[jones rush]

I'm building a new stand for my 9.0s, and I would like to know what is the optimal height the the 9.0s should be, in relation to the ear.

I know that the general consensus is that the speaker's tweeter should be at ear level. But, with the 9.0's, the story might be a bit different, since they are faced up by a small degree.

I prefer not to face them down, because then there will be phase problems betweem the tweeter and bas/mid driver.

Thanks in advance!.

[jqp]

Not sure there is a real optimum height. They were designed, IIRC, for 24" end tables. That way you would hear them sitting at a certain distance, or standing from further away. The Marble Stands are 24".

I don't think that the tweeter and the woofer are time aligned (as a design) so feel free to try different angles. I generally go with ear height at center of baffle, 90 degree angle vertical.

[Marbles]

I don't think that the tweeter and the woofer are time aligned (as a design) so feel free to try different angles. I generally go with ear height at center of baffle, 90 degree angle vertical.

That works for me as well.

[jqp]

Also in addition to my Marble stands, originally I built a "pyramid" stand. See Harmonic Discord - http://www.harmonicdiscord.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=521&highlight=stand+cinder

[jones rush]

JQP,
I saw your stands.
Why is it necessary to have such a rigid stand ?. Except for ensuring that they won't accidently fall, I don't see any other reasons. The marble case of the 9.0s, does not produce any vibrations to the stand, so sound quality wise, it is not important from which material your stand is made from.

Allegedly, speakers with thin wood casing, might vibrate a lot at higher volumes, leading the stand to vibrate too, and while it is, the speakers might not perform as accurately.

Btw, its funny to note that the base with the wheels that you've built, is exactly like the one I've built. Have you remembered to put a fifth wheel at the center of the base ?.

[Jay S]

My custom stands are 20" high and work well for me.  The tweeter is still aimed at or very slightly above my ears when I am seated at my listening position.  

You have to take into account that the 9.0 is tilted upward.  Optimal stand height will be influenced by how far and how high your listening position is from the speakers.

[jones rush]

Jay S,
If the 9.0s are indeed not time-aligned, have you thought of simply shiting their upwards tilt, down a bit, so you could put them at ear level ?.

The problem with the current upwards shift of the 9.0s (or to any direction, for that matter) is that you're not fooling your ears. You might get a clearer/brighter sound, by aiming the tweeters to your ears, but the tweeter's sound will hit your ear's pinna, at an angle which will suggest your brain that the speakers are located down.

In all the performances I've been to in my life, the best seats were usually under, or at the same height level of the performers. Never above them... (which corresponds with the cheaper balcony seats).

[MaxCast]

I have found 24" (the highest I tried) sounded best.  I have the sm6.9.  I thought it would lower because of the tilt also, but prefered them at 24"
Here is a shot of my stand.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?action=gallery;area=browse;album=65
I wanted a stand that would be ridged, hold my leamp/wave, and not have a "beard."  These stands weigh almost as much as the speaker.

I have since shimmed the rear pegs to get the baffle closer to 90 degrees.

[PJ]

I built my 7.0's stands in 2000 at 24" on Barnes' advice.

That was a long time ago now i think about it...

[jqp]

JQP,
I saw your stands.
Why is it necessary to have such a rigid stand ?. Except for ensuring that they won't accidently fall, I don't see any other reasons. The marble case of the 9.0s, does not produce any vibrations to the stand, so sound quality wise, it is not important from which material your stand is made from.

Allegedly, speakers with thin wood casing, might vibrate a lot at higher volumes, leading the stand to vibrate too, and while it is, the speakers might not perform as accurately.

Btw, ...

The rigid stand was more for stabilty and strength for the 80 lbs. of speaker. Also the cinder blocks were cheap, available, and allowed a flexibility of design (if you were not worried about volume of the stand). Plus they are sitting on wall to wall carpet on top of a thick carpet pad.

My furniture dollys are made of two boards with two more pieces of wood on the ends...there is no wood in the center to attach a wheel. That helped inspire the pyramid design.

I also have the marble stands. They are inert and don't need to be filled with anything. They hold the 80 lbs. and they are like a sapling - they bend when bumped (within reason) but don't fall over, but move back into position. Thay also have great looks.

Jays stands are also great looking -



(you can still see a bigger pic on HD)

Looking forward to seeing pics of your stands!

[jqp]

OK I did put a piece of plywood over the gap in the dolly so I could put a wheel on that    probably will when I move them. Good idea.

[jones rush]

I finished the stands.
Yes I cheated!. I actually only modified a pair of old steel stands I had lying around.

Everything in these stands is secured with screws. the 9.0s can not fall because I made holes (hard to see in the images) below the front legs of the 9.0s (below the cloth there is a thick wood, also screwed to the steel stand), so the 9.0s are now leaning forward into these holes, which prevent them to move at all, and also fix me a 90 degree position of the speaker .

The cloth below the 9.0s is black, but because of its high reflectance (very shiny), it appears as purple on the image.

They might seem light, but each stand weigh ~ 13 Kg.

[jqp]

They look nice!

