[timztunz]

Kind words Jim.  Thank you very much.  I'm REALLY having fun now and you (any of you) are welcome anytime.

[timztunz]

Guess I better go revise the Gallery photos with the new speaker placement.  Will do that soon.

[jimdgoulding]

Kind words Jim.  Thank you very much.  I'm REALLY having fun now and you (any of you) are welcome anytime.

I know you are for a fact, Tim, heard it.  Already thinkin about some sonic delicacies to bring round.  One, er, not so delicate, will be Rach's Symphonic Dances on Athena Records.  It'll bow your walls out.  Then we'll get delicate.  Had a blast, podner. 

[mjosef]

And the lesson learned here could be ...there is a time for theorizing and a time to shut up and listen. Words might make up a pretty (or not so pretty) description, but the description never equals the Real thing. 

[jhm731]

Spent Saturday morning at Tim's house listening to tunes.  Allow me to refresh you.  Tim has a big room like Laura's and tall multi driver speakers like Laura's but from a different designer.  Tim formerly had his speaks positioned using Cardas math.  His speaks today are positioned similarly to Laura's.  They are wider apart nearer the corners of his room and much further back nearer the wall.  His listening position is the same and looks very similar to Laura's from her photos.  Tim does not, however, have that little jig or difference from the rear wall of the "anchor" speaker and whatever the other speaker is called in the Master Set nomenclature.

Master Set purists may contend that this couldn't be correct, then.  OK, this is just about my experience at Tim's house, anyway, but his and Laura's set up is very similar in similarly large rooms and if you recall I had said that I think I was hearing at Tim's back when some of what Laura was formerly hearing in her room pre Master Set.  Tim doesn't have a TV between his speaks but does have an equipmemt rack.

Wall of sound?  Niagra Falls qualify?  Images are now more full blown and fleshed out with more vibrancy where as before they were smaller, more confined and center stage distant.  And his stage is much larger, if you didn't understand me.  His mid range is up in level (sounded a little malnourished before to me).  His sound system cooks, MUCH better than before!  On one recording above all the others, Time Out (on some fabulous pressing), I turned to Tim and said that's the best sound I've heard today.  Wanna amend that to the best sound I've heard on any day.  It was that good.  I was just too mind blown at the time to say so.

There is a foreshortening of Tim's depth of field, however.  And things seemed more lateral than 3D.  I just didn't care (don't think Tim does either).  Too much good was coming at me.  Definition and detail were amazing.  Sounded like my head was in the canisters of Joe Morello's drum kit.  I could hear the drumskin stretch.  And Desmond's alto had much more character than I ever thought possible.  The midrange of Tim's speakers was really more alive and present now.  I think/guess the near wall placement was responsible for supporting, even amplifying it better.  The sound overall was more even and dynamic.

I remain cool with my speaker placement.  My room is much smaller, so are my speaks, and my musical tastes run more all over the place.  I'm kinda partial to on location recordings, too, and faithfulness is important to me.

Timmy also identified an area of reflection on his ceiling and treated it.  Timmy done good.  Could be I'm hearing like what Laura is hearing?  Hope so.  Pretty awesome.

Jim-

Great report. Now all we're missing is some before and after measurements.

Check this out:

http://sixmoons.com/audioreviews/xtz/xtz.html

Dan

[jimdgoulding]

You got one of those?  That what you used to show the elevated frequency response from near wall placement in your room?  Thanks.

Those of you who may be wondering what near wall placement has to do with Master Set?  It has everything to do with Master Set.  If we were to measure Tim's before and after placement it would likely look like what Dan has shown us with his tests and virtually identicle to Master Set.  Dunno, tho, maybe impulse response measurements might be worse with the staggering of MS placement.  Guess we will never know unless an individual like yourself tells us cause MS won't unless I am mistaken.  Subjectively, on close miked recordings, well, I've already said how good it was.  Tim's placement, that is.  Wall of sound and bigger images and dynamics.  Not as much hall of sound, however.

Wouldn't call Tim's new near wall placement neutral sounding across the board, and I expect the same can be said for MS, but on the right records it is mind blowing good fun.

[jhm731]

You got one of those?  That what you used to show the elevated frequency response from near wall placement in your room?  Thanks.

Those of you who may be wondering what near wall placement has to do with Master Set?  It has everything to do with Master Set.  If we were to measure Tim's before and after placement it would likely look like what Dan has shown us with his tests and virtually identicle to Master Set.  Dunno, tho, maybe impulse response measurements might be worse with the staggering of MS placement.  Guess we will never know unless an individual like yourself tells us cause MS won't unless I am mistaken.  Subjectively, on close miked recordings, well, I've already said how good it was.  Tim's placement, that is.  Wall of sound and bigger images and dynamics.  Not as much hall of sound, however.

