How many of you listen near field?

DavidS · « **Reply #20 on:** 9 Dec 2007, 04:36 pm »

A couple more things from me:

In my not so great 11x12x8 room nearfield definately takes away some of cube room nasties - solves most of the boomy bass - guess less chance for sound to bounce around.

I'm curious about what makes for a great nearfield speaker. Saw above that single driver works well. Any other attributes? Does size of speaker matter - always think of small monitors for nearfield but not sure this is true. Anyone have a speaker with a large bass driver that they have used effectively in nearfield (Ellis woofer is a 5 incher) or even sub that they integrate in nearfield setup.

David

Wind Chaser · « **Reply #21 on:** 9 Dec 2007, 04:50 pm »

Near field to me isn't merely just a matter of how close you are to the speakers, but how wide apart they are in relation to the distance you sit back.

When I go to a live performance, I want to get up close near the action. Sitting in the back isn't nearly as enjoyable. By having my speakers spread some what wider apart, about 15% - 20% more than the distance I sit back, the illusion of being there is much more believable than having the speakers close together and sitting back at a greater distance.

If you prize a realistic a soundstage and imaging, I think this is pretty important to spread your speakers as wide apart as possible and not sit any further back than the distance between your speakers.

Wayner · « **Reply #22 on:** 9 Dec 2007, 05:01 pm »

Wind Chaser brings up a good point. If you see pictures of recording studios, their near field monitors have a fairly wide berth. I think the wider, the better, until you destroy the sound stage. Also, some smaller bookshelf type speakers may benifit from closer proximity to the corners of a room to boost a saging lower end.

Wayner

Wind Chaser · « **Reply #23 on:** 9 Dec 2007, 05:08 pm »

Quote from: mfsoa on 9 Dec 2007, 03:28 pm

With my VR4JRs I am about 8-9 feet away , about a foot shy of equilateral. But the toe-in is weird - I hardly use any at all. I don't seem to lose image focus, the tonal balance is better and the stage is w i d e.
I hear other JR owners say they do the same thing - point-em straight out.

Not sure what property of the speaker allows for this

I think has a lot to do with your RTs. From my experience when it comes to ribbons, listening off axis works much better than on axis. Most HF drivers have a narrow dispersion and thus benefit from being towed in especially under near field conditions.

satfrat · « **Reply #24 on:** 9 Dec 2007, 05:27 pm »

Quote from: Wind Chaser on 9 Dec 2007, 05:08 pm

Quote from: mfsoa on 9 Dec 2007, 03:28 pm
With my VR4JRs I am about 8-9 feet away , about a foot shy of equilateral. But the toe-in is weird - I hardly use any at all. I don't seem to lose image focus, the tonal balance is better and the stage is w i d e.
I hear other JR owners say they do the same thing - point-em straight out.

Not sure what property of the speaker allows for this

I think has a lot to do with your RTs. From my experience when it comes to ribbons, listening off axis works much better than on axis. Most HF drivers have a narrow dispersion and thus benefit from being towed in especially under near field conditions.

That's all fine n' dandy but this thread was about nearfield listening with the 1801 which if i'm not mistaken has a soft dome tweeter. Soft dome tweeters much prefer to breath and as such should be brought out into a room 2-3' minimum with simular spacing from the side walls in order to achieve a deep wide soundfield, especially for nearfield. Just my opinion, yrmv.

Cheers,
Robin

tanchiro58 · « **Reply #25 on:** 9 Dec 2007, 06:06 pm »

Quote

Anyone have a speaker with a large bass driver that they have used effectively in nearfield (Ellis woofer is a 5 incher) or even sub that they integrate in nearfield setup.

My room is about 12x9x8. I got the horn based speakers with JBL D131 12' woofers. The distance between two speakers is 6-8' and my seat is nearly 8' and no space in the back. Actually I do not have enough room for the system. But I can turn up the volume from 9-3 o'clock it does not heard my ears. You should also consider the room treatments which is very important for a small room.

BrianM · « **Reply #26 on:** 9 Dec 2007, 06:44 pm »

n.b. The Ellis woofer is 6 1/2 inches, not 5.

And Robin's correct, it's a soft-dome (3/4 inch) tweeter.

