It seems rix know me better than myself !
For sure like true friend knows us...
You make me smile thanks....
@sharri - thanks for the de-escalation :-)
Speaker positioning: why do audiophiles neglect this so much?
Went to a recent seminar featuring Jim Smith, well known author of the book "Get Better Sound" and hi fi set up guru.
The basic gist of the discussion was that the most important elements of a high end stereo installation are listening position and speaker positioning, in that order. The actual hardware (speakers, amplifiers, source, cables etc) are of less importance relatively speaking.
Yet it is clear from this web site and it's contents, that set up is discussed much less than the actual hardware.
When I look at the Virtual Systems page on site, I'm estimating that, maybe, 10% of the systems posted are close to well set up. Thus, hardly any of the featured hardware is performing close to it's maximum potential.
Shame, and why is it so? Not sexy enough to talk about system set up in depth? Lack of knowledge? Or is it simply too hard to do and too complex a subject?
Just my 2 cents ...
Showing 23 responses by mahgister
I will add that not only a dedicated room is not necessary but music itself is not necessary, silence in any position is the only necessary fulfillment... But being in an audio thread i will repeat that a dedicated room acoustic is the only luxury...not the price tag of gear at all... Saying that we can enjoy music anywhere from any system even in an escalator is common place fact from which NOBODY can argue against... 😁😊
|
Wise post! But most people spend money on costly tweaks and costly upgrades BECAUSE they dont understand basic acoustic power... The wife factor and a living room for most people cannot distract us to spelling the truth here in audio forums because it is an INCONVENIENT truth for most... Acoustic treatment and mechanical control is the key not the price tag.... Even with a wife and in a living room we need the truth not the market conditioning of our consumer habits....
|
Mental illness i dont know.... i will repeat here that what i speak about was recommendations which are the results of my experiments in my dedicated audio room : a laboratory...These photos dont give an idea they are old...The actual room contain a grid of 100 Helmholtz tubes resonators AND diffusers with a double screen in wood with many acoustic devices on it for example... And i dont describe it all here... Then yes i look like "madness" way more than what you think... 😁😊😎 My dedicated room is an acoustical laboratory...Not a living room..Then spare me insult...
But who is mad or perhaps "deluded"? A man with a 500 bucks system whose sound quality rival system costing 100 times more created by his own low cost homemade devices ?
Or a conditioned consumer who buy and plug many costly brand name gear in the wall and called it hi-fi ? Your own virtual system in an empty room is a "buy and plug" one then...I prefer my " madness" and acoustic research to your laziness sorry ...
By the way if you want to insult me speak it clearly with my NAME spelled, not indirectly and with hypocrisy with an old photo from my virtual system page... i prefer discussion to be frank....When people cannot argue about acoustic they chose insults, the first to act like that was the bullying boss of an audio company who sell costly devices here who never answered my inconvenients arguments and resorted to sarcasm about my old room ... Is it clear?
By the way describing an acoustic distortion to mock my system and attributing it to my system/room is not a fair description... i listen to a quartet like you did, but the sound is not between the speakers plane at all but in front of the speakers in the case of Auryn Quartet playing Haydn for example .... The soundscape is relative to the recordings the sound is around the room,outside speakers in many cases, but ALWAYS reach to my ears like in an headphone and better than in an headphone filling the space between the speakers and my listening position with an intimacy like in headphone because the soundscape INCLUDE ME... In psycho-acoustic science it is described by the LISTENER ENVELOPEMENT factor or LEV. / SOURCE WIDTH factor or ASW. it is a RATIO to be acoustically controlled...I bet you have no idea of what i spoke about nor the way to control it at all... Then sarcasm is your way to chase away your ignorance and scapegoating my room at distance to do so .... It is not the first time ... Then spare me post that describe your own fantasy projected onto an other room you never listen to .... I read acoustic book not audio magazine fantasy reviews publicity ...
