Do you guys subscribe to Cardas math for speaker distance from front wall?

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 97301 times.

bmckenney

I have decided to redo Cardas in my room over the next few days. Last time I had to make some compromises also to achieve the best of all...

I want to start over but have a measuring question...

My room is 173" (14' 5") wide from left wall to right wall. But at the speakers, the wall to the right is a series of four tall 12 pane windows and their woodwork. The windows are covered in heavy velvet curtains...
If I measure the room width right in front of the speakers, the room is 178" (14'10") from left wall to the right window panes... So, the windows are inset another 5" from the woodwork and of course all behind the curtains.

Do I use the 173" room width? The 178" room width? Or maybe even split the difference?

Looking forward to starting fresh and tweaking from there again.

Jason

Without knowing how much space your windows are taking up, I would use the 173".  Place them from the front wall and the side walls using the calculation.  Then play with distance from the side walls in half inch increments out and in from the wall and see what the differences are in dynamics etc.  Once you find a reasonable distance that sounds good, trying the same thing with the distance from the front wall.  And like Jim said your speaker type might be important too.  If they are dipole then you use the ceiling height in the math.  And their crossover design and driver alignment might make a difference with how much toe in sounds best.

jimdgoulding

Maybe it's what I'm smokin, but it sounds to me like reflection is what dude is getting and the reinforcement from it is to his tastes with his speaks.  Hi, Earth, don't mean to talk around you.

Quiet Earth

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1788
Maybe reflections and other audiophile no-no's like diffraction are appealing to me. I wouldn't be surprised.

I am a believer in getting one's speakers and listening position out from walls and corners if possible (unless they're Klipsch cornerhorns).

That's a good point in those parenthesis. Some speakers are designed to be placed right up against the back wall, or in the corner. Placing them into the middle of the room messes up their design criteria.

Quote
Room energizing is about how sound waveforms interact with a room.  Those that are bouncing around the room shouldn't be arriving too soon to your ears else your room will impose itself on a recording.

 I think the room is going to impose itself on the recording no matter what we do (within reason). A speaker should be designed to be placed in a typical living room to complete its sonic picture, not to fight with it. Rear ported speakers with wide baffles tend to work well for me in this regard. Unfortunately, these designs don't seem to be very popular anymore. I guess they are just too old fashioned. Or maybe I am.  :oops:

stvnharr

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 740
Hello,
My earlier post was a bit of a misswrite, in terms of room pressurization, and I picked that up in the few replies that followed, but it has taken a while to get the time to hopefully correct my misswrite.

ALL speakers will pressurize the room they are in, as that is how the sound is made.  This has nothing to do with Master Set.  Whether the speaker uses cones, as most do, the rapid cone movement will pressurize the air in the room.  Other types of speakers do it all differently, but in the end they pressurize the air in the room.  If there is any doubt about that, just take your speakers outside and listen to how they sound.

However, at room boundaries, i.e. walls, floor, and ceiling, the sound will want to reflect. Dealing with this is pretty much standard, although sidewalls usually create the most troubles. But if you are 3 feet plus out from a sidewall and with a decent toe in, sidewall reflections are minimized quite a bit.  Speakers are forward firing and can be much closer to the wall behind them as there is not much to be reflected, even with a rear port, as I have.

What differentiates Master Set is that one speaker is set as an "anchor" speaker, and you position the other speaker so that the room is equally pressurized from both speakers at the same time.  The net result is a single source of sound from the two speakers.  This means that when you the listener move around the room, the sound stays put and does not move around with you.  This may or may not seem important to you, that's for you to decide.

With most any other way of putting speakers in the room you can always get good sound if you sit in the middle of the two speakers as you will get the most equal sum of the two at the one position.  But if you move from that one position, the sound will move with you and will change and be different.

Essentially you can set the speakers to be a single source of sound, or you can have a single seat of listening.

Also, I have just looked at my AC Master Set gallery, and one of the photos has gotten quite a lot of looks.  I may have tweaked things since those photos were taken, but things are essentially the same.

Steve

jriggy

I have decided to redo Cardas in my room over the next few days. Last time I had to make some compromises also to achieve the best of all...

I want to start over but have a measuring question...

My room is 173" (14' 5") wide from left wall to right wall. But at the speakers, the wall to the right is a series of four tall 12 pane windows and their woodwork. The windows are covered in heavy velvet curtains...
If I measure the room width right in front of the speakers, the room is 178" (14'10") from left wall to the right window panes... So, the windows are inset another 5" from the woodwork and of course all behind the curtains.