Russell Dawkins · « **Reply #27 on:** 9 Dec 2007, 08:23 pm »

Quote from: Wayner on 9 Dec 2007, 05:01 pm

Wind Chaser brings up a good point. If you see pictures of recording studios, their near field monitors have a fairly wide berth. I think the wider, the better, until you destroy the sound stage. Also, some smaller bookshelf type speakers may benifit from closer proximity to the corners of a room to boost a saging lower end.

Wayner

The convention for mixing and mastering in stereo and surround is a 60 degree included angle between the L and R speakers. This forms an equilateral triangle with you as the third point.

Presumably, if your set up resembles that, you have a little greater chance of hearing what the engineer heard (and intended).

Having said that, this is a form of entertainment and individual taste comes into it, also if you have your speakers extra wide, they will be ideal for Blumlein recordings, which are meant to be heard on speakers spread 90 degrees apart.

Wayner · « **Reply #28 on:** 9 Dec 2007, 08:45 pm »

If I were to put my Dynaco A25XL's at 60 (total) toe-in, I would destroy my sound field completely. I think they would have to be about 20 feet apart for that angle. I'm only about 5 degrees inward (10 total).

Wayner

Russell Dawkins · « **Reply #29 on:** 9 Dec 2007, 09:02 pm »

I'm not talking about 60 degrees of toe in - 60 total included angle, that is the number of degrees off the center line between the speakers. In these terms 180 degrees included angle would put the speakers directly to your left and right.

Each speaker would be toed in about 33 degrees so as to point just in front of you. The idea is that as you move left and right off axis you are getting further off the axis of the speaker you are getting nearer to which is intended to roughly compensate for the arrival time being earlier. We determine apparent position of a phantom image partly by loudness (this is why the balance control works) and partly by arrival time.

When you toe the speakers out so that the axes are pointing at you or behind your head (let alone no toe in), as you move off center to the right, for example, the right speaker not only gets louder, but the arrival time is earlier. Both conspire to shift the image to the right. The effect is clearly audible.

hubert · « **Reply #30 on:** 9 Dec 2007, 09:08 pm »

About 0.3" from each speaker (Stax electrostatic)

BrianM · « **Reply #31 on:** 10 Dec 2007, 03:43 pm »

Well, I think I'm in agreement with Russell Dawkins that the equilateral triangle with slightly crossed axes in front of the listener is giving the best sound. I haven't done any scientific measurements but think I've got it pretty close angle- and distance-wise. I might experiment some more with distance from the front wall, but am getting very nice depth with them about 1 foot 4 inches out. Best of all imaging, staging and balance are the best I've heard them; I could even hear the difference two rooms away (stereo room opens into dining room opens into living room). It is ... breathtakingly real.

What's an ideal recording to test this out? This one from Reference Recordings:

http://www.amazon.com/Medinah-Sessions-Paul-Bowles/dp/B00005NGYR/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1197301624&sr=8-1

Treasure trove of jazzy chamber music, following the individual voices is very immersing. Recorded in the 80s on analog tape (he knew digital wasn't up to scratch yet, I take it) and remastered at 24 bits; 2 CD set, get it if you don't have it. Medinah Temple Chicago is a great acoustic. The players are all tops.

Carl V · « **Reply #32 on:** 10 Dec 2007, 05:12 pm »

I've had a pair of Selah SSR in a nice Cardas arrangement
wonderful sounding & staging set up.

So I moved things around and crossed the axes just in front
of my nose. 9' equilateral trinangle. Well away from walls,
still a semi cardas setup. Very nice as well!

And Amongst the cds & LPs were some RR stuff
Star of Wonder
Rutters Requiem
many of thiei Fanfares CDS.

the Pro-musica CD choice is great.
Folk singer...Muddy Waters
Alone & Acoustic Blues giant Buddy Guy from the 60's
Audioquest Recordings are killer
as are some Chesky.

I did the same sorta thing with a Basszilla set up
as well.....nice, very nice. If I had the knowledge
I'd love to convert the Monopole bass in the basszilla
to Dipolar. This one took longer to get sounding good.
Still futzing around with it. AT211 amps here.

bummrush · « **Reply #33 on:** 10 Dec 2007, 06:21 pm »

About 6 feet with my Legacy Studio monitors,,it sounds very good

Russell Dawkins · « **Reply #34 on:** 10 Dec 2007, 08:29 pm »

Quote from: BrianM on 10 Dec 2007, 03:43 pm

Well, I think I'm in agreement with Russell Dawkins that the equilateral triangle with slightly crossed axes in front of the listener is giving the best sound. I haven't done any scientific measurements but think I've got it pretty close angle- and distance-wise. I might experiment some more with distance from the front wall, but am getting very nice depth with them about 1 foot 4 inches out. Best of all imaging, staging and balance are the best I've heard them; I could even hear the difference two rooms away (stereo room opens into dining room opens into living room). It is ... breathtakingly real.

