Nearfield listening - once more

I also wonder, is there such a thing as a "nearfield speaker" or is this mostly words? All speakers are nearfield if you sit close enough. The ideal speaker should sound good from the near, the mid, and the far listening zone. But attempts to improve nearfield sound are interesting.

I know that with a two (or more) way speaker you have to move the listener position so that the two drivers blend well. With my single driver speakers that problem is smaller. I can sit closer to the drivers and yet get quite full range and time-coherent sound. Even if my Fostex submini is limited it keeps up and enlarges the performance from my Arche fr2 speakers. 

Thank you all for very interesting and positive responses! I will consider a bit, and come back.

@hiphiphan 

Height - is it always the case that ears are best served by height = the centre of the tweeter? I sometimes feel, somewhere between the tweeter and woofer (or bass port, in case of single driver speakers) is better.

@hiphiphan

Yes, sitting closer to the speakers, my face/head blocks more of the sound from the other speaker. Do you find that the best result is related to the toe-in of the speakers?

@steve59

> 2 to 1. 2 ft apart for 1 foot back.

Interesting rule - will try.

@pwerahera thanks! Seems reasonable. Basically I think you are right. Yet these are not the only laws of physics. Bi- or omnidirectional speakers sound different and work differently from traditional front-firers. I would say that room treatment is important also if you sit four feet from the speakers. Even if the indirect sound is now less prominent, it is there, coloring the direct sound. And even with headphones, where the material of the cusps can change the sonics quite a lot (cf Audioquest Nightowl debate).

My two way (horn treble + conventional woofer) floorstanding speakers sound good and quite coherent even from quite close. This is most probably due to each speaker having two identical set of drivers, two in front, two in the back. This arrangement is designed to create the correct spectral energy plus the right time alignment of the direct and indirect sound. It helps smooth the bass and treble and integrate the two.

I do hear bass even from quite close to the speakers. You wrote: "Big floor standers will give you the bottom octave, but you need to sit away from the speakers." Not so clear in my case.

@mahgister 

Thanks for comments - I agre with much of what you say.

You wrote:

"Room acoustic cannot be replaced or being disposed of because we listen nearfield ..."

Exactly!

But you also write "the result will be a no existing soundstage or one located only between the speakers"

If I sit forwards, almost between the speakers, yes, the soundstage will be located here. But is this neccessarily worse?

Personally I find that I often enjoy the sound, closer to the speakers, although I have not changed my main listening position, with more conventional distance to the speakers.

Wow what a load of information! Thanks!

Just a quick reply. I suggest that we leave deep bass out of the discussion, for now. Not because we dont need it! On the contrary I understand very well the idea of going from below, when tuning the system, start with the best bass, and so on. Yet I think, for nearfield listening, it is a secondary consideration. You have to get the nearfield sound right, down to 100 - 80 - 60 or something herz. Then you solve the problem of the deep bass. This is my experience from working with small speakers. I have tried 5-6 subs in my main system, plus some small subs in my office system. The idea that you cannot hear where the sub sound comes from below 120 or something herz is PLAIN WRONG to my ears. They can be heard and localized even if the specs say they shut up at 60 80 or something hz, in reality they dont. My smallest sub, a Fostex Submini, is the most honest about this, with a manual showing a curve of how the sub output continues upwards in frequency. Even if the volume level is lower. 

@jkevinoc - good to hear the Kans and the Classic are still working so well. I have never heard them, but have been impressed by other Linn gear.

I am testing single driver speakers in my desk system - Arche Audio FR2 speakers and Arche D50A s-state amp, plus a Fostex Submini. I like tweaking to get the best out of a low-cost solution like this. The Arche system is made in S Korea, and does indeed have a bit "Korean" sound to my ears - very analytical, sharp, somewhat bright. I employ a cheap trick: I include the Audiotailor Jade (otl tube) headphone amp in the amplification chain, in order to 'humanize' the sound. Since I had it laying around already. Since the Jade output goes to the sub as well as the speaker amp, the bonus is the ability to control both sub and speakers with one volume control, retaining the balance between them.

I can well imagine that this single driver speaker path has problems, even if we avoid the dreaded crossover. And that the two-way Kans sound more 'holographic' than my setup. Probably also more forgiving of not-the-best digital input. The strength of my system is analytical sharpness, and this is what I mainly use it for - investigating music, potential vinyl albums to buy, for playback in my main system. I would guess that the Kans benefit a lot from optimal stands and positioning. Even with small speakers I thought I knew well, I've been amazed by the improved sound from precise and stable positioning. 

I'd like to clarify my statement on bass, above. Of course it matters, also for nearfield listening, although maybe a bit of the deep bass is lost. It is only that, in my experience with subs, I like them best when they are positioned like speakers, with the drivers front-firing, often in a line with the speakers, a bit forward. I have "heard" the subs even if the crossover is tuned down to 50-45hz. Because in fact the sub doesn't stop there, it emits some higher frequency sound also. This is with a Velodyne DD18, two REL Strata, and others. Maybe I would think otherwise if I had heard, for example, the Audiokinesis Swarm system. But maybe not.