Wouldn't call Tim's new near wall placement neutral sounding across the board, and I expect the same can be said for MS, but on the right records it is mind blowing good fun.

Jim-

I used a TacT RCS 2.2XP and a LinearX M31 mic.

Dan

[timztunz]

Jim-

Great report. Now all we're missing is some before and after measurements.

Check this out:

http://sixmoons.com/audioreviews/xtz/xtz.html

Dan

Dan - I think when you say "measurements" you are probably referring to room "sound" measurements (much like what's described in the link you provided) and not dimensional measurements of where the speakers are located before and after, right?  I can't give you the first one but could give you the second if interested.

[jimdgoulding]

Timbo-  I think Dan was measuring speakers from some distance, one or two meters, maybe, with the speakers at different points in his room.  I think what you've volunteered to do might be of interest to readers here.  You in town this weekend?

[bmckenney]

Spent Saturday morning at Tim's house listening to tunes.  Allow me to refresh you.  Tim has a big room like Laura's and tall multi driver speakers like Laura's but from a different designer.  Tim formerly had his speaks positioned using Cardas math.  His speaks today are positioned similarly to Laura's.  They are wider apart nearer the corners of his room and much further back nearer the wall.  His listening position is the same and looks very similar to Laura's from her photos.  Tim does not, however, have that little jig or difference from the rear wall of the "anchor" speaker and whatever the other speaker is called in the Master Set nomenclature.

Master Set purists may contend that this couldn't be correct, then.  OK, this is just about my experience at Tim's house, anyway, but his and Laura's set up is very similar in similarly large rooms and if you recall I had said that I think I was hearing at Tim's back when some of what Laura was formerly hearing in her room pre Master Set.  Tim doesn't have a TV between his speaks but does have an equipmemt rack.

Wall of sound?  Niagra Falls qualify?  Images are now more full blown and fleshed out with more vibrancy where as before they were smaller, more confined and center stage distant.  And his stage is much larger, if you didn't understand me.  His mid range is up in level (sounded a little malnourished before to me).  His sound system cooks, MUCH better than before!  On one recording above all the others, Time Out (on some fabulous pressing), I turned to Tim and said that's the best sound I've heard today.  Wanna amend that to the best sound I've heard on any day.  It was that good.  I was just too mind blown at the time to say so.

There is a foreshortening of Tim's depth of field, however.  And things seemed more lateral than 3D.  I just didn't care (don't think Tim does either).  Too much good was coming at me.  Definition and detail were amazing.  Sounded like my head was in the canisters of Joe Morello's drum kit.  I could hear the drumskin stretch.  And Desmond's alto had much more character than I ever thought possible.  The midrange of Tim's speakers was really more alive and present now.  I think/guess the near wall placement was responsible for supporting, even amplifying it better.  The sound overall was more even and dynamic.

I remain cool with my speaker placement.  My room is much smaller, so are my speaks, and my musical tastes run more all over the place.  I'm kinda partial to on location recordings, too, and faithfulness is important to me.

Timmy also identified an area of reflection on his ceiling and treated it.  Timmy done good.  Could be I'm hearing like what Laura is hearing?  Hope so.  Pretty awesome.

Interesting post Jim.  Good to see you check this out.  Being a Cardas believer and all that.  I like what you described for the sound.  I'd personally trade stage depth for more detail and dynamics etc. 

Any idea if MS works for something like dipoles?  I can't imagine it would because dipoles are supposed to need more room off the front wall than I think MS generally results in.  Or who knows, maybe it does work.

Bryan

[jimdgoulding]

Bryan-  If you want to find out move your dipoles further apart and further back.  I'm thinking, like yourself, that you wouldn't want to move them back as much as forward firing speakers.  Or, do it the way MS does.  Starting from the back wall and move them forward until you are pleased with what you know dipoles are capable of doing.  I believe MS judges placement by ear, why not you.  And moving one speaker first with a mono signal seems logical to me.  That little jig thing that MS does, which is probably intended to help even out the in room frequency balance- you know, peaks and valleys- of the two speaks is gonna skew time arrival, however.  Tim's are on the same plane, as are mine.  My forward firing speakers are 52.75" off the back wall and 43.50" from the side walls, not Cardas exactly, to the centerpoint of my tweets and the frequency balance sounds very good to me.  My room is small so I still have good room gain where I sit but it serves only to add a little body and enlarge my listening space.  One thing Tim and Laura have in common with me is that they are now sitting more in an equilateral triangle with their speakers.  But, the near back wall placement is making their stages shallower and images bigger.  I favor the versatility and what I believe is faithfulness to my recordings and live listening experience of the set up I have.

[jimdgoulding]

Some information about "yer listenin to your room!":   

http://live.audiogon.com/events/the2008/vids/Sanders_room.html

Granted, this is isn't about casual listening or sensational sound.  It's about transparency to the source.  Faithfulness, in other words.