Do I use the 173" room width? The 178" room width? Or maybe even split the difference?

Looking forward to starting fresh and tweaking from there again.

Jason
Jason-  Hi.  Split the difference if you can center your listening position.  And, please, tell me, at least, the depth of your room.  Also, what is between you and your speaks if anything and beside them and what kind of speaks you are using so I and we can look them up.  Back to you tomorrow.

Hi Jim,

My room is 20" deep (check my layout again in my gallery), wood coffee table between me and the speakers (but I plan on taking care of that at some point), nothing to either side of them besides the heavy velvet curtains covering the windows on the right wall. The windows are 9' long on the right wall. My speakers are Dynaudio s5.4's. The tweeter are on the bottom and bass drivers on the top.

Another note. There is that fireplace to the left but in front of the speaker that sticks out 8" but I seem to remember to just ignore that kind of wall apendage and just use the regular room width... Speaks are almost 54" out and I can go no further becaues of other room and ergonomic reasons.

Hope that helps... I like your idea of splitting the difference.  I am just trying to get to the best width number to START from this time.

Thanks!

TooManyToys

Maybe reflections and other audiophile no-no's like diffraction are appealing to me. I wouldn't be surprised.

……….Some speakers are designed to be placed right up against the back wall, or in the corner. Placing them into the middle of the room messes up their design criteria.

Quote
Room energizing is about how sound waveforms interact with a room.  Those that are bouncing around the room shouldn't be arriving too soon to your ears else your room will impose itself on a recording.

 I think the room is going to impose itself on the recording no matter what we do (within reason). A speaker should be designed to be placed in a typical living room to complete its sonic picture, not to fight with it. Rear ported speakers with wide baffles tend to work well for me in this regard. Unfortunately, these designs don't seem to be very popular anymore. I guess they are just too old fashioned. Or maybe I am.  :oops:

Quiet Earth,

I’m in lock step with you here.  I do think that (some) speakers are designed with the intent of room boundary reinforcement.  You clearly see that when some subwoofer designers talk about their products output and where they should be placed.

I have taken my speakers “on tour” at GTG’s and experienced the difference in tone with and without my own electronics.  During my first trip with them they were placed out into 1/3 of the room and TACT electronics was used with them.  My first listen to a track that I knew well had me thinking “what happened to the bass?”.  I ended up checking the wiring, equipment, etc, and left thinking the difference was the between the electronics used.  The next GTG I brought my own equipment and there was a change, but for the better.  Then I came to realize how much an effect the room has, playing at home after those two experiences.

And I equate with what you are saying about the Cardas placement loosing the life.  I prefer a little more lower end in my sound, my interpretation of “warmth”, which I lose too far out from the back wall.  From the measurements I’ve done in the past, this boundary reinforcement is not limited to 80Hz or thereabouts, but can even be upwards of 200 to 300Hz, well within the range of human voicing.

When Steve discusses MS, he uses the term “pressure” a lot.  I can’t wrap my head around that concept.  Instead I ignore it and use my own visualization of “synchronization” or “clarity”.  While the math as Nyal has mentioned doesn’t bear this out for the frequencies mentioned, I’m going by the leap of faith that it does.

Here’s a swag from my R&D days that may not have any basis at the end of the day.  Vinyl_lady mentioned earlier in this thread:

Quote
…. After reading some of the posts, I used the Cardas calculator and moved my speakers 56.25" from the sidewalls per the calculation. All I can say is WOW! Insturments became more focused, much better bass extension, detail and slam. I am hearing the individual strings of a bass guitar on good bass runs. There is greater clarity, more "air" around the different instruments. What amazed me is that the center stage instruments and vocals actually seem to move back in the soundstage--more recessed as Jim has posted. The Daedalus DA-1.1s have two tweeters offset by 10 degrees with gives me a very wide sweet spot and speakers that fill the room with sound. In the new location the sound remains stable when I move out of a center listening postion. I still have a wide soundstage but there has been a marked improvement in focus, detail and soundstage depth. I don't sense that I have lost any warmth.

The speakers are 72" from the front of the woofer to the wall behind the speakers, an increase of 4" and still within the Rives calculation (68 to 74). The Cardas calculator would locate the speakers 91" from the wall behind the speakers, which puts them too far out into the room given that the room also doubles as a family/entertaining room. My listening position is 11' from the speakers and the speakers are 7' 6" apart (center of woofer to woofer).

