I was wondering by what means you have created a deeper soundstage. I am satisfied with the width but I really feel it is a bit 2 dimensional. It doesn't go back far enough. I like more layers of sound that reach towards you from the blackness. As I've already spent quite a bit on my system I am unable to buy much more expensive components. Did you upgrade one component that made the difference? Placement of speakers? New footers or tweaks such as Stillpoints? Two subs instead of one(I have one)? Different placement of subs? I am working with a very tight space so it is difficult to move things without them being in the center of the room. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
The short answer is to move your chair closer to the speakers. Measure from tweeter to tweeter, multiply it by 0.83, and use that number to determine the optimal distance from the right tweeter to your right ear. (Jim Smith’s method, it works)
The longer answer involves optimal ear height (often a foot or so higher than the tweeters on two-ways, easy to check), optimal speaker distance from the rear and side walls (different depending on speaker type and room layout, and much harder to get right), and not using that questionable super-toe-in method that’s become popular for reasons that escape me.
It’s also worth bearing in mind that if the room has no opening to release pressure the long bass frequencies will create a mess of reflected sound and the midrange will suffer, which is where the holographic magic happens.
My hifi equipment is now at such quality level (but by no means exclusive/very expensive) that decent cabling makes a difference. I have just changed all power cords ensuring all are plugged-in correctly phase-wise, and deployed a cheap power filter/conditioner. The difference is audible giving me more punch and holographic sound image.
That said, I have already perfected speaker placement using quite a few different methods. One of the most educational was "The Art of Rational Speaker Placement" found here https://youtu.be/84Pf0ycbyBM. I even contacted the presenter, and bought his written guide.
Since then, I have diverged from this speaker placement, but following his process gave me insight into what is possible with speaker placement. Especially, careful backward-tilting of the speakers mentioned in the end of the video and guide, is the icing on the cake: it opens up the stereo image submerging the listener into the sound.
Maybe, careful tilting could give you the extra depth and height in your stereo image.
The fastest way to get there is a small room is with monitor speakers and a nice little tube amplifier. Remember that not all tube amps are created equal. Soft dome tweeters are as edgy and good for a small room. Lots of air around the speakers is important, price is not. Yes you need a recording that has ambience to hear ambience, Get the basics first.
From everything I have heard of some amazing obscenely expensive
systems, right down to just above average systems, I have found the
totality of the small ‘lesser’ adjustments to make the biggest
difference, so long as the basic componentry is not average. It shocked
me at first, because like almost how we all started, the primary
components appeared to be most important.
Do you believe everything you have read? I can assure you, this is most definitely not the case, with the exception of speaker placement, but that is hardly a lesser adjustment, that is pretty major. The next big one is room acoustics, and again, that is really major.
However, if you follow what everyone is trying to sell, and what everyone is trying to justify they bought, then yes, you may convince yourself that the small details matter, and you can ignore the big stuff. You can't. Talk to actual acoustic engineers, people who build concert halls, etc.
From everything I have heard of some amazing obscenely expensive systems, right down to just above average systems, I have found the totality of the small ‘lesser’ adjustments to make the biggest difference, so long as the basic componentry is not average. It shocked me at first, because like almost how we all started, the primary components appeared to be most important.
Your observation must be printed in gold before any other thing said in all audio forums...
It is also my experience i summarized in 7 words: Dont upgrade anything before embedding rightfuly everything....
I will only add that my experiments are there only for inspiration in others... You are right and i know that it is not all people who can experiment in a dedicated audio room with non-esthetical devices...But my ideas can be realized many of them in a living room, and some can be replicated more esthetically by others with better craftmanship than me. The point is small cost good system can sound "relatively" like high end modulo embeddings controls...
This is important for people to hear that, then, instead of throwing money or being frustrated, they can became more creative and less conditioned by the false dogmas circulating in marketing and audio reviews...
Thanks kevn for you astute mind reading me and kindness toward me.... 😌
@kevnThanks for those tracks! My system passed with flying colors, especially with the “mission” That one gets saved into my “audiophile test” playlist.
