[JLM]

Seems like a rash of postings around here relating to the struggles associated with small rooms or listening setups in tight alcoves/corners.  Wondered if this is due to:

1.) Domestic partner (wife, live-in) pressures;

2.) Family (kids, grandkids, pets) pressures;

3.) Psychological (need for a man cave) pressures;

4.) Economic (simply can't afford bigger) pressures;

5.) Urban (higher percentage living in cities that in general compresses personal spaces) pressures;

6.) Aging (downsizing to better fit a 'later years' lifestyle) pressures;

7.) Other?

IMO audiophiles (other than headphone users, duh) under value the importance of the room.  More Europeans have faced this challenge and adapted with smaller/less deep bass producing speakers.  So as affluence grows (at least in terms of buying audio gear) and spaces seem to be shrinking the problem seems to be getting worse.  This seems especially evident with OB speakers.

Other opinions?

[twitch54]

I suspect #6 , at least around here, is a major contributor.

[Mag]

When I was driving courier, deliveries I made to new houses under construction. Most of the  houses did not have what I consider an appropriate room for stereo or home theater.

 Basements were usually unfinished and may have an appropriate room later. But from what I could see most homes are being built with no regard to home stereo set up.

[Rusty Jefferson]

I think systems are getting more sophisticated also, requiring more space to perform their best. Most speakers won't provide the magic of a realistic soundstage unless they are sitting 7-8 feet into a room. In the 60s-70s when I was exposed to home stereo, speakers just sat against the wall and people just happily "played" music. Now we "listen" to music.

[macrojack]

most homes are being built with no regard to home stereo set up.

I doubt there has ever been a time or place where it was common or even observable that new homes were being designed around an audiophile listening environment. Are we so clueless as to consider ourselves a force to direct marketing decisions outside of our tiny and obscure cult?

In answer to the original proposition I would say that equipment is becoming more compact, real estate is getting more expensive, people who care are losing population, tiny houses are becoming ever more popular, and economic realities are reaching a stage where more and more of us are being forced to accept reality as it inexorably encroaches on our fantasies. Oh, and real wages are dropping constantly as the new world order becomes more fully realized. Learn to hum.

[veloceleste]

.

[Letitroll98]

I don't think the reason why is important, rather what to do about it when that is your only option makes more sense.  Most decisions regarding housing and lifestyle have nothing to do with audio so this is nothing new.  Your situation where an audiophile of at least modest means is building a new home and can spec out a listening room is far from the norm, god bless.  For myself I live alone and can do what I want with any room, but I chose to use a den as listening room so I had some issues that needed solving.  I will be moving in the near future and where the systems go will be a consideration, but certainly not the only one.

[JLM]

Letitroll98, what strikes me is how much audiophiles try to ignore room considerations while more intelligent options exist (smaller speakers or headphones).  Case in point: we've all seen megabuck systems squeezed into a small attic.

twitch54, your demographic sounds a lot like Michigan.  The whole state is turning into a nursing home (and I fit right in  ).

Mag, our house fits into your opinion of homes not be designed for audio but you'd be half-wrong.  I purposely designed the basement to allow for 8ft ceilings and space for an insulated Cardas Golden Cuboid man-study (combination listening space/office) that was finished off when we built.

Rusty, you make a good observation.  The majority used to be happy pushing speakers against the walls (and connecting them with zip cord), although seems to me we were trying to 'listen'.

macrojack, your observations for quite valid.  But my previous abode was built in the 50's and included a 12ft x 19ft living room (not all that unusual) that offered good acoustics.

velocesleste, you have a valid point.  Residential design has changed.  In the 60's/70's houses got bigger with bigger rooms and additional rooms, then with the energy/inflation crises hit the extra rooms disappeared and the open concept was 'invented' which forced everyone (and all functions) to share the same space which is flexible but not ideal for anyone/anything.

[Elizabeth]

Old Urban houses definitely have smaller rooms than more modern suburban homes.
Old apartments smaller too. Particularly luxury apartment have big rooms.
Add in electrical service to old homes and apartments is usually minimal. Where more modern much better.
I would say apartments built after or around 1960 is when the electrical service got much better on average, to apartments.

As an adult I hae always had a good stereo, but generally have not looked for apartments which were ideal for it. More important was cost, access, and indoor parking!

IMO all the whining about frequency response is a conditioned response. It is easy to not care about a perfect frequency response if you just stop worrying about it!
So that makes placing speakers a piece of cake. All I need it good imaging. no more problems.
SO I say get over the audiophile nervosa of perfect frequency response. and you will be a lot happier.

[Hipper]

Here in the UK most newly built houses tend to have smaller rooms then in the past (and smaller gardens).

The trend is certainly for open plan kitchen/living room to make things appear bigger.

[Tyson]

Might be because some people have dedicated listening rooms now (say, in the basement) vs just using the living room, which tends to be the largest room in the house.

[RichardS]

Categories #4 & (especially) #6 fit my situation. Moved cross-country from Southeast to West Coast where homes and land are much pricier. Gave up a 16'x24'x10' dedicated audio room in a much larger house for a room about half the size: 13'x16'x10', in a studio guest house across the courtyard from main house. Due to open floor plan, using the main house living room was a no-go for preserving family harmony, and the other rooms are even smaller.

It's been challenging to say the least and really made me appreciate the room's contribution to sound. I'm fortunate that it's my man cave so lots of room treatments have been installed, which help but don't make up for the loss of space. Downside to downsizing was needing new, smaller speakers and living with less bass extension and less expansive soundstage. Upside is a more outdoor lifestyle... so few complaints.

