What affects front to back depth in room/ system?

😊👍

@klh007 Thank you for the recommendation. I'm happy where I'm at currently with the fuse situation, but will definitely keep it in mind if (when) I get upgraditis later on. 

@ghdprentice 

Preamp: I went from a Shunyata Delta NR (v1) to same cable but the most current version (v2). 

Mono block power cables x2: I went from Shunyata Venom V10 NR to Shunyata Delta NR (v1)

Fuse in pre-amp: stock to Synergistic Research Purple

Fuse in streamer/dac: stock to Synergistic Rearch Orange

OP,

‘Thank you very much for the follow up comments. It is great to hear what it takes to get improvements. 
 

Please mention the brands and models of the cables and other equipment you used, this is the most valuable information. It is highly encouraged. This is why there is a place to show photos and to identify brand and model of all your equipment. Please share.

@veerossi Please consider trying 2 Swiss Digital Fuse Boxes, it replaces the skinny wire fuse with a solid copper rod which can pass tons more current and uses a microprocessor to sense current and protect your gear, you can change values and it can trip without breaking unlike a fancy fuse.

Just a follow up: I got the sound I was looking for. Here’s are the 5 changes I needed to do bridge the gap:

I’m not sure if it’s ok to mention names and models of items here or if it’s frowned upon, so I’ll leave it out to be safe. If ok and info is desired, let me know and I’ll post em’.

Each of these were performed 1 at a time to ensure I can identify changes (good or bad) or if no change. I then listen for a couple days to assess/ evaluate the 1 tweak, then would move onto the next one.

First: the main speakers needed a litle bit more toe-in and had to be spread a little farther apart. More coherent and focus in center image, improved bass, less side wall reflections.

2nd: upgraded from one good power cable on my pre-amp to the latest/greatest of the same model. It immediately sounded better and cast a huge soundstage, but was also a little bit thinner sounding and "phasey" sounding at the same time (compared to the old one). After 3 days of listening, it settled in and again and the thin and phasey issues were gone. What was left is better bass and I can hear soft quiet sounds in music I couldn’t make out before (during parts of songs where there is whispering etc) I can now hear the words. Crazy!

3rd: (buckle-in): I changed the stock fuse in my streamer/DAC to a "fancy-pants" fuse. This was an incredible improvement in bass, noise floor reduced, better imaging, layering, and depth. I can’t friggin’ believe it. I used this same very fuse in an integrated tube amp I have since sold and I don’t recall it making that much of an improvement like it did to my streamer/DAC. This upgrade made me stop looking at the next upgrade. I’m happy again with this streamer/DAC again. This fuse upgrade just saved me an s-load of $.

4th upgraded 2 already decent power cables on my class d mono block amps to the next models up. I had a feeling these might have been the bottleneck. and I suspected correctly. These weren’t exactly cheap to upgrade. This tweak made the biggest difference of them all.

Lastly, I experimented with moving one of my subs out of the corner of the front wall and put it on a small solid wood table/stand about 2’ off the ground. The table was about the same size as the sub. This smoothed out the bass in the room, but also took away some of the punch. I then took it off the floor and found a spot in the room where the sub responded positively/ improving the upper mid and bottom end. I ended up placing it just off to the outside of the right speaker about a 1’ away and just behind it. I then tuned both subs so one is crossed over for more of the rock bottom and the other one a little higher to get more punch and chestiness.

I’m now contemplating picking up a couple more of those fuses for the mono blocks. I’m finally at a point now where gear is done. I feel that the gear and setup and tweaks was the first 50% and this is now mostly optimized/ as good as it’s going to get. Now onto the next frontier/ other 50%: room treatment. I need to learn REW to take RT60 and measure bass etc. I’m pretty good with computers/apps, but this one is a bit intimidating. Any help here would be appreciated. I already have the U-mik-1 and a mic stand and laptop ready to go.