The Cardas calculated distance from the side walls sure made a noticeable improvement. Count me among the believers on the side wall distance. Rives took into account my furniture, the big TV, etc. when he designed the treatment package and calculated the front distance. That distance which is 19' less than Cardas works great in my room……..

This is swag from my R&D days, and at the end of the day may not have any basis.  Maybe what Cardas came up with is an “ideal” (for the specific room type and more so for sidewall placement), and the MS and other locations are the “subset” or “harmonic” of those points to the rear wall, but with speakers positioned closer to the rear wall you have more lower end reinforcement.  That in reality there is no ideal one location, but there are several distances from the wall that allow for the “clarity” with additional levels of reinforcement.  Or I’m nuts.  My wife won’t have a vote on this.

Maybe it’s just circumstance with the few times I’ve used Cardas, but it appears that the speaker positioning and the seating equilateral triangle end up putting the listener and the speakers in a line of sight to the rear room corners.  Actually the listener is just a little in front of the convergence.

bmckenney

Hello,
My earlier post was a bit of a misswrite, in terms of room pressurization, and I picked that up in the few replies that followed, but it has taken a while to get the time to hopefully correct my misswrite.

ALL speakers will pressurize the room they are in, as that is how the sound is made.  This has nothing to do with Master Set.  Whether the speaker uses cones, as most do, the rapid cone movement will pressurize the air in the room.  Other types of speakers do it all differently, but in the end they pressurize the air in the room.  If there is any doubt about that, just take your speakers outside and listen to how they sound.

However, at room boundaries, i.e. walls, floor, and ceiling, the sound will want to reflect. Dealing with this is pretty much standard, although sidewalls usually create the most troubles. But if you are 3 feet plus out from a sidewall and with a decent toe in, sidewall reflections are minimized quite a bit.  Speakers are forward firing and can be much closer to the wall behind them as there is not much to be reflected, even with a rear port, as I have.

What differentiates Master Set is that one speaker is set as an "anchor" speaker, and you position the other speaker so that the room is equally pressurized from both speakers at the same time.  The net result is a single source of sound from the two speakers.  This means that when you the listener move around the room, the sound stays put and does not move around with you.  This may or may not seem important to you, that's for you to decide.

With most any other way of putting speakers in the room you can always get good sound if you sit in the middle of the two speakers as you will get the most equal sum of the two at the one position.  But if you move from that one position, the sound will move with you and will change and be different.

Essentially you can set the speakers to be a single source of sound, or you can have a single seat of listening.

Also, I have just looked at my AC Master Set gallery, and one of the photos has gotten quite a lot of looks.  I may have tweaked things since those photos were taken, but things are essentially the same.

Steve

Steve, I had a ook at your room pictures.  I don't believe there are rights and wrongs but I do believe there are some truths about speaker placement that are generally always applicable.  Your speakers do look to be very close to the front wall.  Almost like your speakers are one of those UK designs like Rega etc that do need to be close to the front wall.  They are designed that way because many UK rooms are small and constrained.  I believe these designs are usually front ported but I could be wrong.  And I don't know if your speakers are designed to be close to the front wall.  Anyway, I have the belief that when speakers are very close to the front wall the stereo imgage depth is going to be very flat.  I strive for dynamics and good frequency response first in speaker placement.  Then I'd say that getting that seamless wall of sound, energized room with disappearing speakers comes next.  Then comes imaging.  And then final spatial cues like imaging, soundstage width and soundstage depth.  I have always found without exception, but with limited experience, the closer speakers are to the front wall, the less depth there is.  And out of all the spatial elements, depth is probably most important to me.  Especially when listening to acoustic music, classical orchestra or choral for instance.  Or jazz bands.  I guess I want it all.  And I can't imagine that having speakers so close to the front wall would give me all of it.  Maybe one can get excellant depth with speakers close to the front all and I just have not heard it yet.

Bryan

max190

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 435
  • Home of the St. Louis Cardinals!
Bryan, depth is very important to me too.
I increased depth some by adding absorption to the front and rear walls when my rear-ported Dyn's were 3' from the front wall.  This also brought the critical midrange forward and subtle queues just off center and to the L&R behind the spkrs was lost.  Bass response was good though in part due to bass trapping.

