# Sticky  HTS Two-Channel Speaker Setup Guide for a Deep Soundstage



## AudiocRaver

*Abbreviations*

CCC - Cedar Creek Cinema, Sonnie's home-based cinema and 2-channel listening room
GM = Golden Mean, or Golden Ratio, which is 1.61803398875:1 ~ 1.618:1
GMP = Golden Mean Positioning, or positioning of speakers using Golden Mean guidelines
LP - Listening Position


*Introduction*

This will be a developing thread. Here is the quick start version, diagrams will follow.

The data and methods given here represent the best we have learned from Sonnie's Two-Channel Speaker Evaluation Events hosted by Sonnie at his home-based Cedar Creek Cinema (CCC). This guide was put together to help answer questions about speaker setup techniques learned during those events (links below). As further events occur and as pertinent additional information becomes available, it will be added to this guide.

$1,000 Speaker Evaluation Event, August 2013
$2,500 Speaker Evaluation Event, November 2013
$3,000 Speaker Evaluation Event, February 2014

Those events have been documented extensively, so they will not be discussed in this thread except where that discussion relates directly to stereo speaker setup for music.

Data from speaker setups in other rooms might be included if it clearly fits the approaches discussed.


*Conditions and Caveats*

These results occurred in certain room(s) with certain listening priorities. To summarize:

The primary goal is a wide, deep, detailed, cohesive, lifelike soundstage with sharp imaging and, where achievable, sharp soundstage depth acuity (few speakers can achieve really precise depth acuity, but when they do, your heart will stop - hopefully only for a moment).
The speakers go wherever they need to in order to sound their best, no consideration for WAF or convenience or pets or kids or anything else.
_Minor_ sacrifices in frequency response may result in following these recommendations:
Toe-in angles help accomplish the desired soundstage and usually put the listener off the tweeter axis, resulting in _minor_ high-frequency rolloff above 5 kHz - down 2 to 3 dB at 10 kHz, more above that.
Speaker positioning meant to minimize sensitivity to room modes has, up to this point, pretty much been ignored.

One might very well ask if there is any validity to assuming that these dimensions and ratios are at all universal. I have done detailed speaker setup work and achieve the desired soundstage and imaging results in many very different rooms and at multiple different LP/speaker arrangements in some of those rooms and the basic ratios and results have always ended up very close to those given here. In discussions with the evaluators at the CCC evaluation events they have indicated having similar experiences. So far there have been no major departures from these patterns. When there are, we will do our best to incorporate them in an informative way.

We are doing our best to convert the data into a useful rule-of-thumb setup guide format. But remember it all comes from the way certain speakers sounded to our ears and listening tastes in certain rooms. We hope our attempts here are useful, but they will certainly not apply to all. This is an experiment with the best of intentions, please take it as such.

There are many guides and approaches to room and speaker setup. This guide is specifically for reaching the goals stated above. We have ignored "equilateral triangle" rules and "aim at the listener" rules and rules that reduce room mode interaction and other considerations that common setup guides focus on, because they have different goals and do not help - in some cases they work against - the accomplishment of our defined goals. In putting this guide together, it was seen that the Golden Mean guidelines for reducing room mode interaction could be incorporated in determining logical setup _starting points_ for various rooms. But adjustments from those starting points will usually be necessary, negating those benefits partially or completely.

We appreciate meaningful feedback, but will limit folding in data to that which we are confident meets our criteria and is compatible with our approach to finding that ideal speaker location. For starters, there is one data point from work in my home listening room. The setup was determined totally by ear without referring to notes about setting up the same speakers at CCC a few weeks earlier. The configuration arrived at independently matched very closely what we came up with at CCC in parametric terms, according to our rule-of-thumb approach. A single data point of confirmation, hopefully more will follow.


*Defining our Terms*

There are two parts to our process:

Determine the Starting Points
Make Adjustments
There will be a diagram for this eventually. For now, imagine a big letter *T*. The top of the *T* is the line from center to center of the fronts of the speakers (B in our table below), along the _speaker plane_. The "stalk" of the *T* (A in our table) is the line from the ears at the Listening Position, starting at the _ear plane,_ to the center of that first line, the top of the *T*.

If your speakers are very close to front wall of your room (more guidance below), you will need to consider one more measurement. To illustrate it, we magically convert the letter *T* into a big *+* sign, with its vertical line going from the _ear plane_ to the wall straight in front of the listener (C in our table).

Here is what our data shows:
*Average B/A Ratio: 1.4* (ranges between 1.08 and 1.57)
*Average C/A Ratio: 2.2 for NON-DIPOLES* (ranges between 1.74 and 2.61)
*Average C/A Ratio: 2.0 for DIPOLES* (ranges between 1.59 and 2.31)

*But we are going to use a value of 2.4 for C, regardless of speaker type, not 2.0 or 2.2.* The reason follows...