You need to listen to Diana Krall all the time if you wanna listen to things with sound depth . Most of the time I find it's the quality of recording that makes all the difference in the world despite whatever equipment you have 

@veerossi 

I consulted with Dennis at acoustic fields before I built my dedicated room. He seemed very knowledgeable but said I would need about 35k to build the room. That was out of my budget. He also said my speakers would not work in a room my size. I went with an acoustician recommended by Duke LeJeune of audiokinesis to design my room and am extremely happy with the result. 

https://youtu.be/gcf1Hp_oAv4?feature=shared

I think the speakers have the most to do with it. Mind you I don't have a high-end system but when pitting kef r11's non meta against everything in the room at magnolia, one thing I noticed was that the kefs had an unusually deep sound stage..I wasn't listening for it, I just noticed it, and it was the first time I ever heard a deep sound stage and as you probably know all of the speakers are very close to the rear wall in Magnolia I ultimately chose them over theB&W 702s2s I have them set up in-between 2 rooms with about 12 feet behind them, using a Denon 4308, similar to the Marantz that they use in Magnolia, so nothing special.. the recording has a lot to do with it I found that with live jazz I can easily pick out the location of the instruments. Some many feet back,The whole sound is very layered.. and as one other reader had said, shutting your eyes makes a big difference especially at night.

I am fortunate to have a relatively large dedicated listening room which allows for proper distances from the walls, This, along with abundant acoustic treatment provides for an immersive experience. I also use a distributed bass array akin to the Audiokinesis Swarm and I find that it further makes an enormous contribution to soundstage and depth.

@veerossi - thanks for those dimensions. I don't see any issues. You are kind-of close to the back wall, but that's way better than sitting in the middle of the room, where you would experience bass nulls. Your gear looks great to me, so next steps are probably room treatment, as others have recommended.

Working out how much treatment is needed and where to place it is not rocket science. A few measurements from your listening position using Room EQ Wizard and a calibrated mic (eg., miniDSP UMIK-1) will tell you just about all you need to know. Feel free to PM me if I can help.

I don't think this can be oversimplified. It is a combination  of things. 

* speaker placement

* room treatment

*speaker isolation

* recording styles or techniques

*cabling

*music service 

*low noise in signal

I believe it is a combination of things.  Each helps but it is the cumulative result.

@dsnyder0cnn my room measures 15’x19’ (4.57m x 5.79m).

The front of the speakers are 4’6" (1.37m) from the front wall. Middle of tweeter left speaker to middle of tweeter right speaker is 7’8" (2.3m). side of speaker to each side wall is 4’11" (1.5m). Ear in the listening position to front of speaker baffle (tweeters are at ear level) is around 9’3 (2.8m)" -same for left and right. I have about 2’ (.6m) from ears to the back wall.

The speakers are about 1 1/2’(.45m) closer together than what it would take to make an equilateral triangle, but this is where they work best (keeping the biggest emphasis on best bass and the right size mouth I hear singing the song).

@wolf_garcia ​​​​and @tablejockey I was just spinning the UHQR Aja tonight (just got it after seeing them with the Eagles last week). Man, if everything sounded as good as that album does, I wouldn’t need to fiddle with all these fidly bits.

@skinzy I’m starting to think the same thing. I’m really curious to see what the difference will be after I treat the room though.

@axeis1 I have Robert Harley’s book (which is pretty great) and of course Paul McGowans- which was quite helpful at the beginning.

@labpro Thanks for mentioning Acoustical Sciences Corporation. I checked out their tube traps a while ago, and was seriosuly considering those.

While we’re here- I’ve been thinking about going with Acoustic Fields (Dennis is who suggested I move speakers from the short wall to the long wall instead...which was a great improvement. The only thing is I don’t see any posts on here about them, but see some of the others. Does anyone here have experience dealing with Acoustic Fields/ Dennis or opinions/ feedback?

@dsnyder0cnn 

Thank you for your post. I appreciate your foot covers.

It's probably already been said, but FWIW real 'depth of image' is captured in the recording process. If it ain't there it ain't going to be anywhere.

In a carefully set up two channel system all you get is what is on the recording. There are many variations of what folks think is soundstage mostly depending on how they use their room in their set up and think what they have achieved is really the 'depth of image' so often referred to by folks, it's not. That sound is only the result of management of the rooms construction, size, speaker placement, reflections, and nulls/nodes, etc. 