My speakers are 60 inches into the room from the front walls and 19 inches into the room from the side walls. My chair is located 8 feet from the speakers. It took months of trial and error plus blue painter's tape to get everything tuned. My listening chair was picked for it's height and comfort. I'm pretty lucky to have a dedicated room (22'x14) and a supportive Wife. Every measurement is important, where and how the rack and equipment is located, floor and wall treatments.
Please don't waste your money on hyper expensive cables or power conditioners ... etc. There are only two things that affects the soundstage depth:
Recording (Production). Use Stereophile test CDs to test the SS depth. John Atkison have done great recording on this.
Speaker placement - Experiment with the speakers by moving away from the wall behind them.
Also be aware that some speakers do represent the soundstage depth more accurate than others. One example for exceptional soundstage is Sonus Faber Stradivari
Thanks mahgister : ) - I also forgot to say in my comment that it may be many things that contribute to good depth in the sound, but perhaps not as many as I originally believed. So long as a better than average amplifier and speaker system is being used, preferably tubed, because the truly good ss amps usually cost so much more - that the final difference that is made, is precisely in the other ‘lesser’ components of cables, fuses, isolators, dielectrics, room control - all the things you refer to as embeddings. And that difference is so very small and yet so absolutely huge because that tiny elevation of sound quality makes the difference between ‘was that real?’ or ‘that’s recorded music’.
From everything I have heard of some amazing obscenely expensive systems, right down to just above average systems, I have found the totality of the small ‘lesser’ adjustments to make the biggest difference, so long as the basic componentry is not average. It shocked me at first, because like almost how we all started, the primary components appeared to be most important.
But here I have to step a little back from all your remarkable experiments, which I fully understand that you engage in as a work of total passion - I love all you have done, for peanuts, as you tell us all the time, and I have no doubt they work, based on the reading of your posts and nuanced comments you occasionally make, on disparate issues that resonate with my own experiences, and tell me you are indeed hearing what you say you hear - I know how good your system must sound without ever hearing it ; ) - but for me, my passion is less with the tinkering, (I know some will not even consider me an audiophile!) and with the money I have, I merely wish to arrive at the best sounding system my slightly higher budget can buy, without needing to have a dedicated sound room that I might trip over special cow bells, copper ribbons or sponge in! Please understand, it is not my criticism of what you have achieved, only a remark of the limited space and tinkering passion I have : )
When I wrote my post, it was only to state what I think I am hearing, so that if the OP and others either do, or do not hear the same things, we can then discuss very specifically what it is that is either similar or different more objectively, and I might then be able to say what I believe makes the small change that creates a new world.
And I believe also that millercarbon is correct when he says that most recordings do not play so much with depth of field and the most important thing to hear in every single recording is the separation of voice and instruments, and their location in relation primarily to width and height, and not so much depth. Classical music and jazz perhaps, does more than all other genres, in relation to depth.
I have learned so much from reading everyone’s posts and comments on audiogon: there are so many distinct characters here - like some or dislike some, everyone makes this platform interesting for me and helps me to learn, either directly or indirectly. Thanks again : )
A good track for holographics, which i refer to as all three dimensions of the soundstage, "bubbles" by yosi horikawa does quite well to hear system resolution - in the best systems ive heard, the effect not only occupies the entire frame in front, it extends beyond the sides of the speakers, and every sound effect is distinct and tangible in relation to how far away, how high or low, and how much centre, left or right they are. Some of the sounds are at ceiling level. It is mesmerising.
Thanks very good suggestion indeed...
And it does exactly which you describe.... But i knew already that my audio system was good thanks to my embeddings controls... 😁
But a feed back can help because the composer is interesting by itself...
Hi there roxy1927 - i am pretty new as an audiophile, and with all the responses youve already received, perhaps mine wont make much of a difference. But in any case, in the past year and a half that ive been using more of my ears than i ever had before listening to all kinds of systems, ive found a few tracks with which to gauge how good systems, and then really good systems, sound like, specifically in relation to depth of soundstage, and thought i would share the short list with you to see if it helps at all.