|
If you are not able to hear with this album the soundscape OUT of the speakers, especially completely outside of them SIMULTANEOUSLY by the left and by the right, with this recording, you have a problem with the relation between your speakers and your room size and geometry or a treatment problem or a mechanical control problem or the three problem at the same time... Dont try with an electronical equalizer it will not work ALONE to solve this problem like wrongly claim some here...An E.Q. is a useful tool yes but not the solution by itself alone here... For example in some piece of the album there is three harpsichords, two outside of the speakers completely by left and right and the third in the perfect center...The voices comes in front or sometimes at left or right in the thirty pieces of the album...... Acoustic and psycho-acoustic are sciences with principles with which we can experience and devise experiments and from which we even may create acoustic devices and tools... I know it because i did it... The timbre perception , imaging, listener envelopment , dynamic, soundstage are not MAGICAL events created by the gear pieces by themselves alone by the power induced by the BRAND name, 😁but MOSTLY acoustic phenomena which are TRANSLATIONS of the original recorded acoustical cues in your own room, which acoustic information the gear ONLY convey but do not FULLY produce it by itself and did not optimize it by itself either, we need to determine by acoustic treatment and acoustic mechanical control the specific Ears/ Room relation to the speakers/gear for that... If the sound image and soundstage are confined here BETWEEN the speakers plane your relation speakers/ room is far from being optimal...Sorry... And the culprit is probably not some brand name piece of gear itself, or the system itself which is not probably the problem , save if your gear is of a bad design for sure, but usually the problem will be the relation between the system and the room lack of or unbalanced treatment and lack of acoustic control ... The speakers type must be chosen for the room size and geometry but the location of the speakers and their precise postioning will not be enough either in most cases...You will need at least room treatment and probably some degree of room mechanical control with Helmholtz devices to gain an OPTIMAL result... By the way this is part two of a very beautiful original Columbia album titled "Moondog" which i purchased when i was 24 years old and i am almost 71....
|
I will add that yes speakers positioning is the most important factor to adress first BUT this matter is not so much the straigth forward RECIPE many people think it must be... It is relative to many factors: speakers type yes, but also the acoustical state of the room and the PRECISE relation between a chosen type and the way the room must be organiszed to answer for the speakers needs... In my room 13 feet square with 8 feet 6 inches high... I enjoy TWO sweet spot : one at 3 feet and another one at 8 feet from the speakers... One spot is slightly more clear and detailed like headphone and rival any headphone ...The other sound more natural with a more encompassing bass...The two positions give me an englobing soundscape encompassing the listener with, relatively to the recording, even a sound almost coming from behind my head sometimes...The two positions give me an intimacy like with an headphone but out of my head with an astounding depth imaging in near listening and with a sound filling the room and around me in 8 feet listening position, according to the acoustical cues of the playing recording for sure...
Impossible to prefer one position to the other.... I listen half time in each one... 😁😊 Then there may be many sweet spots, at least two , not only one in a controlled room... And in small room any change in the room is audible even at three feet from the speakers... Then those who claim near listening eliminate the need for room treatment and room control are completely wrong... But to know it, someone must EXPERIMENT it and dispose his room to experience it to begin with... There is many myth in popular audio acoustic threads...One is near listening eliminate the need for room treatment and control... Another myth is about speaker position, any bad position CAN BE to some extent compensated by acoustic mechanical control over the pressure zones of the room by modifying them ...For example one of my speaker is pressed into a corner of the wall , the other speaker is not...Is it not bad enough? It is... it take me one year of acoustic control experiments to compensate acoustically to a great degree for this bad positioning...my soundscape is almost the same now coming from the two speakers without imbalance... Then reading that a speaker in a corner is bad means something in a non controlled room and dont work the same in a controlled room...And for sure it is relative to the speakers type, mine is a box two way speakers with a port hole in the front... Acoustic is not a list of ready made recipes to blindly apply but a list of priciples to experiment with...
I am not an acoustician at all only a "nut" experimenting with a dedicated room for 2 years non stop....I only know a few things but i learned them in listening experiments ... |
The optimal placement question is the most complex to evaluate because there is 2 method to do so... One with the help of a microphone and an electronical equalizer... Another way is instead of using a precise tested frequency response, to use instead a large bandwidth response like a singer voice timbre for example and replace a microphone by your ears and replace the electronical equalizer by an Helmholtz mechanical equalizer made of many bottles or tubes which will act like resonators and diffusers at different locations in the room .... The two methods are complementary, the E.Q. adress the speaker response to the unmodified room with a microphone an a single tested frequency , the other the M.E. adress the modified room response to the speakers with your timbre perceiving tuning ears... The E.Q. equalization will ask for a MILLIMETER exact location for golden spot... The M.E. tuning process will give a larger spot for location in inches for golden spot... it is better to use the two methods... But it take a dedicated room... |
Thanks it feel better to be understood than being alone with common place fact and acoustic science... Pointing to this truth dont negate the scaling differences between gear design... i only claim that we must learn acoustic BEFORE throwing money on not so useful upgrade... In my experience acoustic treatment and mechanical acoustic control exceed most upgrade of any piece of gear by a great margin most of the times and may cost nothing in a dedicated room......
