Can quality sound be had using the short axis in a medium sized room (12X15) ??


I have read and was told that short axis speaker set-up will not as a rule produce good sound. Supposedly there are too many anomalies in this type of set-up, mainly the listener will be at a shorter distance to the speaker plane and midpoint between the speakers

Realistically, I have about 13 ft of usable long wall to the corner   Placing speakers on the long wall axis to my seated listening position  is approximately 7.5 ft  allowing speakers to be placed NO MORE than 14 inches (or less) from  the back of the wall. 

Also are there speakers (either floorstanders) or monitors) that can produce quality sound that close to the back wall.

Advice and recommendations will be great appreciated


Thank you,  S.J.  

sunnyjim
I use my Harbeth P3’s about 10 inches from the rear wall with no problem. These and other LS3/5A type speakers   with sealed woofers have worked fine without any problem!
By short axis I assume you mean "long wall" placement?  If yes, I use this type of arrangement often but like everything else it depends in your room and your speakers.  Beacuase of the way the room is designed and used, I can only use the long wall for speaker placement in my my 16 x 22 living room and I have successfully used many different speakers in there over the last 25+ years.

Many speakers (omnidirectional, bidirectional, wide dispersion) do not sound best placed on the short axis and near the side walls in moderately sized rooms.  Some speakers, Larsen and the larger Magnepan models come to mind, are designed to be placed on the long wall.

The problem with long wall placement can be if there is not enough room for proper speaker placement away from the front wall, distance from you to the speaker and distance behind your ears to the rear wall.  It's often hard to achieve a perfect Cardas or Sumiko (or whatever manufacturer you like) arrangement based on the rule of thirds or fifths.  I would look for a speakers that will allow placement close to, if not right against, the front wall for better seating flexibility.

The alternative is to adopt a nearfield listening position.  This works really well with some speakers.  The little Harbeth P3s come to mind, where nearfield usually produces the best sound.

I've heard JBL 100s sound wonderfully open and precise positioned right up to the rear wall. Same for tall Kef floorstanders with about a foot behind them. I recently heard some Monopulses and Kerr Acoustics sound great with not much space behind them.

As you say the key is to get some speakers that don't need yards of space behind them to really sing. 

None of mine (Regas, Ruarks and Tannoys) have ever been more than 10 inches away from the wall. I did have my Quad ESLs out further but didn't think the results were worth the effort so I sold them on.

There is also that old chestnut about close wall proximity speakers not imaging as well as free standing ones.

Not sure if any consensus was ever reached on that one.



II would imagine that your proposed seating arrangement would put your head close to the wall. As such you’ll need to put some absorbing room treatment directly behind your head. I prefer the long wall layout with such treatment over other options more often than not.
Exactly!  Long wall arrangement allows the speakers to breathe away from front and side walls, so long as you treat acoustically the wall behind you.  That's what I do and it works well.
Don't be afraid to experiment.  Keep an open mind and an open set of ears, but don't forget the details.  Where are the electrical outlets?  Sometimes you got to be willing to haul your Mt. Everest of LPs to a different wall. Sometimes the floor gets scuffed, too.

Thank you to those members who responded so far.

To br3098.  Yes, I did mean long wall placement. Your comments are very useful I have auditioned the Larsen 4.2 which sounded very good. Reps and shop owner claim the Larsen 6.2's  provide much more of the sound provided by the 4.2's Therefore better (??). They seem reluctant to show or stock the 6.2 which they claim achieves much better sound because of the use of Wilson Audio woofer and a Scan speak tweeter, or its equivalent, and a much better crossover

The price of the Larsen 4.2  is $2200; the 6.2 is $4300. The build quality of 4.2 is average, despite a true "organic" rendering of the music and stunning bass response for their size. Like other European brands they seem overpriced for what you get.    Larsen 8.2 at $7500  seems to be the one the company  and/or dealers want to showcase and sell; maybe because the 9 is $15,000.  Like some buyers, this kind of dough is not just laying around on my kitchen table or stashed away in a large sugar bowl. 


I am surprised what you noted about the Magneplanars; I repeatedly have read and was told they need to be placed almost in the middle of the room to achieve good and balanced sound; and, placement is finicky and troublesome. I am in the process of downsizing  and want to reclaim some of living room space.  I am aware that both Maggie .7 and LRS and  the excellent reviews they have received. 

Thank you all.

S.J.

To "unsound" and "twoleftears" 

Thank you for tips.  I do have enough space behind my head for  some acoustical padding. It is a 36"L X 24" throw type rug that I use in my current set-up. I am not sure it will help with Maggies, that is, the .7 speakers.


Thank you,

S..J.


 .

@sunnyjim You probably know this already but don't use acoustic foam. I learned from my mistake. It sounds bad.
The closer your head is to the wall, the more important the absorbing treatment becomes. Acoustical foam can work quite well, if it's overlapped with something like natural wool. This can have decorative advantages as well.