For a really basic but solid foundation, "drum and bell: walk around the mic: test" from dr chesky’s ultimate headphone demonstration disc, provides all the fundamental cues one would need to understand how depth of field can sound in different recordings - i feel its the minimum any system should be up to in relation to depth perception with sound.If you don’t hear the echo change from the track, and feel the sheer depth of that recording, then what you have as a complete system which includes your room, is not up to par. Even on average systems, height differentiation is also obvious.
For height differentiation, referring to how high or low instruments are to each other, a basic track to listen to would be "duelling banjos" by eric weissberg and steve mandell - the guitar is low and inside the right of the left speaker, and the banjo is high, and almost directly above and just edging the left side of the right speaker. The guitar is low and close, and the banjo is not only higher, but also slightly further back.
A good track for holographics, which i refer to as all three dimensions of the soundstage, "bubbles" by yosi horikawa does quite well to hear system resolution - in the best systems ive heard, the effect not only occupies the entire frame in front, it extends beyond the sides of the speakers, and every sound effect is distinct and tangible in relation to how far away, how high or low, and how much centre, left or right they are. Some of the sounds are at ceiling level. It is mesmerising.
For better systems, two tracks work well for me - the first being "slice" by five for fighting’s jon ondrasik - between 00.27 and 00.49, the rim shots from the drummer will be in front of or on the same plane as ondrasik’s voice om average systems, and on good systems, they will be well behind his voice. And the second is the track "gabriel’s oboe" from the soundtrack of the movie "the mission" by ennio morricone - at the very beginning, there is a soft roll of drums, which i believe are called timpani - in most systems, the sound is quite ambiguous and vague in location, even if the timbre is well placed; but in the really good systems i have heard, they are so viscerally and clearly located in the hall, seemingly just before the back of the stage, and to the left of centre - after 00.16, sound mixing comes into play with the other instruments, and depth of field doesnt matter much anymore.
All of these can be streamed from spotify, and as lousy a resolution format that spotify is, there is still sufficient information in those files to hear clear differences. Tidal, of course, makes it all definitive.
The electrical embeddings dimension of the audio system implicate all electrical locations in the house, it is why new audio sockets and power cord among other things will work together for the better to lower the noise floor...
I use my own device at low cost to reach the same goal... (Adding the 2 methods would certainly be better tough )
All this tells me is that you never addressed the acoustics if these were the biggest changes.
But yes acoustical embeddings control are also one very important key, perhaps the more important but not the only one tough....Acoustical controls and treatment cannot replace, and give in S.Q. by itself only, what the electrical grid controls and the mechanical controls will add together in their own dimension to the global S.Q....
Then dont forget even the mechanical vibrations and resonance controls of your audio system they will improve imaging, timbre and stage too...
I can hear what you hear relatively speaking with very low cost solutions....If i had the money i will do also your change(audio socket+power cord) adding these to my devices... But i am very satisfied at peanuts costs then....😊
Can hear to the walls of the recording venues, hear the air around and behind the players/singers, much more 3D and much clearer, more focused bass.
All this tells me is that you never addressed the acoustics if these were the biggest changes.
A lot of flat-earthers think this is nuts,
Do you kiss your Ted Denney statue before you go to bed? That statement is directly from his moronic Facebook echo chamber. I would be embarrassed to be a member.
A lot of good responses already, and many not so good.
In my 45 years as an active audio enthusiast, the biggest single improvement I ever got in soundstage openness, depth and clarity came from having an electrician install two direct runs from our home's breaker box to audio-grade sockets in my listening room. I have spent many thousands of dollars over the years without getting so dramatic an improvement. Cost in my house was $1,200, which is higher than most because it required a complicated run.
Close second was from upgrading the power cords on my equipment. A lot of flat-earthers think this is nuts, but the improvements are NOT subtle. If you're using stock cords and don't have much to spend -- or want proof before spending more -- I strongly recommend Audience's cheapest cord, the F3 at $149.
