Looking for the next level in imaging...


I enjoy my system every time I sit down and listen. But as we all do, we get the itch to seek improvement!  I am intrigued by Omnidirectional speakers such as MBL’s, German Physiks etc. and breaking free from the head in a vice sweet spot to get better imaging throughout the room and better the imaging in the sweet spot!  I believe changing the speaker will deliver on this quest!  What speakers would you look at? Or would changing a component yield the result? Has anyone gone from the traditional dispersion speaker to an omnidirectional?

current speakers are Martin Logan Ethos

budget $20-30K...could stretch if something is exceptional

polkalover

Showing 3 responses by mikelavigne

Martin Logan’s do space and purity, but like omni’s are not ideal for organically solid full frequency imaging. one reason is that the mid and lower bass uses dynamic drivers, a different type of driver, so the coherency in the low frequencies is reduced. this detracts from imaging.

a more traditional 2 way dynamic speaker system might be best for this priority. it makes the fewest mistakes.

imaging is about room<->speaker synergy, and room symmetry, combined with surface treatment of reflections. to get imaging that is ’right’ also requires that the room has good bass balance, so images are cohesive, and contain full frequencies.

with your budget, there are any number of quality 2 way speaker systems that can work.

do you have a dedicated room?

is it symmetric? how high is the ceiling? can the ceiling be treated?

windows or screen next to or behind the speaker?

any distortion in your signal path or speaker will restrict imaging by locating the sound coming from the speaker. so eliminating distortion anywhere promotes imaging everywhere since the signal transparency disconnects the sound from the speaker location. you hear less distortion, more of the music signal.

seating position will also be a factor. sitting in the near field and working on toe in and toe out will allow you to optimize imaging. near field means more direct sound, and less reflected sound. an advantage for imaging.

all these factors will effect the potential imaging of your system.

+100 on over treating being better than under treating. Especially in smaller rooms where control is even more important.

@ronboco

i spent years optimizing the imaging in my large dedicated room, and holographic imaging is very important to me. i already wrote a long post in this thread about my opinion about it.

but when it c omes to musical connection, my highest priority is ’why’ and 'what' the musician is doing, not ’where’ he is doing it. it’s the musical intent and musical energy, micro and macro dynamics, textures, rich tonality, and flow which is the priority. every time i made a change in my system or my acoustical treatment i would take a week to 10 days to make sure that i was not inhibiting the flow and energy and musical touch to attain better imaging.

i want it all. imaging is desired, but it’s not first in line.

so over doing room treatments is NOT an option for me. it’s all about balance.

the physicality and how the music effects me is what i desire. imaging just takes it further. live music many times is a mess as far as imaging, yet we automatically connect. it’s REAL.

small rooms can be a challenge; i just got back from Axpona and there are many small rooms. but still musical connection comes from balance, and sometimes imaging suffers to get that connection. turning down the flow to get imaging is not how i would like it. YMMV.

is it possible to break down or quantify the importance of the different components and room design and tuning?

For example—and I am just throwing out numbers as examples—would it be 30% room design, acoustics and tuning (to get a holographic image); 40% speakers; and 30% front end? Is it possible to break it down? And to refine it even more, like ratios of importance for the front end (ie, amp, preamp, DAC, source)? If percentages are unrealistic, maybe a ranked priority order would work?

@patrickdowns

back in 2017 i responded to a thread question; "What is the most important part of a system" .......which does somewhat answer your question. i don’t feel you can assign percentages, since the process is dynamic and builds on itself.....and there are too many starting points and variations and matters of preference.

but i still see things this way generally. i’m only linking this since i don’t want to derail the nice thread away from the "imaging" focus.

https://forum.audiogon.com/posts/1399899

as far as room tuning and how it relates to imaging; i’ve posted links to how i did my personal process back in 2015 before. it starts with having a personal reference sound. sometimes that is the issue; we all don’t possess a locked in reference to chase to guide us. sometimes we delegate our system character to a dealer, or friend and follow their advice. it’s s perfectly valid way to go and honest. but better is when you do have the light go on and you know where you are going and so can attack it yourself. then; if you are lucky enough to have a dedicated space where you have the flexibility to be able to do what you want; then it’s doable.

here are those room tuning links to what i did back in 2015. lots of details. and note that i had been in my purpose built dedicated room for 11 years in 2015, so i had crashed and burned a number of times and underwent a baptism of fire to get to the point of my final 9 month long dash to success.

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/almost-free-and-4-inches-the-final-1.17389/

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/almost-free-and-4-inches-the-final-1.17389/page-3#post-314941

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/suck-out-fixed-i-think.18116/

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/suck-out-fixed-i-think.18116/page-2#post-329496