My carpeting (with the thick pad underneath) is too thick to allow for a base that small and square. The stand would tip over too easily. The wheels allow me to move the stands and vacum. I assume you have a thinner carpet on top of cement or wood?

I would move your speakers further apart before listening!  

[jones rush]

I assume you have a thinner carpet on top of cement or wood?

Yep. Actually a thin wall to wall carpet, on top of foam panels, on top of marble floor.

I would move your speakers further apart before listening!

Actually (I know it's going to sound funny...), the reason I made the wheel stands in the first place, was in order be able to shift the speaker in to the position in the images, which puts me at a 20 degree angle with the speakers    (instead of the usual 60 degree). I then apply digital cross talk cancellation, so the left ear can not hear the right speaker, and the right ear can not hear the left speaker. As a consequence, the stage becomes huge, and imaging as sharp as I never thought possible.

An added bonus of the 20 degree angle with the speakers, is that the sound hits the pinna in a way that does not cause the pina to add distortion in the way that it does when it hits it in a 60 degree angle. As a consequence, everything sounds much more real. Instruments have so much realism to them. It's amazing.

If you want, you can try it yourself (in a more primitive way). Take your speakers to a 20 degree angle with you (and don't sit more than 2 meters from them). Then, take a mattress, and put it between the speakers, and up to about 50cm from your head. It will be a physical barrier which won't allow the waves of the two speakers reach the opposite ears. Now you'll feel how it is to listen to headphones, without the imaging being inside your head.  

Here is a pic from the first time I tried this setup, before I used a digital cross talk cancellation



After this audition, there was no going back!.

I actually wanted to know how close I can sit from the 9.0s, and still get a smooth tweeter and mid/bass driver integration, so I told Barnes what I'm trying to do, and asked him that question. Apart from the direct answer, Barnes also told me, and I quote:

this (method of listening) makes a lot of sense.  It is one of the few things I have heard from the audio world that is even logical.

I think that there are two main reasons why this method of listening will not get adopted by the majority of listeners and manufacturers:

1) The sweet spot is too narrow. No one can sit to the sides of you. If more than one person needs to listen, he needs to sit exactly behind you, in a straight line.

2) The physical barrier is only for crazy bachelors, and a good digital cross talk barrier, is really hard to find. There are some low fi digital barriers by Carver and such, but from what I've heard, they don't cut it.

Also, something which probably won't make the manufacturers too happy. I don't know why or how, but listening with the barrier at the 20 degree angle, somehow eliminate most differences in sound quality between lower end and higher end gear. Don't get me wrong, I say this in pain. The really first time I heard this setup (even before I took the image above) I used a pair of low grade $100 aiwa 3-way speakers, paired with a mediocre Onkyo receiver, which was driven from a portable cd player ( the reason I used such low end gear, was because I simply didn't believe at the beginning that it is going to work, so I thought bringing the nOrhs to the right position is going to be a waste of time). Anyway, the sound I heard from this cheap system, rivaled and surpassed the sound I got from the 9.0s, in more than a few criteria (especially imaging, and the ability to deiscern any tiny nuance in the signal, much in the way which is possible when you're listening through headphones). the fact that the waves of the speakers aren't mingling together, somehow lowers the demand from the hardware. Don't ask me how or why. I'm just reporting what I've heard.

[jqp]

Of course I ws kidding but you weren't. I read about this technique of using the barrier a few years ago on the web. What is the guys name who invited the audio writers over to his place for a demo?

[jones rush]

Of course I ws kidding but you weren't. I read about this technique of using the barrier a few years ago on the web. What is the guys name who invited the audio writers over to his place for a demo?

You mean Ralph Glasgal ?. I know that he usually invite people over to his house to witness his Ambiophnics setup, which consists of the "Ambiopoles" (which are simply stereo speakers at the configuration I've mentioned above), plus many, many surround channels (including height surround) which suppose to replace the walls of the room in creating the reverberation. The reverb channels are loaded with impulse responses from different auditoriums in the world (check out www.altiverb.com) and suppose to mimic their sound in your room (assuming your room is damped really good).

You can read more about it at www.ambiophonics.org.

As a matter of fact, I'm currently at the second phase of the Ambiophonics setup. I've ordered 110 square feet of 6" absorption foam, to make the room dead, and I have four surround channels (two at the sides, and two at the back and a bit higher) which are the bare minimum for an ambiophonics setup.

The reverb (surround) channels, and the amps which drive them, can be of any quality or type (you can have different types at the same room), it won't matter, since their job is to only replace your walls. Walls are not that accurate in reproducing sound waves.

The most important factor of the ambiophonics setup, and the one that most of the money should be spent on, are the main two speakers.

If you want to read more about the importance of cross talk cancellation in audio reproduction, you might want to check out this great page by Prof. Angelo Farina.

[jqp]

You mean Ralph Glasgal ?....

That's the one! Sounds like a fun project and certainly a very specific bang for the buck. Now you need stereo viewing glasses and you will have a holodeck!

[Rob Babcock]

I bet Chuck would love it!

[jones rush]

I bet Chuck would love it!

Who is Chuck ?.

[Rob Babcock]

He's Vibrations Worst Nightmare!  (See the 2 ch Circle for his ongoing soap opera).