[James Tanner]

james

[drummermitchell]

James,besides all the engineering,testing,assembly ect,
I imagine Bryston has a display front for products and a few dedicated audio rooms for listening in.Course maybe if there is a few audio rooms,no work would get done or are those rooms for Mike,Stuart and yourself  .

[James Tanner]

James,besides all the engineering,testing,assembly ect,
I imagine Bryston has a display front for products and a few dedicated audio rooms for listening in.Course maybe if there is a few audio rooms,no work would get done or are those rooms for Mike,Stuart and yourself  .

Hi Don,

Yes we use to have a listening room but as you say it is just too busy and too noisy in the factory generally to be able to concentrate on the nuances you need to when evaluating new designs etc.  So I have 3-rooms in my home that I use for the final listening/testing stages.

james

[vegasdave]

Very cool. Nice landscaping.

[vegasdave]

James,besides all the engineering,testing,assembly ect,
I imagine Bryston has a display front for products and a few dedicated audio rooms for listening in.Course maybe if there is a few audio rooms,no work would get done or are those rooms for Mike,Stuart and yourself  .

Hi Don,

Yes we use to have a listening room but as you say it is just too busy and too noisy in the factory generally to be able to concentrate on the nuances you need to when evaluating new designs etc.  So I have 3-rooms in my home that I use for the final listening/testing stages.

james

Ok, so those are the official listening rooms. Cool. It's probably better to have the rooms in a home environment, true?

[Gojo]

Hi Guys,

here's a link to an earlier thread with pixs of the 2 Bryston listening rooms
  (Sep 2004)

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=12845.0

Hi James,
Have the rooms been updated or changed with regards to layout or acoustic treatments?


(Interesting in the main room that diffusors and not absorption are being used at the first reflection points of the IB2s, n'est pas? Any comment their?  Would very much look forward to your thoughts/ideas there)

Thanks again

Joe

[texaslonghorn]

So James - is your home the place where customers get to try out the Brystons???  Hmmmm, hope you have plenty of beer and chips - I'll be right over.  Mind if I bring some friends and potential customers????

[Hififreak]

james

Klik

[James Tanner]

Hi Guys,

here's a link to an earlier thread with pixs of the 2 Bryston listening rooms
  (Sep 2004)

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=12845.0

Hi James,
Have the rooms been updated or changed with regards to layout or acoustic treatments?


(Interesting in the main room that diffusors and not absorption are being used at the first reflection points of the IB2s, n'est pas? Any comment their?  Would very much look forward to your thoughts/ideas there)

Thanks again

Joe

Hi Joe,

I have been involved, especially at the studio level a lot over the years with acoustics and I have altered my ideas on what I think sounds better, especially in most domestic size rooms.  The diffuser Vs the absorber is an interesting issue and has been hotly debated for many years  (live end - dead end etc.). At this point I find I much prefer the diffuser at the first reflection point rather than the absorber.

What turned me in that direction was listening to speakers in very large rooms where first reflections are not an issue and the ability of the loudspeaker to create a huge wide sound stage was always apparent in these large venues. In smaller rooms when I tried absorption I always felt that the sound stage width would collapse in towards the centre.  When I used reflection I much preferred it as the soundstage seemed to provide much more width. I realize some of the width is artificial because if it is a strong enough reflection it will create a phantom image off the wall.  In fact, I know a very well known reviewer who is a big advocate of using blank side walls to 'create' this strong first reflection in order to make the soundstage appear larger in very small rooms.

I think the reason I prefer controlled reflection is that middle to low frequencies are quite long in wavelengths so even if you have very thick absorbers on the first reflection points it only absorbs part of the frequencies hitting the wall so the off axis tonal balance is skewed. Here is the formula for figuring out how thick an absorber has to be to affect a specific frequency:
AbsorberThickness Formula:  1130/ (4 x First Null frequency)
Example: For 250 Hz absorption: 1130 / (4 x 250) = 1.13 ft thick.

The other reason I do not like absorption is because even if you use very thick absorbers at the reflection points they seem to act like a 'black hole' and the room takes on a very unnatural almost anechoic feel.

I personally feel that these highly absorptive small audio/video rooms sound very unnatural too me so I much prefer a room with much more controlled reflection than absorption.

james

[Gojo]

Thank you very much James for the detailed response.  You feedback is most helpful and always very much appreciated!

Joe

[Mike-48]

I have been involved, especially at the studio level a lot over the years with acoustics and I have altered my ideas on what I think sounds better, especially in most domestic size rooms.  The diffuser Vs the absorber is an interesting issue and has been hotly debated for many years  (live end - dead end etc.). At this point I find I much prefer the diffuser at the first reflection point rather than the absorber.

