0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 12136 times.
Regarding imaging......Big rack in middle and on the speaker plane means you'll likely get a confused center image and inadequate center fill.Also, tightness on the wall behind them means depth and layering will virtually be non-existent.Out in space, the 2.5 are able to do these things admirably.
Given your experience with R2.5. do you think that approx 20" placement from the wall behind will be problematic and would foam plugs/ pillows be some sort of remedy?
Several replies were posted while I was writing my last post. Given that this is a NYC apartment with the accepted challenges, my advice would continue to be to go with a smaller standmount and one or two high quality subwoofers such as rythmik. You will stand a better chance of controlling bass in your challenging space.I would also commit to near-field positioning for serious listening. You'll find it more satisfying in your circumstances.
Another highly regarded speaker. Front ported. Reported to work very well in "smallish / medium" rooms. Bass is not overpowering. VG price. Local to OP. No direct personal experience.https://www.audiogon.com/listings/full-range-aerial-accoustics-model-6-outstanding-3-way-spk-2017-02-05-speakers-11050-2468-port-washington-ny--2
the listening area opens up into a living - dining space. the overall total space is 20ft deep x 30 ft wide (600 sq ft). the ceiling height over the Tv/ listening area is 10 ft and it opens up to 14ft so the average is 20 x 30 x 12 ft so it's quite a big open space.where the listening position is the speakers are 7ft apart and about 9 ft from listening position.I listen to it all- blues, electronic, rock, pop, dub reggae, folk and classical..My current speakers are Salk Song Towers which are very good. However they don't quite have the heft, esp in the bass for my space. See pics below