Pulling them out to 61" increased my soundstage immensely in all directions.  This distance is 1/3 the length of my room.  The forwardness of the midrange relaxed back to all around the spkrs.  Subtle queues appeared that were lost before and the mid-bass response was more coherent.

Everybodies room plays a huge part in what we hear from our systems...
I remember when I bought my inexpensive JBL outdoor spkrs.  The 1st time I listened to them was in my room.  They did not sound good at all.  Then I took them outside and the difference was like night and day.

bmckenney

Bryan, depth is very important to me too.
I increased depth some by adding absorption to the front and rear walls when my rear-ported Dyn's were 3' from the front wall.  This also brought the critical midrange forward and subtle queues just off center and to the L&R behind the spkrs was lost.  Bass response was good though in part due to bass trapping.

Pulling them out to 61" increased my soundstage immensely in all directions.  This distance is 1/3 the length of my room.  The forwardness of the midrange relaxed back to all around the spkrs.  Subtle queues appeared that were lost before and the mid-bass response was more coherent.

Everybodies room plays a huge part in what we hear from our systems...
I remember when I bought my inexpensive JBL outdoor spkrs.  The 1st time I listened to them was in my room.  They did not sound good at all.  Then I took them outside and the difference was like night and day.

Steve, your pictures are nice and it looks like your speakers are nice and close together, well away from the side walls.  I know that's good for reducing the side wall reflections (I think) but I find the biggest plus of this is the center filling dynamics and room energy that results from it.  I used to think doing this had a down side.  Reduced soundstage width.  I've found that to be true in the past.  But not in my current situation.  I dont know if its the bass traps or the toe in or distance from the front wall or all of the above, but the width is excellant too.  And the speakers don't beam at me either.  They disappear.  But the energy with speakers closer together is effin fantastic. When I look at your room pictures I feel like it would sound similar to my system.

Bryan

stvnharr

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 740

Steve, I had a look at your room pictures.  I don't believe there are rights and wrongs but I do believe there are some truths about speaker placement that are generally always applicable.  Your speakers do look to be very close to the front wall.  Almost like your speakers are one of those UK designs like Rega etc that do need to be close to the front wall.  They are designed that way because many UK rooms are small and constrained.  I believe these designs are usually front ported but I could be wrong.  And I don't know if your speakers are designed to be close to the front wall.  Anyway, I have the belief that when speakers are very close to the front wall the stereo imgage depth is going to be very flat.  I strive for dynamics and good frequency response first in speaker placement.  Then I'd say that getting that seamless wall of sound, energized room with disappearing speakers comes next.  Then comes imaging.  And then final spatial cues like imaging, soundstage width and soundstage depth.  I have always found without exception, but with limited experience, the closer speakers are to the front wall, the less depth there is.  And out of all the spatial elements, depth is probably most important to me.  Especially when listening to acoustic music, classical orchestra or choral for instance.  Or jazz bands.  I guess I want it all.  And I can't imagine that having speakers so close to the front wall would give me all of it.  Maybe one can get excellant depth with speakers close to the front all and I just have not heard it yet.

Bryan

Bryan,
It's nice that you took the time to look at the photos.  But try not to imagine the sound without hearing it because well, it's not the same.
Most of what you've said is about the same as I used to think, pre Master Set daze.  And this is why people like to have their speakers a few feet out into the room, for the 3-D illusion effect.
However, I have found that whatever 3-D effect there truly is, is in the mix of the recording itself, rather than where you put the speakers in the room.  Speakers out into the room exaggerate the 3-D effect, but really add nothing to it.  If you put the speakers out 4-5 feet into the room and then go behind the speakers you will hear the sound in front of you, between the speakers, and not where you are behind the speakers.
When you listen to live music, of any genre and in any sort of venue, there is little 3-D effect like is so common in home audio sets. 

Also, the Sumiko experiments with room boundaries found that when speakers were close to a boundary, they tended to couple to the wall and the wall became part of the speaker baffle.  If a speaker designer wishes to design for close to wall sound, then he has to have the speaker fairly close to a wall, and design the off axis responses from that positioning.
In Master Set, the speakers, while seeming close to the wall behind them, are actually out far enough to be decoupled from the wall.
BTW, one of my first thoughts when I saw a Master Set setup, before I knew what MS was, was that the speakers sure look close to the wall and it could not possibly sound any good in that positioning.