If you want to see how your system reproduces true depth of image get yourself a recording that has it in the first place. I always recommend Opus 3's "Depth of Image" on an LP if you can use it or CD. IF your system is properly set up its sound will blow you away. It's just amazing! This recording is a compilation of classical, jazz, pop, taken from their recording of such music from their other recordings. Their mic set up is simple and 'correct'. The manual will discuss all of the cuts and tell you what you should hear - if you can't detect all that they tell you exists, then you know that you need to adjust your setup to get there. High quality equipment may help some, but a reasonably good system can get you there. 

labpro is correct that sidewall reflections affect image depth...all other things being equal, by moving speakers closer together you can increase soundstage depth but at some point it's at the expense of sounstage width. It's an iterative process, and almost every room is different...

While it sounds counterintuitive, side wall reflections impact the width and depth of your sound stage more than I ever imagined.

As you consider room treatments, read a few articles written by Art Noxon, owner of ASC (Acoustical Sciences Corporation) Tube Traps. 
 

I like his tube traps because you can literally “dial in” the soundstage by simply adjusting the amount of diffusion and absorption you need. 
 

Use a mirror to find your 1st and 2nd side reflections, and watch your soundstage adjust to meet your needs. 
 

Hope this helps.

I went on the search for greater depth and have concluded it is a bit of a myth.  My speakers are 4' off front wall and 3' off sidewall.  My side reflections are treated. I have a fabulous sound stage and very holographic sounds.  There is depth but not to the degree some describe (i.e. behind and outside the front wall.).  

Note that unless you've never actually owned a stereo system or you have no faith in your own taste, the proper setup is what sounds best to YOU.

It’s all about setup. There are several excellent books on setup. Buy one, read it , learn how to setup your room

I see quality loudspeakers there. Wide-angle distortion in the photo makes it difficult to estimate the ratio of tweeter-to-tweeter and ear-to-tweeter. Some say that these should be equal (an equilateral triangle); however, most great-sounding systems I've heard have the speakers a little closer together. Tweeter-to-tweeter distance is ~85% of ear-to-tweeter.

I agree with others that for most loudspeakers to create a perception of depth, you're going to need to pull the speakers well out into the room…at least 4 ft from the front of the speaker to the wall behind. Sometimes further is better. It also helps for there to be nothing between the speakers. Bonus points for having nothing inside the triangle formed by the tweeters and your ears.

Good luck. It's something we're all chasing and have achieved to various degrees.

It’s in no way a matter of cabling and tweak products such as vibration absorbers, contrary to what the either delusional or perfidious dealer suggested here. Yeesh…talk about misleading.

The primary factor is how much space you allow between the speakers and room boundaries. Additionally, bass smoothness, proper room treatment for ideal decay time, the phase of the recording, and overall speaker performance also play critical roles. All the rest affect perceived depth by far smaller margins.

I’ve setup systems that can create incredible depth for relatively little money, so it’s not so much about how much you can spend, but high quality speakers are a must. 
 

"Listen to the infamous brilliantly recorded later Steely Dan recordings...one of the first things you notice is the utter lack of reverb"

I'm listening in my head...

Skunk Baxter's  "Bohdisahttva or Walter Becker's "Josie" solo would have been ruined with noticeable reverb. OD tone/reverb is an odd pairing to my ears. 1-2 max on the knob- if any.

Those geetars are dry!

wolf on point.

Reverb and delay add reverb and delay, and not depth particularly in my experience. Maybe an illusion is enough, but level is key and burying an instrument in reverb tends to obscure its position in the mix more than accent it. Listen to the infamous brilliantly recorded later Steely Dan recordings...one of the first things you notice is the utter lack of reverb.

@wolf_garcia 

You are leaving out a major mixing tool for creating the illusion of depth in recordings. Reverb and delay on particular instruments/tracks is, in my experience, the most effective way of creating depth in a recording.

Soundstage depth is accomplished by a recording mixer by using relative volume level adjustments on isolated or semi-isolated instruments, and width is from panning from the middle outwards. That's it. Vibration controlling silliness or room reflection worries are minor or irrelevant.

magnuman

mihorn, I wish you would have named the system that that singer is singing on it sounds very natural even through my phone I can hear how nice it is.