Compared to stock cords, you will not believe the improvement -- even in relatively humble systems. I got a non-audiophile buddy to buy one for his Sprout100 integrated amp, powering a $300 pair of Elac Debut B2 6.2 speakers, and he said it gave him at least 20% more depth, clarity and dimensionality, revealing much more of what was in the recordings.
And, BTW, an F3 absolutely killed a Pangea AC-14XL, same price.
I use higher-grade Audience cords in my main system, and the Front Row -- very pricy -- is so good I can't believe it. Can hear to the walls of the recording venues, hear the air around and behind the players/singers, much more 3D and much clearer, more focused bass.
I don't know what kind of music you are into. However, Radiohead - King of Limbs is a live studio recording. It has some of the best ambience I've ever heard recorded. On an ambient loop system, it is incredible.
I also forgot to say that you should look for a Dynaco QD-1 quadapter. They are rare, but not THAT rare. Use Google and one should pop up. If not, contact me. I have an extra one, although I really don't want to give it up.
Add an ambient rear channel, which is NOT just two more speakers in the back. Look up what an ambient loop is. Also, if you can find one, a Dynaco Quadapter is essential if you want to maintain an 8 ohm or 4 ohm front speaker setup. I've been using this setup since 1972, and it blows away any supposed 4 channel system. My email is prvk@earthlink.net if you want to get in touch with me. :-)
Let me see, ah!!! yes more image and depth destroying stuff between the speakers in the second one. And the first one would have been even better again if what is between the speakers was moved to the side instead.
Wow, OP has to be totally confused after all this! Unfortunately, optimizing audio systems is very complex undertaking, lots of good advice through thread. Only personal experience with advice here will get you to system's full potential. Changes you undertake will have variable results.
In the end, every single thing in your system, from the ac feed to room has an effect on sound stage and imaging.
I don't know if this has been mentioned, but many rooms are not symmetrical. Positioning of speakers and acoustic treatments must take this into effect.
t always remains an illusion, I listen a lot (for corona) to live music and yes, then you can see the music and you can see and hear the depth. I also read a lot of audio magazines, and if you read that such a reviewer is talking about the soundstage and surprising depth. Well sorry, I am already quite used to audio installations, but there has been none of which you could say, for example, "hear those basses in the choir back there"
A while ago I heard those Magico M2 and M6, they cost a hell of a lot the sound is fantastic but I haven't been able to perceive that depth anyway.
Example: There is an audio Highend dealer in my area that sometimes organizes a listening session, with live music, which is then recorded on a Studer A80 mastermaschine, and then played and top installation with speaker from the 75K range. Yes, it is almost real.
I myself have been trying for years to thin the "net curtains" between reality and the installation as possible but
it continues to make do
Millercarbon is right about the EXACT angle necessary to position speakers.... That is mandatory...
While this certainly helps, I've never had to do that to get excellent imaging and depth. But I work with speakers that aren't beamy on the top end. If you have issues with beaminess, there will be a small sweet spot and speaker position will be critical.
The other issue I find that seems to affect depth and soundstage width is the electronics. If you have phase shift issues in the upper region of the audio band, you'll lose soundstage information as a result. Phase shift is usually caused by a rolloff that is often outside the audio band. In most amplifiers, the upper limit where the -3dB point is encountered in the amplifier's frequency response is where this phase shift starts, and it has influence down to 1/10th the cutoff frequency. So if your amplifier rolls off at 50KHz you can expect effects down to 5KHz.
Also, if your electronics has a distortion character that increases with frequency (which describes most solid state amplifiers made in the last 70 years) maximizing the soundstage will be more difficult, since you will have distortion at the higher frequencies masking low level detail that is part of the soundstage presentation (this distortion characteristic is also responsible for brightness and harshness). If you have wondered why some designers eschew negative feedback, this is why, since the application of feedback is tricky. If you have some but not enough you'll get that rising distortion with frequency thing I just mentioned. 'Enough' is usually about 35dB or more! Semiconductors that allow for the sort of gain bandwidth product (which is to feedback like gasoline is to a car) really haven't existed for most of the last 70 years.