James hardly needs a ditto, but since I just removed some absorption from my listening room, replacing it with mixed absorption/diffusion panels, I can't resist commenting. My experience with pure absorption has been that it deadens the sound and contracts the soundstage.  (Yes, the wider stage is partly artificial, but it's pleasant and innocuous in tonal terms). I have not tried pure diffusers, but I have had excellent results from mixed diffusion/absorption items: ASC's flat panels and RPG's BAD panels.

Anyway, a few hours of work tonight gave sterling results: better apparent dynamics and far better spatial presentation.  No doubt in my mind that improving the room acoustics was one of the most effective changes to my audio system -- right up there with getting that large Bryston power amp.

[V]

James, the Bryston building looks nice.

Can you give us some more company information not available on Bryston's home page ?

Examples:
1. Key people in the history of Bryston (past and present).
2. Number of employees.
3. Links to more information on Bryston.

Thanks in advance.

[vegasdave]

James, the Bryston building looks nice.

Can you give us some more company information not available on Bryston's home page ?

Examples:
1. Key people in the history of Bryston (past and present).
2. Number of employees.
3. Links to more information on Bryston.

Thanks in advance.

I would like to know this too.

[Phil A]

James, the Bryston building looks nice.

Can you give us some more company information not available on Bryston's home page ?

Examples:
1. Key people in the history of Bryston (past and present).
2. Number of employees.
3. Links to more information on Bryston.

Thanks in advance.

http://www.soundstagelive.com/factorytours/bryston/

[95Dyna]

Hi Joe,


What turned me in that direction was listening to speakers in very large rooms where first reflections are not an issue and the ability of the loudspeaker to create a huge wide sound stage was always apparent in these large venues. In smaller rooms when I tried absorption I always felt that the sound stage width would collapse in towards the centre.  When I used reflection I much preferred it as the soundstage seemed to provide much more width. I realize some of the width is artificial because if it is a strong enough reflection it will create a phantom image off the wall.  In fact, I know a very well known reviewer who is a big advocate of using blank side walls to 'create' this strong first reflection in order to make the soundstage appear larger in very small rooms.





james

Hi James,

All this being said, what is the proper size of the sound stage in terms of width and height assuming a typical situation where the speaks are 3 meters apart give or take (tweeter to tweeter).  With terms like "huge wide" and "artificial width" its hard to pin down what are the ideal stage dimensions. 

Thanks,

Bill

[James Tanner]

^^^^^^

Hi Bill,

I think the ideal soundstage for me would be a good concert hall with me sitting at about 12'th row center.


james

[95Dyna]

^^^^^^

Hi Bill,

I think the ideal soundstage for me would be a good concert hall with me sitting at about 12'th row center.


james

I agree that would be a good spot in a concert hall.  I always sit in just about that position at the movies.  I was thinking more in line with what the appropriate dimensions would be in a listening room environment e.g. if my speakers are 12' apart and I'm sitting 12' back how high and wide should it be with respect to the position of the tweeters so that it sounds optimal i.e. not too small and not so large it sound unnatural.

[James Tanner]

The reason I used the concert stage as an example is I try to take the distances involved at the concert hall - 100 foot stage and I am 80-120 feet back and try to replicate that at home.

So for me the speakers are approximately the same distance apart that I am from them.

The recording then will generally determine the soundstage size and I try to keep the speakers well away from boundaries to prevent early reflections from affecting the frequency response and image placement.  Most speakers are designed to place your ears at the tweeter level (due to high frequency beaming) when seated but a lot will depend on the specific speakers design parameters.

james

[vegasdave]

The reason I used the concert stage as an example is I try to take the distances involved at the concert hall - 100 foot stage and I am 80-120 feet back and try to replicate that at home.

So for me the speakers are approximately the same distance apart that I am from them.

The recording then will generally determine the soundstage size and I try to keep the speakers well away from boundaries to prevent early reflections from affecting the frequency response and image placement.  Most speakers are designed to place your ears at the tweeter level (due to high frequency beaming) when seated but a lot will depend on the specific speakers design parameters.

james

But don't good speakers sound good off-axis?

[JRace]

But don't good speakers sound good off-axis?

Some...but not all. For example, the $15,000 MartinLogan Summit X's I review a while back sounded utterly amazing, jaw-dropping kind of amazing when in the sweet spot. Move 4inchs up, or 10inchs to the side, and the magic is gone.

The greater the dispersion the more it interacts with room boundaries, and the less direct sound you get.

Every single speaker ever made is a series of compromises.