My system consists Oppo 95 (modded), Bakoon int. amp (modded), and Wavetouch audio speaker with Wavetouch cables. Here the system video. Alex/WTA

@veerossi 

The BSG QOL originally retailed at $4K. They show up used once in a while for around $800 to $1K.

tomic601

12,443 posts

01-17-2024 at 01:22pm

u r chasing u tail….if your system can do it on a recording but not others….

This is correct (hence my previous comment about soundstage being largely recording- / master-dependent.

I’d find other well-performing systems to play my preferred files on for comparison before altering my system. If 90% of what you listen to has a soundstage you prefer on your system, I suspect you are near the lead of the audiophile curve. Some recordings just won’t permit it.

Plenty of anecdotal accounts where using DSP to focus stereo imaging had a reductive effect on soundstage size, just FYI.

Meow?

u approximate a cat…..

u r chasing u tail….if your system can do it on a recording but not others….

It sounds like I need to finally get going on my room treatment. I’m not sure there’s much left for improving speaker position in the room. My speakers dissapear 90% of the time right now. I need to finally buckle down and learn how to use REW.

Earlier I spun the Mofi Brothers in Arms and on "So Far Away From Me" I get the sound wrapping around the room- almost like it’s giving me a hug. My thought is: somewhere there’s a treated room with a properly setup system that can do this full-time. I’m holding on to this as a goal.

Not seen in my photo is the rest of the gear that’s against the back wall. I will try going back to the short wall for the setup, but will need to muster up the energy for that chore first.

@8th-note The BSG QOL Processor sounds interesting. Do you recall how much it cost?

@o_holter One of these days, I need to hear Quads. For a long time, I’ve heard so many great things about them.

@testrun Wow, that Moon River is a spectacular recording. It's ASMRish! Soundstage is massive!

@audphile1 The depth doesn’t change much at low volume, but I can tell when I’m at the right volume. There is a volume where the pressure in the room is just right. Too little and it’s a bit dull. Too loud and it overwhelms/ excites the room. Using my phone and the DecibelX app, around 70-75db works well.

@veerossi adding to my earlier post. Now that I saw your system….very nice! But I’m afraid, in addition to room acoustics, lack of preamp is contributing to the soundstage limitations you’re experiencing. 

With regard to southern California dealers, I thought Alma Audio in San Diego did a nice job of setting up their Boenicke W8 speakers to create a sense of depth. The sound was very enveloping. Nice looking speakers that sound excellent, imo.

Let's consider some of the basics of perceived soundstage depth.  Sounds that seem way behind the speakers have reverberation which is either natural--from distant-miking--or artificial.  Sounds that emanate from the plane of the speakers are typically close-miked without much reverb.  To have sounds in front of the speakers in a stereo system would require that the phase was reversed.  Or maybe it can be done with a surround system.

Your perception of depth of soundstage is most likely negatively impacted by the first reflections (side walls, ceiling). Also, adding bass traps will help solidify the soundstage. When your brain needs to process sounds bouncing off every reflective surface, it will have a tough time realizing the stereo image. 
Easy way to test it is at very low volume where the reflections are minimal, does the depth increase?

Try playing Moon River by Jacintha to get a perspective of image placement and over all system sound.  

In my experience I started with by-amping Adcom 555s . It sounded amazing but only a 6 foot circle in the center of the room between the speakers . When I upgraded to the mc452 that was a whole different story. Soundstage grew exponentially. My room is of similar size 15/20 with speakers set up along the 15 foot wall 7ft. apart. The soundstage grew from 6ft. circle to the whole back of the 15ft wall. My opinion is for a better soundstage is amp, amp ,amp.

mihorn,

I wish you would have named the system that that singer is singing on it sounds very natural even through my phone I can hear how nice it is.

First of all you should change your speaker placement, you should always put the speakers firing down the longest length which is 20 ft and then go on the Cardas site and you can plug in the 15-ft width of your room and it'll tell you exactly where to put your speakers, I did that and it totally opened up my sound stage, and then you should get the Townshend podiums to stop your speaker vibrating it was the most significant upgrade I've ever done to my system they're not cheap but well worth it.