|
The photos in my virtual pages dated back in the months before my systematic listening experiments in acoustic few years ago... My actual dedicated room is my music room and laboratory... Not a living room...And way more "silly" than in these past images... Nothing is esthetical because all is homemade with low cost materials... Then some may mock me, but i laugh last... My wife would have divorced if i had put anything in our living room...But think about that, if my wife had accepted my system presence in the living room i would have never experimented and discovered acoustic powerful impact...Most audiophile think that it is only an icing on the cake...Sorry but it is the reverse, most upgrades are only icing on a bad or on a good cake , acoustic experience and science is the cake itself.... It was fun to experiment, fun to learn how to listen and tune the speakers/room and at peanuts costs...i am proud to not be a gullible passive consumer of audio only but also a creative learning student of audio and acoustic in particular.... Some of my experiment could inspire some more crafty people than me and can be tried in a living room...And my experience can spare useless upgrading to some and oriented them toward low cost acoustical experiments...This is the only reason for my posts....If it is not useful to some then i am nut for sure.... But the fact is and will not change because you would want it so : acoustic matter more than a piece of brand name gear at the end... And a dedicated room is the only luxury in audio not the price tag of the gear....The fact that these two claims are inconvenient truths to spell in an audio thread dont matter... 😁😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😁😎 My deepest respect to you....
|
It is not always true... When your vibrations control is done, when you had put in place some solution about the decresing of the electrical noise floor of the house and gear, and when the acoustic treatment and especially mechanical control of the room is done well, your audio system NOW play at his optimal working level... You are done and only stay a marvellous musical experience... You now know how good are your piece of gear and what his the weakest link in your system... In mine it is my marvellous Sansui....NOt my low cost dac at all ... 😁😊 Because the dac is performing so well at a cost so low i dont feel i need to upgrade it at all, i am even afraid to change it and be deceived... It is a freench battery dac with a minimalist design, low noise level, TDA 1943 by french designer Christophe Mariac, Starting Point System... The only upgrade i am not afraid to do now is my beloved Sansui AU 7700... not the speakers which are the top design of British designer Mission Cyrus 781 which bass power are marvellous... And before i enjoyed the superioir Tannoy dual gold concentric....Then.... Anyway the possible upgrade wll cost me a lot more than the price of my beloved Sansui ... 100 bucks for the Sansui +recap price of 100 bucks by a more than honest repairman yes... I am lucky... compared to the low cost Sansui it will cost 6,000 bucks to buy a ZOTL.... 😁😊😂😊 I will not do it, not by self sontrol and abnegation or because it is too much money... I dreamed about the ZOLT Berning amplifier for a long time and i read about it... I will not do it because i dont need it to enjoy music now thanks to acoustic well done... Would it be an improvement to reach a higher "clarity" and accuracy of the timbre sound ? Yes it would... Is it a strong tentation to do this upgrade now? Not so much because even if inferior to the ZOTL my Sansui, i KNOW IT now, do the job very well even if it would be upgraded by the ZOTL... I know it because i enjoy a good timbre already and details thanks to ASCOUSTIC well done ... Acoustic put the Sansui on his best potential level where i can stay and live with it...And at the same time i know what are is probable weakness compared to the ZOTL tech...Clarity... But i am not frustrated at all with this konwledge... Confirming then by my experience that Acoustic well done exceed most upgrade in S.Q. powerful improvement... The Sansui is not transformed in a better amplifier for sure after acoustic, but i now can listen to ALL his qualities without feeling a lack on any count even accuracy or clarity.... But this is the factor that will be improved... Why ? Because all the other factors matter less at the end and ayway the Sansui give a lot of them very well... I am done upgrading for years now... Then all audiophile dont chase their tail... I did not... Acoustic is superior most of the times to any possible upgrade if your gear choices has been good choices to begin with for sure... |