To avoid these issues the electronics either has to have so much feedback that it doesn't make more distortion at higher frequencies and phase shift in the audio band, or you run no feedback at all and simply have a wide bandwidth amplifier. Now of course many reading this will be thinking that they are getting fine soundstaging with their older solid state gear (which almost by definition is what I've been talking about); So to be clear here I am talking about **maximizing** the ability to reproduce the soundstage correctly. You certainly can get good soundstage effects with older gear.
If you have decent equipment, you can accomplish your goal. You don’t need $100,000 speakers and you sure don’t need a bunch of $2 gimmicks to accomplish this. If you don’t have a good acoustically treated room then you are going to struggle to get the best sound possible. Then speaker positioning is next. Browse the Cardas website, GIK acoustics website, or Dennis Foley’s Acoustic Fields YouTube videos on suggestions on speaker positioning and room acoustics.
I'm reading your tea leaves... "You're searching for a goal that will keep moving away. Buy some new shoes and find a nice girl. Forget about the depth of your soundstage. It's ok as it is"
Eish, just lost one long written epistel due to some Agon glich...
Yet in short... and so true!
"The room and setup is key. Few of any probably have a room at home naturally suited to recreate what I heard with the mbls set up optimally in that dealer showroom."
End quote.
Totally and completely my experience when moving some years back to a new place.
'nough said as all be just lost to the bloody ether again! 😏 😖 Michélle 🇿🇦
The setups I have heard that do it well tend to have very low distortion throughout. The speakers have very wide and balanced sound dispersion and are located accordingly with proper geometry to the listening position and distance from walls to avoid early reflections, and also the drivers tend to emulate a point source at the listening position.
The best setups I have heard in this regard by a long shot are also in highly customized and treated rooms, not your typical rectangular room found in homes. Even then results will vary widely with various recordings.
I’ve found the new KEF ls50 Metas to do soundstage depth very well in my very average 12x12 room, noticeably better than any other small monitors I have had in there including similar original ls50s prior.
Also Ohm Walsh speakers set up well do a pretty good job in general in most rooms.
But the best I have heard by far and no contest was mbl 111 speakers set up in a highly customized showroom about halfway into the room with both tapered and heavily treated curtained walls extending 12 to 15 feet to the rear. There was a big deep holographic soundstage and you could identify players in an orchestral recording exactly throughout that space. It was uncanny and the best I have ever heard by a long shot....no contest. This was at now defunct United Home Audio in Annapolis Junction MD several years back. Exact same system heard soon after in a poorly treated and very lively room at a local audio show: Meh. The room and setup is key. Few of any probably have a room at home naturally suited to recreate what I heard with the mbls set up optimally in that dealer showroom.
So if you have a grid of 12, and they are not synchronized with each other, then how do you know they are not all cancelling each other out?
they are all connected by copper very thin cable in ONE grid...Then they are synchronized in some way....my ears tell me that...
Of course, it is not like there are any components on that PCB to tune the magnetic coil to anywhere near 7.83Hz ... not that there would be any efficiency as an antenna even if there was.
I never presume that this cheap design will be of high quality and i never presume that this will produce the EXACT constant famous Schumann frequencies... But who will modify for experiment a costly very good product?
But at 10 bucks it does not take Einstein to try an experiment.... I tried and i modified them.... I am not an engineer but i have a measuring apparatus that is very powerful... My standard ordinary ears...
The audible effect produced by this cheap and bad engineering chinese piece was very effective... With my modifications...
Buyer beware. Your mileage may vary.
Then your caution for a peanuts cost product used for a simple experiment is superfluous...Buy 2 and try them before crying wolf when you see a mouse...
Of course I am sure the little, near useless antenna on those units will totally dominate over the much much higher power 60Hz that surrounds you .....
I forgot to say yes this ridiculous piece dominate the noise level better with my modification tough ...Then your knowledge veil you some other unknown facts... But the history of science is full of some who know and prove that plane cannot fly ....