Steve

PS. As far as the wide of the setup, yes the pictures make it look like the speakers are a little closer together than they are.  They are about 7 ft. apart.  I'd really like them a bit farther apart, but the size of the room and the large sofa prohibit anything more.  And in doing the setups, whenever I've moved a speaker laterally, the balanced sound just disappears.  Ideally, you want very very little center overlap of the two speakers.  But you need a little bigger room than I have to have that.

stvnharr

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 740

When Steve discusses MS, he uses the term “pressure” a lot.  I can’t wrap my head around that concept.   

Perhaps you could get a better understanding of "pressure" here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound

BikeWNC

This has been an interesting discussion and brought back a memory of a few years ago when I visited a Vienna Acoustics dealer.  I remember just how great those speakers sounded in the display room and remember noting that they were placed very close to the wall behind them and on the long wall.  They used a Rel sub blended into the mains and the bass was so articulate.  I couldn't afford them at the dealer at the time but bought a pair and sub used shortly after.  I never got the same sound out of them!  I attributed that to my room, gear or any number of other things.  I wonder, since I used a Cardas setup if I had tried the MS, which was what the dealer used apparently, I would have seen an improvement? 

Fast forward to today, I no longer have those VA speakers but I want to try the MS setup for experimentation sake.  My system is in a different room and all the components have changed since then.  The only issue I see is trying to enlist the help of my wife to move the speakers.  She probably won't be very keen about that!   :lol:

stvnharr

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 740
This has been an interesting discussion and brought back a memory of a few years ago when I visited a Vienna Acoustics dealer.  I remember just how great those speakers sounded in the display room and remember noting that they were placed very close to the wall behind them and on the long wall.  They used a Rel sub blended into the mains and the bass was so articulate.  I couldn't afford them at the dealer at the time but bought a pair and sub used shortly after.  I never got the same sound out of them!  I attributed that to my room, gear or any number of other things.  I wonder, since I used a Cardas setup if I had tried the MS, which was what the dealer used apparently, I would have seen an improvement? 

Fast forward to today, I no longer have those VA speakers but I want to try the MS setup for experimentation sake.  My system is in a different room and all the components have changed since then.  The only issue I see is trying to enlist the help of my wife to move the speakers.  She probably won't be very keen about that!   :lol:

Sumiko is the VA importer in the US.  So, I'd say chances are good that what you heard in the dealer showroom was a Master Set, as that's what Sumiko came up with it all for, dealer showrooms.
If your dearly beloved doesn't get inspired to help you out, you can do it by yourself. It just takes longer and you get a lot of exercise getting up and down.

TooManyToys


Perhaps you could get a better understanding of "pressure" here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound

Oh, I understand the principle.  Please understand that I worked with in-vehicle recording and objective analysis of noise since we used reel to reel tape.  "Pressure" is not the term I would use for what is "going on" here.  This is not just about loudness otherwise the clarity of the guitar would not change.  If it was just about "pressure", then I would just hit the button on the remote for balance and bring the left speaker up.

jimdgoulding

The recording venue and instrumental placement is in a recording, or isn't, right.  What I am attempting to do with my set up and am suggesting is that appropriate space be given the speakers for a faithful recreation.  In my set up, there is no thinning of the frequency response or loss of image saturation.  Moving my speakers close to walls causes an elevation and an imbalance of things from the bottom up.  I think it is important to note that I have the ability to move my chair nearer or further as I see fit and do depending on what I am listening to. 

My room is most audibly removed from the equation when I sit at the apex of an equilateral triangle.  My toe-in is least from this position altho this is only the most satisfying position on classical recordings with a wide and recessed stage.  Pushing my seat back some adds tangibility to things in the near field and liquidity and that is a plus on female vocals, for example.  There is also fuller bass.  I think I am getting some of what moving your speakers closer to walls more enables by moving my seat tho imagery and separation are still very tactile and 3D. 

I thought Cardas was the rule of thirds once upon a time.  That appears to have changed.  I have corrupted the Cardas formula to give me the most realism across the spectrum and involvement with my music I have ever experienced over a whole lotta time and box swapping.  You can see similarity in what Kenny, Vinyl Lady and I have been saying re the subjective benefits.  I believe we have rectangle listening rooms.  If you do, too, and your frequency response doesn't need any enrichment, you will benefit by trying some of what has been written.