This recording of Pat Bianchi and Pat martino , two of my favorite musicians, fill the room OUT OF THE SPEAKER PLANE,.... If not, this will indicate most of the time not a problem with your gear choice itself, (my audio system is low cost basic one) like most people could think, but a lack in acoustic treatment and especially in acoustic mechanical control of the room... All my posts here are pointing toward this direction, in spite of ill informed people with no experience in acoustic who think the sound MUST always be BETWEEN the speakers plane save for out of phase gear or distorting reflections... Here the soundscape is outside the speakers sometines by the left or right and the organ sound fill the room with the guitar in the center.... Listening to it we are like with an headphone in an intimate relation with the sound... It is like this IN MY ROOM.... This intimacy is called in acoustic science " listener envelopment factor" or LEV it is a factor relative to another one called the relative sound source width factor (ASW) These factors rightful ratio LEV/ASW emerge when we learn how to play with the timing of reflections lateral and back one, and also with the location of Helmholtz diffusers in our room, we may learn how create this effect which include the listener in some intimate relation with the sound which does not come from the speaker anymore at all and is no more between the speakers now... It is not my choice of speakers, or dac, or amplifier that will explain this acoustic phenomenon , no brand name gear publicity is necessary at all here , my gear being basic, only understanding of acoustic, and basic psycho-acoustic can explain and describe it... Then if someone want to contradict me i will wait for his arguments and not for his insults like from some above ignorant posters... Reflections can be useful and they are postive when we learn how to control their timing and their RATIO, lateral one and also back reflection in particular, when they are rightfully TIMED with one another by acoustic treatment and mechanical device control with and rightfully timed also with the TWO direct frontwaves coming from each speaker for each ear... Reme,ber than in a small room loke mine at the speed of sound in each second the waves cross the room 13 times...Meditate the consequence if this fact for psycho-acoustic and acoustic...Acoustic did not consist to buy prefabricated acoustic panels sorry...They are tool only which can help... But tuning a room ask for way more.... The good news is the cost may be peanuts, it was for me... I am not a gear fetichist but a student of experimental acoustic IN MY ROOM .... My results are the proof of the acoustic pudding.... Gear fetichism dont explain acoustic, it is the reverse.... 😁😊
|
Please keep your insults... Trolls dont give logical argument with articles about the subject matter of the thread in which they post like i did... Trolling is insulting to provoke WITHOUT arguments... Discussing is not trolling, only insulting like you just did is.... Buy a mirror...
|
Sorry but if you spoke about me... I did not promote any piece of costly gear at all EVER.... I did not promote any costly "tweaks" at all EVER ... On the contrary i dont buy anything save low cost devices in some case...I promote a method of control about mechanical,electricial and especially ACOUSTICAL control and not only treatment OVER UPGRADE obsession ... All my propsed tweaks are homemade or peanuts costs...
For the rest i speak with arguments like Millercarbon did in his own way but perhaps with less rudeness sometimes in my case... I wrote less well because English is not my native tongue... 😁😊 I speak about what i know and which is the most underestimated factor in audiophile life : acoustic and psycho-acoustic basic for speakers/room... Then spare me your one line allusion with no ARGUMENT....
|
I try not to insult people but giving them ARGUMENTS and sometimes article of science... this article is ONLY ONE of more i could have posted here to answer your post about soundscape limited to be ONLY between speakers never filling the room outside of the speakers plane like in my experience....i posted a research paper in ACOUSTIC by three non marxist japanese ACOUSTICIANS explaining some aspect of LEV ... Insulting them will no do great for your reputation and image here... You dont know what is LEV and the correlative with the ASW factor in acoustic it is OK, relax.... But dont insult the messenger : me or the acousticians from Japan... Japan has great acousticians by the way guess why? I gave you arguments in my posts , you NEVER answer them save by insults or silence... You are not ashamed to be seen as an ignorant with an answer like that to my post with contain arguments and a research paper explaining some aspect of the acoustical phenomena called "listener envelopment factor" which it seems you dont even know exist ? i apologize to you for my criticism because it is evident you are UNABLE to understand what you pretend to understand, but an equalizer manual dont equal acoustic experience AT ALL....Like i said already an equalizer is a limited TOOL not an acoustic device like a mechanical Helmholtz resonators set...You can tune some aspect of the sound with an electronical equalizer yes, but you cannot tune a room for the speaker. . The electroncal equalizer is not a part of the room like a mechanical equalizer is... I did not pretend to know much more but i EXPERIMENTED two years with complete success in my room and i understand why.... This is the reason behind my posts about the importance of acoustic: passive material treatment but also mechanical control via Helmholtz method of a room...