You are very more knowledgeable than me in audio... I never doubt that...But you lack humility...You are not knowleadgeable in all subjects neither me...
I know nothing in audio.... It is the reason WHY i created without preconception and without fear my own audio system with ONLY very low cost devices like these chinese junk or with my homemade creation... Guess what? my ears are so happy that i will never need to upgrade... It is by no means the best system... I am not a fool.... But for his price it is the best i ever listen to.... Then....
I will repeat this audio truth i myself experience completely:
Electronic design components, the worst one or the best one, are always subordinated for their optimal working to the 3 same mechanical, electrical and acoustical constraints... ( i must ban the word embeddings people are afraid of this word)
Nobody can change this fundamental fact that will help them to reach an optimal working level for any system.... And controls devices that work in this 3 dimensions DONT need to cost more than peanuts... It is my experience after my 2 years experiments...
« Reality dont wait for explanation-Groucho Marx
By the way nevermind our arguing i wish you the best....
I’ve heard a million speakers in my day... to achieve what you’re looking for - I am trying something interesting...
i placed a pair of Heil ESS air motion tweeters on top of my towers and they have revolutionized my listening experience. They move sound fore and aft of the speaker and the soundstage is open, airy, invisible and yet focused at the same time.
I don’t have a billion dollar budget but I’ve chased the perfect audio system my whole life - and I’m incredibly close.
not only does the stage have depth / these tweets seem to have limitless treble in the best way. It sounds like “nothing” as opposed to a speaker box. It’s really incredible.
I’ve heard every speaker made and this setup is incredibly FUN to listen to and I’d put it up against 800 series diamonds or the like any day.
anyone that’s come over and listened smiles immediately and says the ride is unlike anything they’ve ever heard (ina good way).
So if you have a grid of 12, and they are not synchronized with each other, then how do you know they are not all cancelling each other out?
It's a shame an RF engineer (or any engineer for that matter) did not design those. He would have had the sense to use both sides of the PCB for the "coil" and increase the inductance.
Of course, it is not like there are any components on that PCB to tune the magnetic coil to anywhere near 7.83Hz ... not that there would be any efficiency as an antenna even if there was.
Of course I am sure the little, near useless antenna on those units will totally dominate over the much much higher power 60Hz that surrounds you .....
For the Schuman generators, i use a grid of 12...😁
Nobody had try what i recommended already... Use them with a thin small golden plate +herkimer diamond on top of the caps or the USB power connector...(Golden plate=shungite plate+copper tape on the external side)
That will increase their power, adding more meat to the bone-tone+envelope with the golden plate and adding more air(better decay) with the Herkimer diamond....
This increase the aura of the sound...
It seem i have too much ideas....People are afraid to expriment at low cost....Too risky to loose their face...They prefer to loose their money with costly product....It is a good thing nobody can hear my system :cost 100 peanuts butter jar....🤐🙃
😊 Electronic design components, the worst one or the best one, are always subordinated for their optimal working to mechanical, electrical and acoustical constraints( i must ban the word embeddings people are afraid of this word) Nobody can change this fundamental fact that will help them to reach an optimal working level for any system....
Happy New Year and God give you the best sound of your life because music is what we have the more similar to heaven....For the time being....
Several positive comments about Schumann generators, which I have not tried, so I'm intrigued. What should I look for when selecting one?
It looks like there's a lot to choose from but really its one or two almost identical circuit boards and what looks different is really nothing more than the box it comes in. I discovered this when reading reviews and one that sells for $400 when the reviewer opened the plastic case the photo of the inside shows the exact same circuit board sold on eBay for $12.
They all use a 5V DC power supply, and many come with a USB cable so all you need is a USB charger and you're in business. Or you can buy the one Synergistic sells, it has the fanciest box of all, and its own power supply, and the highest price tag, but look close wouldn't you know the power plug label says 5V DC. Hmmm....
People will tell you put them 5 ft up off the floor and sure enough the most expensive one Synergistic sells is a tower. But they also have the black box that sits right on the floor. If indeed that's even what these are, not like I know for sure, could just all be one big coincidence.