*Incorporating the Cardas Golden Mean Guidelines*

In our experience, the C dimensions vary more than the A and B dimensions, and appear not to be super critical as long as C is "long enough." By increasing C only slightly from the values arrived at below, the speaker locations - if they can be set first and the LP can be placed accordingly, as in Option 1 below - line up with the popular Cardas Guidelines for room setup, minimizing room mode interaction. This is why the value for C is 2.4 for both dipoles and non-dipoles, rather than 2.0 and 2.2 seen below. From here forward, the value of C=2.4 will be used just to simplify matters.


*Decision Point: The Simple Way or The Complex Way?*

I have been told that I tend to over-complicate things. That might be true.

At CCC, the LP is fixed by room design, so that is our starting point when setting up speakers for evaluation. We have looked at Golden Mean Positioning of speakers, but the speakers almost always end up somewhere else for the best soundstage, so Golden Mean Positioning (GMP) of speakers is not a top priority.

Starting from the fixed LP and determining the starting point is easy for us. We have marked the spots where most speakers end up or thereabouts, and that is where we start. Easy. And, guess what, those spots fall right where A=1 and B=1.4. No surprise, our experience is what defined those values, as shown in the chart below.

The only reason the extra GMP calculations were added is this: if you have to figure all of this out from scratch for your room anyway, and have the flexibility to place the LP and the speakers wherever you want to, why not make a few extra calculations and make your starting points fall on GMP spots for your room? Maybe you will be lucky and with your speakers you will get the desired deep soundstage with the speakers on those very spots, and then you will have nice, even bass responses, too. Probably not, but maybe. It is worth the few minutes of extra effort to at least try, is it not?

But it does add extra complication that will probably be of little benefit to most. So my suggestion is this:

First time through, do it The Simple Way, with no GMP calculations, just to see how it works out with your speakers in your room and if you even like the results. If you do, then you can go about it the more complex way with the GMP calculations and _maybe_ get smoother bass response, too.


*Determine The Starting Points - The Simple Way*

Pick a spot for your LP.
Measure from there (center of head, right between the ears) to the wall in front of the LP. That value is C. A good value for C is 12 ft in a medium-large room.
Calculate A: C / 2.4 = A, the distance from the ear plane to the speaker plane, 5 ft in this example.
Calculate B: A x 1.4 = B, the center-to-center distance between the speakers (center of the baffle plate, the tweeter is a good reference), 7 ft in our example.
Place the speakers according to the definitions for A, B, and C.
Now skip down to *Make Adjustments* below.
That's it, The Simple Way. When you want to try The Complex Way, it is given next.....


*Determine The Starting Points - The Complex Way*

*Option 1 - Best - No Restrictions, Start with the Speaker Positions*

Starting with your room width as 3.130 units ((1 + 1.618 + 1) x (1.4 / 1.618)), a weird number, the logic follows) place the speakers spaced between the side walls using units of 0.866:1.4:0.866 (this would normally be expressed as 1:1.618:1, but we have multiplied these numbers by 1.4 / 1.618 or 0.866 in order to keep with our A = 1, B = 1.4, C = 2.4 starting point) and 1.4 units (C - A) away from the front wall (measure from the center of the tweeter). This is good for reducing room mode interaction. Use C = 2.4, which also makes A = 1.

For example, in a room 15.66 feet wide, speaker spacing would be 4.33 feet from side walls, 7 feet from the front wall, and 7 feet apart (B). The LP would be 12 feet from the front wall (C) and 5 feet from the speaker plane (A). Following the Golden Mean (1.618:1), this places the speaker positions with left/right room symmetry where they will be least affected by room modes.

This all works out in most rooms anyway. We suggest always keeping the LP at least 3 feet from the back wall and its reflections, so in some smaller rooms the A, B, and C values must be reduced, keeping the same ratios, until that 3 feet guideline is satisfied. Then the Golden Mean guidelines are no longer satisfied.

Now skip down to *Make Adjustments* below.

*Option 2 - 2nd Best - No Restrictions, Start with the Listening Position*

Place the center of head of the LP equally between the side walls, as room symmetry allows, and make the distance from the front wall - dimension C - equal to 2.4 units of measure and the distance from the back wall 1.48 units of measure. Set the distance from speaker to speaker at 1.4 units of length (dimension B), and the distance from the speaker plane to the LP at 1 unit (dimension A).

For example, if the room is 19.4 feet long, locate the listener's ears 12 feet back from the front wall (C), leaving another 7.4 feet to the back wall. The speakers will be spaced 7 feet apart (b) and the LP will be 5 feet from the speaker plane. Following the Golden Mean (1.618:1), this places the listening position with left/right room symmetry where it will be least affected by room modes.

This all works out in most rooms anyway. We suggest always keeping the speakers at least 3 feet from the side walls, so in some smaller rooms the A, B, and C values must be reduced, keeping the same ratios, until that 3 feet guideline is satisfied. Then the Golden Mean guidelines are no longer satisfied.

Now skip down to *Make Adjustments* below.

*Option 3 - 3rd Best - Other Conditions, Exceptions*

If the LP or speaker location is set, use it as your starting point and determine A, B, and C the best you can given that limitation, also following the other guidelines in Options 1 and 2 the best you can. Remember that C is not critical as long as it is "big enough," so if conditions force it to be bigger than 2.4, that is fine. The same applies to mid- or near-field monitoring in a large room.