|
Incredibly wrong... Rightful room acoustic and good system NEVER sound dull... That remark say much about your system/room than about anything else... Sorry...
Wrong too ...It only reflect acoustic ignorance transformed in audiophile dogma, ignorance of two main factors in room control: listener envelopment (LEV) and sound source width (ASW) and their acoustic interrelation ...
I will refer now you to this paper at the end to understand what i speak about because you demonstrated that you have no IDEA about its existence and how to create it in your room... A clue : electronic equalization will NEVER do it... 😁😊
But you are right about something too, good system
Yes this is true... And:
This is true... You are not totally wrong... 😁😊
But dull no, no good room /system is dull EVER, in the oppposite all good System/room are astounding BECAUSE of the naturalness of timbre perception and dynamic....Simple... And listening to only a sound " in between" the speakers No thanks keep it for you... Your system/room is, if not flawed, uncontrolled and the treatment is not very well made...Very sorry for you....Put aside your electronic equalizer manual and read some room acoustic paper... 😁😊
To help you this is an abstract of this paper which will explain what i spoke about because you have no clue it seems ...But beware this article is one among others that will be necessary to read to understand how to implement Lev and ASW correct balance in a small room...
«EFFECTS OF EARLY REFLECTIONS ON LISTENER ENVELOPMENT Hanyu,Toshiki; Sekiguchi, Katsuaki; Koizumi Yuki ABSTRACT It is well known that later reverberant sounds contribute to listener envelopment (LEV). On the other hand, the effect of early reflections on LEV has not sufficient ly been clarified. In this paper, listening tests were carried out in order to examine the effect s of early reflections on LEV.
|
Even in a living room if you know the importance of acoustic versus costly upgrade, at least you can improve in some degree your listening experience at low cost if you think and read about acoustic instead of reading marketing reviewer of gear...... That is my point... I dont say to people that dont own a dedicated room that they are wrong, i just say look at what you can do acoustically even in a living room at low cost BEFORE upgrading... All audio threads speak about upgrade... I speak about something more essential : acoustic... I must be right if a reviewer with a way more costlier system than mine enjoy only an " in between speaker sound" not even knowing that it is not optimal acoustic at all... 😁😊 Alleging only fuzzy distortions and "out of phase" effect and attributing that IN A BET to my room CANNOT EXPLAIN timbre and imaging and other acoustical cues perceived coherently TOGETHER in my room...This is just plain acoustic ignorance invoking simplistic explanation about something they are unable to figure out to begin with confirming my point about general underestimation of acoustic in magazine......But they sell NEW gear not acoustic knowledge right? If they will focus on acoustic, who will pay their publicity? This fact will not change the scientific fact that acoustic and psycho-acoustic ONLY can describe our sound/music experience and perception not a new complex design of gear by itself alone EVER nevermind his cost.... Only fetichist think otherwise...
|
In a small room near listening will be affected by all the room controlled or uncontrolled acoustic.... I know it perfectly well by listening experiments... My room is 13 feet square... ANd my speakers/room acoustic beat my 7 headphones limitations... My system value is 500 bucks... Then why? Acoustic science and psycho acoustic is always prioritary for me...