Even with single driver or one way speakers, I compromise by adding a sub. I then have a two-way system with associated problems of integration. However my small Arche FR2 speakers dont go much below 100 hz. The upside is that they don't try to do bass that will distort and make trouble also upwards in frequency. The downside is that they need a sub to get the right tonal balance.

I also have a further question regarding nearfield listening.

Do you find that it works better with streaming, than with other sources (especially, analog / LP)?

If nearfield tends to sound especially good when streaming, there could be many causes (productions more tuned to ’personal listening’ and whatnot). But maybe mainly a more flat digital sound, compared to what one gets from LP playback, and therefore, more benefit of sitting closer to the speakers.

Testing nearfield listening in my main system.

First, I drag and push my heavy listener chair much closer to the speakers than I am used to. I then change the position from very close, to medium close, to not so close.

The test deserves one of my best LPs, The Beatles Magical mystery tour, Hørzu edition with true stereo. So I play Hello goodbye, a track I know by heart.

Result: from very close, it sounds disjointed, not fully coherent.  Medium is better, and not so close is best.

The test confirms the need for some distance to get the best coherence, soundstage and depth.

This preliminary result is very interesting.... more to follow...

With close and medium distance I can feel that the band is around me. Pushing the chair further back is like changing the position from the stage, towards the front seats in the concert hall, and then further backwards. I think this says something about good speakers. 

Testing some more with the Audiokinesis Dream Maker floorstanders. They stand ca 5.5 feet from the wall, and 5 from the side walls, toed in ca 40 degrees. They stand 6.7 feet apart, measured from the center of the drivers. My conventional listening position has been ca 8 feet from the middle of the front plane of the speakers. Now, I tried 2 feet away, 3 feet etc in small increments. Large impact on the sound. I found that 2-3 feet was too close. 4-5 was better, more coherent, and with some space and depth also. Although maybe, all in all, 7-8 was best. Not sure yet. Although I don't end up very nearfield, it may be that my listening chair should be closer to the speakers than I have thought.

@atmasphere - my experience is that the sub needs to be cut off at a lower frequency than 80 hz. The Velodyne DD18 is the sub I've owned that really went low, and the crossover could be set to 40 - 45 hz. Even lower than with the two REL Strata subs I had before. Yet even at that low crossover, I was concerned about the sub positioning, and found that the DD18 sounded best, positioned in line with the speakers, or a bit in front, very directional - although this should not be the case. I have not (yet) experienced truly non-directional subs.

Thank you, all!

I have been into 'reverberant' sound, speakers trying to 'play' the room and so on since 1970 (Bose 901). The Audiokinesis Dream Maker speakers I have used the last ten years is a much more sophisticated version of this principle, made to resemble big Sound Lab panels but with dynamic/horn drivers. So I know my way around indirect sound, a little bit at least.

I think we all agree that room treatment and room/speaker synnergy is important even with nearfield listening, although the direct sound now plays a greater role. My impression is, whatever the speaker, it does play the room. You cannot avoid it, even if many speakers are designed to minimize it.

Now maybe the best thing about nearfield listening, in my case at least, with a fairly large room, is that is it not either / or. No harm is done to our living and listening room arrangement, by dragging the main listener chair closer to the speakers. The sound is just as good as it was before, in the rest of the room (unless I do some large changes of speaker positioning and toe-in - so far I have not felt the need).

@asctim - yes, very interesting experiment - it reminds me of what I hear when I have my head 'just so' a bit before and above the woofers in the speakers.

@atma-sphere - yes, from what I've read, the Swarm system is able to do the vanishing act that I ask for. Or most of it. Have never heard it, though. The bass management of the Dream Makers, with two 10 inch woofers per speaker, one in front and one at the back, is very good and pure on its own. I can hear test tones down to 28 - 25 hz or so.

Sorry if I am a bit slow, answering the many good comments in this thread. Reason; I need some time to adjust my ears back to the music. I get tired listening to the sound. "Is A better than B, or maybe C", and so on.Testing is fine, now and then, but too much does not work for me. However, the discussion has been useful. I have moved my listening chair closer to the speakers, and will get used to this, before I change anything.

@chrisoshea - this is my impression too. I am now investigating a much closer to the speakers listening position than I've been used to. Very interesting. Better? Maybe no, my speakers are designed to work with the room. Timbre is better with the speaker and room interaction. Yet detail - or some if it - seems better in the near field. So this is at least a very interesting 'alternative take' on how my speakers sound.

I should note that my interest in near field listening in my main system is also motivated by recent changes in my home office system, where I sit closer to the speakers, or use headphones. No crossovers - single driver speakers. No output transformers - OTL amp with NOS tubes takes the main amplification load. The office system sounds good. And even better, now, with a balanced headphone cable to my Nightowl headphones. Nearfield listening approaches headphones.