Anyway the ones I have are in different locations including one down low right by the power conditioner, and if there is any difference between any of them its really hard to tell. So I would just get whatever's cheap or looks okay to you and put it wherever you have an outlet, sit back, and enjoy. No matter what I can just about guarantee you will be shaking your head trying to figure out what the f is going on, and not caring, because its deep and black and natural and you just want more.
Several positive comments about Schumann generators, which I have not tried, so I'm intrigued. What should I look for when selecting one? Likely buying from Ali Express.
FWIW, completely concur with the importance of room treatment, learning, measuring, listening. I've done that and wouldn't do without if doing it all over again.
I found this video from Dynaudio on speaker placement helpful. As much as you would think it intuitive, this helped me a lot. I know it is basic but, to me, it helps to have technical objective explanation of what is going on which this video does a decent job of.
I have a second system in a small 11x10.5, almost square, room. This video helped me place speakers and listening position properly and made a huge difference in getting the core setup aligned.
Interesting Thread and Read op. Thanks for Posting. For me, this has never been an issue since I listen to Dipoles in a mid sized room with plenty of space behind and between the Magnepans. Soundstage Depth, Height and Width in spades. The Tubes in my Preamp do seem to make a slight difference so that "piece of equipment" is simply experimenting with Tubes. I found the Melz1578 & KenRad VT231 to do the job nicely.
My Maggie’s do I nice job of providing depth to the soundstage as I’m sure other dipole and open baffle speakers do as well. As others have mentioned, getting speakers away from the wall, room treatments, and the quality of the recording all contribute.
My experience, not hugely vast, non technical, was; as soon as I experienced minimal XO’s as in my loudspeakers (Reference 3A Grand Veenas), phase alignment, the holography went through the roof. Further enhancement was the made through the use of tubes and room treatment, (bass management and diffraction), in that order. Undeducated ears that listen in my home, always comment first on the imaging, even unknowingly whether or not that the recording was of low or high quality, just that they were familiar with the music itself.
Heed the expert from Atlanta who wrote the book on improving sound. ($500/day per session
My mechanic charges way more than that.
On symmetry: Also a no. Reducing early reflections is everything. The more symmetry, the more reinforcement of early reflections.
While early reflections are very important the rest of this statement is nonsense unless you are breaking symmetry to fix a worse issue.
The rules of physics still apply. If there is not distance open to the wall behind your speakers you will fail.
The rules of physics still apply. This statement however shows a one dimensional knowledge of acoustics (physics). It's the different between knowing what you are doing and parroting rules of thumb from others.
Wow that was all a bunch of conjecture which each participant believes is helpful. Some possibly useful but most doubtful.
Heed the expert from Atlanta who wrote the book on improving sound. ($500/day per session) He tells everyone the 1st thing to do is move everything out from between the speakers. This is 100% correct. If you can't move it then lower it.
In my setup every piece I play has the vocalist 4 feet behind the speakers. Perhaps I do not listen to crappy recordings but who does?
The rules of physics still apply. If there is not distance open to the wall behind your speakers you will fail.
On symmetry: Also a no. Reducing early reflections is everything. The more symmetry, the more reinforcement of early reflections.
News soon to be common knowledge: The Amp makes all the difference.
Sometime in March 2021, A well established, US based maker will be releasing a new & affordable product which beats all other comers. No it's not Pass.
But I also think there are certain ways your brain 'likes to...or prefers to' listen to sound. Probably different for everyone. I went deaf in my left ear for a few months in 2020 and now that I have recovered what I lost, I appreciate what your brain does to compensate. You need around 40-50% hearing in one ear to begin to 'place' and locate things in space.
For some reason, I don't hear a better soundstage when I close my eyes...even in the dark. I do 'feel' like I hear a better sonic picture when the room is dimly lit and my eyes are open and looking somewhere between the speakers (in a blurry gaze) but obviously thinking about the music.
I'm sure a lot of you have certain conditions that you prefer when doing critical listening.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