|
Dont make a sophism with my observations... Dont put words in my mouth... I never said that changing some piece of gear will not make a difference...ALL change make a difference, even cables did... I never said that people with a living room which is not under perfect acoustic control MUST never upgrade...They can, but acoustic improvement is BETTER before upgrading, because it is better to listen to the real potential of what you want to change before changing it.... I SAID that MOST upgrades will never replace the HUGE improvement when acoustic is rightfully done...For sure my low cost Sansui will never rival the high end design of a costlier amplifier ONLY because my room is acoustically under control...did i ever say that? But before upgrading this Sansui amplifier it is better for me to listen to it in optimal acoustic condition... I did.... This is the reason why now i am satisfied with it even if i know that a Berning Zotl amplifier for example will be better... But i am satisfied with my ratio S.Q. / price cost which is over the roof thanks to acoustic method...I listen music no more distracted or disturbed by a "bad" sound...Nothing is perfect but it is optimal now for this system/room of mine... It is then enough... I will not go from a 500 bucks system to a 15,000 bucks upgrade, which will be the real cost of a real upgrade... I know the cost because i listen to the working peak potential of my actual system and i can assess his limitations , thanks to acoustic...
I advise people here AFTER my experience and experiments thats all... I dont judge people 😁😊
By the way upgrading is a risky move, acoustic is a science....
|
Wise observation...I think the same because my room look awful....But dont sound awful at all....Ifi judged my room by a photo myself i will claim the sound must be horrible...But it is a visual bias that has nothing to do with acoustic experience... It is the reason why i put no actual images of my room in the virtual system page... The old one are enough to perturbate most people.... Read the commentaries....😁😊
And seriously, how can you evaluate distance, exact location, material acoustic properties of the material content and topology, with speakers characteristics, exact density of the walls and ceilings and floor and the hiddeen characteristic of the room not visible and evaluable by sight ? the only one who said he can was speaking of relatively empty room, not small nor too large, and even in this case it is very problematic to judge.... The most important aspect will be before room treatment and mechanical control, the synergy between the speakers characteristic and needs and all properties of the room...This is INVISIBLE.... Those who say they can judge a room by a photo dont understand acoustic and reduce acoustic to panels general rules of placement... alas! acoustic and psycho acoustic are more complex than GENERAL panels mathematical rule placement, trained ears experience judge listening on the concrete room NEVER from a photo.... The only thing we can guess to have great acoustic property by sight of blueprint design not only photo will be the architectural design of a big amphitheater, and even there we must listen, seat there to be sure and to be able to compare with other design...
😁😊
|
You can create great S.Q. in a living room.... But it is way more difficult... And it is not because many people cannot own a dedicated room that this truth can be erased from thread: It is not the cost of the gear who gives us S.Q. but acoustic.... The only luxury in audio is a room, not a 100,000 bucks system... I apologize for repeating this truth... But i cannot boast about a piece of gear i dont upgrade nor buy anything i prefer to make my devices with junk...
But this acoustical truth is not said by much people here...is not it? It is my excuse .... And i can mute myself and let others speak about everything save this important acoustic discovery for me for sure... 😁😊
My best to you....
|
You are right, 😁😊 but if i dont insist who will?Not so many people for sure... I apologize for my lack of modesty or ego....I am not perfect i know.... My goal is saving money for people... Dont upgrade before figuring acoustic... By the way this general ignorance in audio thread or magazines cost me time and money many years ago, this dont excuse my tone of voice sometimes but help to understand it...
My deepest respect to you...
|
Speakers position and listener position is only HALF of the story...Sorry... And it is a common place fact in acoustic circle if not in audiophile thread.... And yes most people think the gear is the main important factor which is erroneous... The passive material treatment and especially the mechanical acoustic control is the more important half...Why more important? Because the first half is well known, the speaker/listener position; the other half is not even explained in audio threads : Room acoustic mechanical control with Helmholtz method about resonators and diffusers .... And this part ONLY can compensate and can use for the better the specific difficult geometry, topology and acoustic material content of most small rooms ( carpet, fabric cloth pieces, furniture,books,mirror etc); the relation between speakers and listener position CANNOT solve by itself all these acoustic problems.. I never wrote a book but i was able to do my small room right... BUT It takes me 2 years non stop to figure it out , i am retired.... And now i know how to do the listening experiments and which devices can be useful ... And yes it is complex... But yes it may cost peanuts.... 😁😊 And it was the most fun experience in my life on par with cycling and walking and dreaming and reading.... Upgrading one piece of gear after the other is not audiophile experience, it is obsession maintained by ignorance of acoustic, sorry....
|