@veerossi : Seems like good speakers (assuming it is the Tannoy Turnberry). They are sensitive two way speakers, like mine, but not bidirectional like my Audiokinesis Dream Maker. I think they should be able to do depth very well, if precisely set up. Note, I said precisely. Not just OK. This is because they seem very pinpoint front sound oriented (e g compared to mine).

I am experimenting with an even more ‘puristic’ pinpoint system in my home office – single driver speakers, no crossover. The soundstage changes a lot even with small changes of speaker positioning and toe-in. One might think that frontfiring speakers were less dependent on the room and reverberant sound, compared to bi- or omnidirectional, and yes, it is partly so, but there remains a huge dependence. More than we usually think about. The speaker «cant help it», it plays the room, and together with the room, even when designed and tuned to minimize this effect.

Consider trying the short wall once more, with more space behind the speakers, and adjust in case of bass dropouts. In my room 27 x 20 x 9 feet, there is no doubt that the sound is best with the speakers on the short wall. Others have reported the same, so I wonder why it is different for you.

@erik_squires : «Acoustic treatment in dimension of concern. Diffusion behind speakers and listeners, ceiling absorbers between speaker and listener». Well said. My experience also, as a main rule. Not too much treatment, though. I had to remove two thirds of the ceiling absorbers to get it right. And speaker positioning is even more important, to my mind.

@elliottbnewcombjr «primary factor is how much space behind the speakers.» Yes. My speakers like 5-6 feet from the wall for optimal depth. So even with a more conventional front-firer, I would try 4 feet at least.

@noromance «The speakers are completely gone in the 3D soundfield. Vinyl, tubes, Quad ESL57. I’m not sure how that translates into your set up but perhaps tubes might help.» Right, works well for me also, with my Audiokinesis speakers and tube system. The better the source, the larger the chance to hear depth and detail.

Someone wrote, I would like the audience applause in a live concert recording to sound in front of my speakers.

Not sure if I can reproduce this effect in my system. Will try. Suggested test recordings, anyone?

OP The depth behind the speakers is great, just not much in front of them- unless it’s one of those songs that has a part where it has that inverted phase trick. Then it washes over me. I want that all the time.

I guess you are talking about the tunnel sound or the mid-range far behind speakers. It happens when an audio system sounds unnatural which sound stage is far behind speakers. The speaker makers try to pull the sound forward but they can’t do it because the veil in front of sound images is already too forward and the veil irritates the listener. The actual mid-range is behind speaker, but the veil/glare is already hitting the face of the listener that makes sound very bright and noisy (left speaker in below video).

If an audio system sounds natural, the sound stage comes forward like the original music naturally.

Original music

A sample of natural sound system. Many systems can sound closer to this sound with right audio cables and some tweaks.   Alex/WTA

I think you should start with some basic treatments, the simple stuff that is unlikely to change. Diffusion on the rear wall, absorption on the side walls, absorption on the ceiling absorption behind you. Then report back on how that affects, your soundstage

I get that effect where the musicians are playing in the space in front of the speakers as well as the usual depth behind them. The speakers are completely gone in the 3D soundfield. Vinyl, tubes, Quad ESL57.  I'm not sure how that translates into your set up but perhaps tubes might help. 

I also made it over to my local audio shop and took a listen to this today. I’m not sure how good this system rates in the big picture. It consists of a $40K T+A integrated solid state amp, 30K Fyne speakers, Chord Dave DAC, one of the Hi-Fi Rose streamers, and all Nordost cabling. It sounded great, but in the end soundstage and depth were not too far apart from what I have at home. Here’s the setup I listened to:

and here’s my setup at home:

Interestingly, I came across this video tonight. I swear Paul can read my mind sometimes.

After watching Paul’s video, it sounds like what I’m hoping for can be found in a surround sound system, but that’s not my cup of tea. I’m becoming a bit of a purist at really like the simplicity of 2 channel. At some point, I hope to get speakers to where I can get rid of my 2 subs.