[gregfisk]

Richard, your situation mimics mine. I have a wide open floor plan which has been popular for the last 25 years and is still often the case. With that it is not suitable for an audio room. I have a separate building dedicated to audio albeit with a kitchen and bath for guests when they come.

The trend here in the Seattle area is for large houses and no land, something I don't care for but what seems to be selling. Open floor plans are still the norm here but the other rooms in the house are not all that large. There are just a lot of them.

Custom homes which I have worked with for the last 35 years do have dedicated theater rooms, sometimes two. These are the more expensive houses and I don't believe any of these people have been audiophiles. Theater rooms have been popular here for a very long time and I don't see them going away anytime soon.

[JLM]

IMO all the whining about frequency response is a conditioned response. It is easy to not care about a perfect frequency response if you just stop worrying about it!
So that makes placing speakers a piece of cake. All I need it good imaging. no more problems.
SO I say get over the audiophile nervosa of perfect frequency response. and you will be a lot happier.

In my experience flat frequency response is an eye-opening revelation.  Suddenly everything makes sense.  OTOH good imaging requires moving most speakers away from walls (and IMO near-field listening position).  That in itself does reduce room effects and so improves frequency response.  So in a back door way you are achieving flat frequency response.

[OzarkTom]

The bigger the rooms, the better the sound. The best smaller room I ever heard was a 20x20 with 30 foot high ceilings and 3 walls of all glass windows. It was a lake house. It was fascinating to watch the snow trickle down from the sky in the winter. I always have wished I could have bought that house when he sold it. Any system I  put in their sounded fantastic. The owner had a small concert hall. That room told me that the room is the most important component to your SQ in your system.

[timind]

Mine will get a bit bigger when we move next month. I'll go from my square 12x12x8 room into a 17x14x9 room. We'll see how much time it takes me to get that room sounding as good as my square.

I know square rooms are supposed to be the bane of the audiophile, but you need to hear mine to appreciate what setting your speakers in a diagonal can do. Even though it's probably not required in the new room, I may try diagonal for the heck of it.

[Mike-48]

Mine will get a bit bigger when we move next month. I'll go from my square 12x12x8 room into a 17x14x9 room. We'll see how much time it takes me to get that room sounding as good as my square.

I know square rooms are supposed to be the bane of the audiophile, but you need to hear mine to appreciate what setting your speakers in a diagonal can do. Even though it's probably not required in the new room, I may try diagonal for the heck of it.

I think it will take you about 5 minutes. In my experience, the extra foot of height will make a big difference, not to mention the width. The length, yes, will help also. Anyway, congratulations on the bigger room, and please keep us informed!

[Mike-48]

In my experience flat frequency response is an eye-opening revelation.  Suddenly everything makes sense.  OTOH good imaging requires moving most speakers away from walls (and IMO near-field listening position).  That in itself does reduce room effects and so improves frequency response.  So in a back door way you are achieving flat frequency response.

+1.  If you are listening to acoustic music, at least, flat FR (or more precisely, smooth FR that is basically flat with slight treble cut and bass boost) increases realism noticeably.

[JLM]

Mine will get a bit bigger when we move next month. I'll go from my square 12x12x8 room into a 17x14x9 room. We'll see how much time it takes me to get that room sounding as good as my square.

I know square rooms are supposed to be the bane of the audiophile, but you need to hear mine to appreciate what setting your speakers in a diagonal can do. Even though it's probably not required in the new room, I may try diagonal for the heck of it.

About 15 years in my old house I had the place to myself for the day, so experimented.  The room was 12ft x 19ft x 8ft, plaster walls/ceiling, hardwood floors with area rug, two openings into hall/kitchen, and a large picture window.  Sound was good in a traditional end wall setup with speakers away from the walls, but tried a skewed (diagonal, not symmetrical in the corner) setup and it seemed to be a bit better with fewer reflections/echos. 

[OZZIOZZI]

Points 1-6 all the above +1
WARNING Long post

Point 7 unaffordability of first house for many people in urban areas so they usually rent -- with all the restrictions this entails--size, no structural changes, wiring changes, attachments to walls or ceilings
Point 8 trend to smaller apartments in highrise developments driven by population moving to large cities seeking work or better community services.
Point 9 simultaneous trend to large open plan suburban houses with few isolated rooms suitable for dedicated audio rooms unless it is a priority for the owner/designer.
Point 10 trend to mobile audio listening, iphones and earbuds, mp3 files and overly compressed and limited music (Google "loudness wars) has led to mostly portable audio solutions and lowered expectations of the minimum requirements for "highfidelity". Car audio systems generally concentrate on max volume and bass extension. Many people spend their time commuting to and from work in that environment. I suspect this changes expectations for their home systems.

Just heard a TED Talk last night saying that more than 3 billion people in the world live in self-built illegal homes (read squatters in slums) of an average 40 square metres for a family of four. Not much room for a dedicated listening space in that situation.

Point 11  I can still enjoy music playing from an FM or DAB+ digital radio playing through a 4" speaker, interrupted by ocasionally passing loud cars or Harley Davisons with open exhausts. Any improvement on that is desirable. Yeah, I have over-ear headphones and in-ear monitors--good frequency response and dynamics, but I get sick of the closed-in feeling.

I think that complaining about non-ideal listening situations or the need for continual equipment upgrades are a first world problem of affluent audiophiles. I am Guilty as Charged. So I do what I can to improve my situation, limited by family obligations and preferences and economic restraints.

I think it is time for me to have a rest from this forum, count my blessings and just enjoy the music.

Good luck with everyone's efforts to improve their listening rooms.

Ozzi