[cujobob]

Actually, equipment can overcome some room issues - speakers, mainly. Controlled directivity aimed in will put the first reflection point past the seating position which helps create a wide soundstage even in a small room.

By wide front stage, I don't so much mean how far apart the speakers are, but the walls themselves.

[JackD201]

Well Jack.....I didn't really want a dog in this fight.....I was merely commenting on the fact that Cujo made a reference to the first reflection points. Even a moderately treated room will benefit and affect soundstage by a HUGE margin. Seems he believes the equipment can somehow "overcome" a room's first reflection points.

Assuming I understand what he meant about, "A wide front stage is important so that the first reflection points don't screw everything up".

But then again, maybe I misunderstood his meaning. But it sounds lik eyou "get it" when you meantioned "the room's ability.....".

Bob

Hi Bob in SL, sorry for the confusion I meant Bob as in Cujo Bob. No dog fights here just a friendly bunch a guys shootin' the breeze

[JackD201]

Actually, equipment can overcome some room issues - speakers, mainly. Controlled directivity aimed in will put the first reflection point past the seating position which helps create a wide soundstage even in a small room.

By wide front stage, I don't so much mean how far apart the speakers are, but the walls themselves.

True cujobob. I've witnessed this first hand myself at the homes of my horn loving buddies. Dr. Earl Geddes for one recommends rooms that are not what we could refer to as damped. Not surprising since as you say, CD loudspeakers like his do overcome some, if not a lot of room issues. Dr. Toole and others are not so quick to eliminate side wall reflections entirely, just some bands of them if one has no choice particularly when one is forced by circumstance to place his transducers in spots affected by the precedence effect time window. We might be drifting a bit

My main point is that symmetry in signal is a universal* requirement for Stereo or Mono using two channels irregardless of loudspeaker type and even a CD loudspeaker will benefit from being placed in a room that is symmetrical in both dimensions and construction. As far as acoustical symmetry I think it is "almost" universal. The only exceptions I can think of are nearfield listening and using headphones.

[jimdgoulding]

Has anyone mentioned speaker and chair placement, yet, with regard to room boundaries?   

[cujobob]

Chair's are bad acoustically, standing is too. One must squat at all times, uncomfortable but sounds great 

Soundstage is affected by a lot of factors...a wide discussion was bound to occur.

[jimdgoulding]

Ricardo, permit me to temper what Cujo said a bit.  I would say that the listening chair be a) comfortable, but of moderate size- b) off the wall behind it- c) composed of organic fabric- d) without a head rest.  An example of worst case to generous soundstaging would be a leather sofa up against a wall.

http://www.linkwitzlab.com/frontiers_7.htm

The short of it is, for good soundstaging, position your speakers AND listening position out from room boundaries in an equilateral or equidistant triangle.  There are pictured examples near the bottom of the link under Phantom Source Location and Gestalt.  I can personally vouch for position A and variances thereof.

[redbook]

 The claims made by that vib- eater thing are very accurate. Since I placed sixty pounds of lead in my cabinets the things mentioned have all come true.

[Soundminded]

I have two pair of speakers, one is a bookshelf TM configuration, and the other is a Tower in MTM configuration. Both use 5 inche or so midrange. Both are well regarded in theeir respective price range yet the tower thrown out a larger soundstage. Now i wonder what actually makes it so? Oubviously, they are different speakers, but assuming if on design a speaker with the same drivers, but one in a TM configuration and the other in MTM, could a MTM has an advatnage in throwing out larger soundstage?

IMO several factors. One underlying principle is to reduce interaction of sound that gives directional cues with the room. You need a tweeter that beams its highest octave narrowly. You have to reduce upper bass lower midrange output to at least flat and maybe below. You have to reduce interference patterns between the tweeter and midrange or midwoofer through careful electrical and physical alignment. And then you must position the speakers and yourself very carefully. This usually means speakers well away from walls (3 to 4 feet) and you at one apex of an equilateral triangle, the speakers being at the others. If you don't move your head you might just fool yourself into hearing a wider soundstage. Ambiophonics takes this a large step further increasing the apparent width to from 150 to 180 degrees but again you must sit in a "sweet spot" and to my ears all of the sources are on a line between you and the speakers. There may be other "trick" phase cancellation circuits that will have a similar effect. I think my TV set has one built in.  BTW I do not personally favor any of this. Imaging is of no concern to me but this is what I've observed. There is much you sacrifice for it including accurate tonality of instruments. For me that's the single most important factor I consider when judging the quality of audio equipment.

[redbook]

 Well explained. Thanks for the info.    redbook

[jimdgoulding]

An explanantion of why you would lose tonality is needed.  And in whose opinion would it apply to what speakers, please.

[JackD201]

Chair's are bad acoustically, standing is too. One must squat at all times, uncomfortable but sounds great 

The ol' boy scout, dump in the woods squat is best

[JLM]

My listening room that follows the Cardas recipe (room shape and equilateral speaker/listening triangle), with side wall reflectioned distances at least 11 feet (0.01 second delay to eliminate direct/reflected sound "confusion" to the ear), single driver speakers (with 8 inch drivers that beam highs), and listening chair without headrest is just about ideal.

Confirmation is a wonderful thing.

Tone is king, but pin point imaging provides a "natural" degree of resolution that is non-fatiguing.

[OzarkTom]

I have found that speakers with no crossovers tend to have a bigger soundstage image than ones that do.

But the room can be the biggest issue. The best rooms I have heard are the ones with vaulted ceilings going up to 15-20 feet high. The best imaging room I have ever heard was 30 foot high ceiling with 3 walls of it being glass. Any system we tried imaged well in that room. I sure wished I had own that house.