Jason-  Hi.  You say you can't move your speaks out any further.  Come on, man!  Six more inches?  Should help take your tele more out of the equation and in so doing expand your depth of field.  What are the chances you can sit nearer the apex of an equilateral triangle with your speaks?  Try it at least and see what happens.  That an acoustic panel over your fireplace?  Know what, I would butt it up flush with the forward edge of the fireplace most near your speaks and angle the other end to the wall to hide that cavity and edge.  But if you move your speaks more forward, maybe it's good where it is.  I'd try a little toe-in with my new test listening position (!).  Holler back, now, ya hear!

Quiet Earth-  Hi.  You sound like a Harbeth man.  Would that be correct?
« Last Edit: 26 Dec 2009, 05:50 am by jimdgoulding »

Quiet Earth

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1788
Audio Note, Jim. But I have found the basic idea to work with a few other brands too.


Merry Christmas you guys!
 :xmas:

Nyal Mellor

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 250
  • Founder - Acoustic Frontiers.
    • Acoustic Frontiers
There is definitely something interesting in MS which in my mind is the concept of not worrying about distance but using SPL to define the correct placement of the left and right speakers.

It cannot solve room modal problems with movements of 1/8" inch because of the wavelengths of these frequencies. For example 100Hz has a wavelength of approx 11ft. Moving a speaker out of a location where there is a room mode peak cannot be done without movements of about a quarter wavelength, in this case 2-3ft.

But there have been a number of peer reviewed scientific studies performed that show that we can detect SPL difference of 0.5dB (a very small difference, within many manufacturers quality tolerance levels). So maybe MS is assisting in equalizing the SPL at the listening position for situations where there are different amounts of boundary gain due to difference in the room construction, dimensions or speaker placement relative to the walls.


I think one of the issues with the Cardas technique is that speakers end up being placed very far into the room. Most speaker designers will factor in some amount of boundary gain when designing their speakers such that they sound optimal where most people would put them, which would be 2 or 3ft max from the front wall. Hence when pulled out to 6 ft from the wall they sound thin and lifeless due to lack of energy int he mid bass.

stvnharr

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 740
There is definitely something interesting in MS which in my mind is the concept of not worrying about distance but using SPL to define the correct placement of the left and right speakers.

It cannot solve room modal problems with movements of 1/8" inch because of the wavelengths of these frequencies. For example 100Hz has a wavelength of approx 11ft. Moving a speaker out of a location where there is a room mode peak cannot be done without movements of about a quarter wavelength, in this case 2-3ft.

But there have been a number of peer reviewed scientific studies performed that show that we can detect SPL difference of 0.5dB (a very small difference, within many manufacturers quality tolerance levels). So maybe MS is assisting in equalizing the SPL at the listening position for situations where there are different amounts of boundary gain due to difference in the room construction, dimensions or speaker placement relative to the walls.


I think one of the issues with the Cardas technique is that speakers end up being placed very far into the room. Most speaker designers will factor in some amount of boundary gain when designing their speakers such that they sound optimal where most people would put them, which would be 2 or 3ft max from the front wall. Hence when pulled out to 6 ft from the wall they sound thin and lifeless due to lack of energy int he mid bass.

Nyal,
I agree with what you've written.  I think I may not have written well enough about Master Set.  Quite obviously, within the area of setting up the anchor speaker being about a foot or so, you cannot do anything with regards the long wavelengths of the low frequencies.
But within the area where you can set the "anchor" speaker you just listen to the smoothest bass line, as it does change a very small bit with very small movements, though not with every movement, and it is pretty subtle as well.
I tend to think that you are just trying to find a "point", for lack of a better term, where there is something that can be matched with the other speaker as you move it out into the room to match/mate with the anchor. But it is all so subtle that I tend to go for the balanced sound in the room, from the positions I have identified, as I know that if I can get that, then I am very close to the matching position that I am looking for -  the near perfect sum of the two speakers into a stable single sound source.

TooManyToys

....... So maybe MS is assisting in equalizing the SPL at the listening position for situations where there are different amounts of boundary gain due to difference in the room construction, dimensions or speaker placement relative to the walls.  ......

I think that is probably the best interpretation so far.  I might want to add:  "relative to the walls" and other objects in the room.

jimdgoulding

Amen, Jack, seems to me, also, in theory.  And agree room gain is worth finding, Nyal, no buts about that for me.  That's done by getting the most perfect relationship between room and speakers first, IME, and is why I have deviated from pure Cardas.  The whole has gotten rapturiously better than the sum of its parts.
« Last Edit: 26 Dec 2009, 05:44 am by jimdgoulding »