What's an ideal recording to test this out? This one from Reference Recordings:

http://www.amazon.com/Medinah-Sessions-Paul-Bowles/dp/B00005NGYR/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1197301624&sr=8-1

Treasure trove of jazzy chamber music, following the individual voices is very immersing. Recorded in the 80s on analog tape (he knew digital wasn't up to scratch yet, I take it) and remastered at 24 bits; 2 CD set, get it if you don't have it. Medinah Temple Chicago is a great acoustic. The players are all tops.

Thanks for the recording suggestion and glad this worked for you.

What I did to make speaker angle adjustment easier was to take a protractor and draw an angle of 60 degrees on a piece of paper, bisected with a line down the middle, and cut it out - about 6 inches on a side. then I just move this around until the edges are pointing at the speakers and ideally my head should be where the near point is, if you follow (you can see why I'm not a technical writer!).

Wind Chaser · « **Reply #35 on:** 10 Dec 2007, 08:53 pm »

60 degrees is a good place to start, but it never hurts to try a wider girth. You might be surprised with the result!

satfrat · « **Reply #36 on:** 11 Dec 2007, 01:18 am »

Quote from: Wind Chaser on 10 Dec 2007, 08:53 pm

60 degrees is a good place to start, but it never hurts to try a wider girth. You might be surprised with the result!

I agree wholeheartly when it comes to my Lorelei's. With me sitting 6' in front, I have my Lorelei's crossing a good 6' behind me and they're still able to disappear while creating a soundfield up & behind them, especially now that I'm using Jim Goulding's wool surrounds. Gotta love them Scan Speak 9700 soft dome tweeters for their dispersion.

Cheers,
Robin

David Ellis · « **Reply #37 on:** 11 Dec 2007, 03:17 am »

I generally share this sentiment:

Quote

My experience on near field listening is just as eye-opening as my discovery of room treatment. It sounded a little weird at first, but once you're accustom to it, you will appreciate what it does - it brings you so much closer to the singer, it's as if she/he is singing right on your nose.

However, this arrangement is totally unacceptable in my wife's living room

. This is probably true for most folks.

I believe there are a few 1801 listeners using a near field arrangement, but the number is very small.

Dave

billc · « **Reply #38 on:** 11 Dec 2007, 03:58 am »

As an owner of Dave's phenomenal 1801b's, I use the nearfield arrangement for most of my listening. I keep each speaker positioned with the needed toe-in, and place my (light enough to carry) listening chair at the equilateral triangle listening point, about 7 feet from each speaker. The soundstage is incredibly real and three dimensional (with the right recordings, of course). Sometimes, when changing a record or CD, I linger between the speakers and can't believe the center image is so real.

When I am done listening I move the chair back to a nearby spouse-approved location.

This set-up also works well with company visiting, when my listening chair position is impossible. The nearfield setup also works especially well when the family asks that I keep the loudness down.

Bill C

Russell Dawkins · « **Reply #39 on:** 11 Dec 2007, 04:14 am »

I find that, realistically, in the average home no more than one person wants to listen closely to something. For everyone else involved in other things the quieter the better, although "background levels" are usually acceptable.

With the set up I described on page 1 of this thread there was a relatively extreme difference between levels in the chair and the rest of the house, which was part of the plan. It was nice to be able to enjoy decent loudness without bothering anyone.

Most of the time the speakers would be swiveled out for casual listening. Of course with this arrangement they were too close together for "proper" stereo placed just each side of a chair, but I don't listen for imaging when I'm walking around the house!

It did help that they were small, light and floor standing. This wouldn't work for a spiked setup unless the stand top was big enough to allow the speaker to be turned around on it and the speaker itself was not on spikes.

All that is needed is a speaker whose sound comes together at those close distances. Do the 1801s? I haven't heard them.

cheers