[Quiet Earth]

I suppose there are certain guidelines one should follow when the goal is to achieve a holographic sound stage such as Cardas, Audio Physic, et al. But there is another way to enjoy stereo. It's the old fashioned method that you enjoyed before you became an audiophile. I don't know what to call it, but it's where the stereo image stays on one side of the room and you stay on the other. I think I like listening to music this way more than the 3D audiophile way. It feels more natural to me, as though I am observing the music in my room rather than being all wrapped up inside of it.  It's still stereo, and there are still solid 3D-like images, but it is over there and I am over here. It took me a while to get used to it after living the Cardas-equilateral triangle life style, but now that I'm enjoying it I can't go back. Sorry for the rambling,,,,,,, hope that made at least a little bit of sense. 

FWIW, I'm getting an interesting kind of soundstage over here yet bending a lot of rules in the process. My speakers have :

- a wide baffle with sharp, flat edges
- a varnished (reflective) front face.
- a cabinet that is light in weight rather than heavy and dead
- a lively cabinet that has minimal internal bracing and minimal interior padding.
-drivers that cross over very close to their frequency limit.
-a somewhat complicated crossover near the frequency you are supposed to avoid. ( 2.3 kHz?)
-room placement where each speaker is almost touching its respective side wall.

On the plus side I guess you could say that :

-the stands are very heavy.  (filled with sand)
-the stands extend the baffle to the floor. (beard effect)
-the stands have the crossover inside where there is no vibration.
-the bass, the dynamic slam, and the quality of tone are augmented by the close side wall placement. (There's your answer about the tone Jim!  )

I'm not trying to say that people should start breaking all of the rules and start reaping the rewards,,,,,,,, no! I'm just saying that there is more than one way to get good sound. It all depends on what you want to hear. 

[jimdgoulding]

Quiet, you have a flat out world class system I'm quite certain of that and one I'd love to hear.  My guess is the experience is rather like Klipsch corner horns, a speaker of cult status.  I imagine the sound is positively grandiose.  And what a room!  Love those high ceilings and natural light.   

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?action=gallery;area=browse;album=3274

Most speakers are balanced for tone in the design stage.  Your wall treatments would likely alleviate high frequency brightness, if any, and your placement give support to your midrange and below.  I do that, anyway, with a -2db cut above the crossover with dip switshes for the benefit of same on the back of my active speaks.

I think we both listen to a lot of classical music and believe this bodes well for us, holograpy aside.  Cheers, mate.

[redbook]

 My Ti 120's  (JBL) also have the wide baffle. The box does comply with the ideal ratio of width by depth by height. With the mass loading of the speakers and the stands I have achieved terrific sound overall. (25 years of experimenting). I also felted the baffle around the high and midrange drivers and tuned  the  port which did have a positive effects .

[Quiet Earth]

Nicely done redbook!

I think a lot of the old school designs will continue to stand the test of time as long as there are people interested in listening to music. I’m also partial to the older designs, and I fall hard for the old concepts with modern materials. The retro-new stuff! Speaking of retro, isn’t it all retro? If you are sitting in a room listening to music with no ear buds and no video monitor . . . .  then you’re pretty darn retro. 

Here's a retro sighting……… an Audio Circle friend enjoys the “imaging” from speakers that don’t follow the diffraction rule. Maybe the grill piece completes the baffle? Check it out : http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=98573.0


Jim,

Thanks for your kind words. You have humbled me again sir!   

You may be right about the Klipsch analogy. I might have a similar kind of wall-of-walla-sound stage that a corner horn provides. To be honest I don’t really remember what the Klipschorn sounds like because it has been way too long since I last heard one. However, since I’m not completely designed into the corner, I do have a little more freedom to experiment with imaging and that’s what I have been doing lately. I have actually pulled my speakers further out into the room since that last photo. They are hugging the sidewalls a little closer too, but the fronts are now further away from the plane of the rack and closer to the listening seat.  See? I want to have my cake and eat it too. There is hope for me yet! 

Btw Jim, the room is certainly nothing special in the acoustics department. The pyramid foam was put up just before I sold my Sound Labs (dipoles). The foam really helped those panels sound better while letting me reclaim some of the room space for myself. In other words, I could push the panels back a couple of feet instead of having them sit in my lap. Unfortunately, I glued the foam to the walls and I am too lazy to rip it all down and touch up the walls.    So I just leave it up there. The diffusers were purchased later, when I owned these narrow baffle speakers : 



I started experimenting with closer sidewall placement with the Zingalis because I liked the way the weight and tone of the lower and middle registers improved.  But there was a compromise in imaging (as you well know) so I tried the diffusors. The diffusors really helped me cross the line for a while. (More cake!)

Eventually I realized that my taste had just changed and I was ready to get different speakers altogether. These things happen! I probably don’t need the room treatments anymore, but since I already have them I will keep them.

I like the enclosure forum. Speakers are fun to talk about! 

[jimdgoulding]

You're too kind.

[Letitroll98]

Quiet Earth, I know what you mean when you talk about alternative imaging strategy's and vintage designs.  Many years ago I had Allison 3's, which had to be placed in the corners against the walls and I achieved excellent imaging with them.  I still have a pair of Snell Type E's that compete with anything on the market today, and are even being sold as a redesign by Audio Note UK for 5 times their original price.  Great designs just don't stop being so because there's something new on the market. 

That being said, I'm using fairly conventional placement strategy with the Maggies that are in the main listening room presently.  I do a bit more math than the average person with regard to room nodes for frequency response and toe in for imaging, but overall pretty benign placements for me these days.