are adjusted up or down depending on how near or far you are from the speaker. Near = down Far = up
3) pots are adjusted up or down depending on room interaction. Acoustically deadened room as in limited reflection = pots down, Acoutically reflective room which "sprays you with reflected highs = pots up
While the last one may seem opposite of what you might think, the resulting masking/blurring of highs by reflected highs require a "boost" to cause your brain to get the same "detail level" out of the sonic haze created by the reflections.
Hope some of that might help in your exploration of convergence angles and expected results.