When speaker spacing gets overly wide, the soundstage and center imaging fall apart. Large rooms might also force you to abandon Options 1 and 2 for that reason (this is also covered in the next section.) If so, use a smaller-spaced configuration, focusing on A and B and ignoring C if it goes above 2.4.

Now skip down to *Make Adjustments* below.


*Really Big Rooms*

Our experience has been in rooms with ceilings under 10 ft (the CCC ceiling is 8.5 ft high) and with side walls and front wall within "spitting distance" of the speakers. Soundstage development as we like to hear it depends on diffused reflections from these surfaces, along with the more diffused later reflections from the back of the room behind the LP. In very large rooms, very long rooms, or outside, it is unknown how well any of this applies.


*Make Adjustments*

With dipoles, point the speakers straight at the ears at the LP. While listening, adjust the angles outward by equal increments (check angle symmetry with a laser pointer along a flat surface of the speaker cabinet to reference points on the LP chair) until the soundstage with a strong center, tight imaging, and good depth - it will not take much of an angle change from the starting angles for this to happen with dipoles, probably only a few degrees.

With a non-dipole design, start with the speakers pointed straight forward, not at the LP at all, but at the back wall (0 toe-in), and adjust them inward by equal increments while listening until the soundtage appears with a strong center, tight imaging, and good depth. This could occur anywhere from a few degrees of toe-in to 25 or 30 degrees, highly dependent on the speaker dispersion pattern.

You are listening for a soundstage that extends well beyond the width of the speaker spacing, tight, clear imaging that does not move on different notes or smear on sibilants, and - here is the magic element - _you are not done until you achieve this_ - soundstage depth almost as deep as the width. With rare speakers, the acuity of the depth of positioning of voices and instruments will be down-to-the-inch precise in the depth dimension. In the width dimension this kind of precision is a minimum requirement for acceptable speakers, although many do not achieve it. Also pay attention to high-frequency response changes, as too wide an off-axis angle can cause excessive rolloff.

Make angular adjustments a few degrees at a time, or estimate an amount of change successive-approximation style. A $4 protractor might help, but mainly verify symmetry. Measure, measure, measure. A laser pointing device is a must, a laser measuring device is better. (Verify proper alignment of the laser within the body of the pointer.) Be precise to the inch, check angle symmetry to reference points at or around the LP to the inch, or - even better - to the back wall for greater sensitivity, assuming the relationship of your reference points to the LP have been measured or are known to be symmetrical by room design & construction.

After making an angle change, if you do not appear to have located the sweet spot at the LP, see if you can go and find it. Move around slowly while listening so you can determine how close you are to the sweet spot. Check the sound a few inches higher or lower, maybe much higher, or even in standing position. Be sure you have fond the right listening height for your speakers. Lean or move forward from the LP keeping your ears at the ideal height, like a "strutting rooster," move way up between the speakers, try behind the LP. Move your head side-to-side to see how sensitive the soundstage is to that movement. Experiment. Once you have located the best sweet spot for the current speaker setup, estimate how far the next adjustment should be to move it to the LP.

If the deep soundstage never happens, or if the center of soundstage seems weak or empty or has poor image clarity, start over with the speakers spaced closer together. If the deep soundstage occurs but you want to try to make it deeper, start over with the speakers spaced farther apart. If the angle adjustments seem too sensitive, start over with the speakers closer to the front wall, or the LP farther back from the speaker plane. If the angle adjustments do not seem to make much difference, start over with the speakers farther from the front wall, or the LP up closer to the speaker plane. If you notice excessive high-frequency rolloff, the off-axis angle is excessive (or the LP height might not be right), and you will need to adjust accordingly.

Tip: Drape a folded-up plushy blanket over the back of the LP seat if it has a back that approaches ear height. It will reduce reflections, improve the imaging and soundstage, and make them less susceptible to head movement and position.

When you find a setup that works, make careful measurements and write it all down, using reference marks for easy checks or resetting if something gets bumped or moved. Gaff tape for floor position and reference dots on the back wall for checking angle symmetry with a laser make a 10-second setup check possible. Do a quick setup check before every listening session.

Enjoy your great soundstage!:sn:


*Table of Setup Data*

Here is the data used to generate the spacing ratios.

The calculation of the A/B Ratio includes data for all speaker types. The calculation of the C/B Ratio is done with an averaging of values for only dipoles and a separate averaging of values for all non-dipoles.

No code has to be inserted here.
(18.21+1.46)/14~1.405=1.4
(22.65+1.81)/11=2.22364~2.2

No code has to be inserted here.
5.85/3=1.95~2.0

**** Conforms with Cardas Golden Mean Guidelines under some conditions, so C=2.4 is always used for convenience and simplification. Explained above.




Early Reflection Guidelines:

Perfect room symmetry is not absolutely necessary. General symmetry plus a few treatments probably do the trick. A room with longer RT60 times might have "unbalanced spaciousness" effects where one side sounds bigger than the other. My own listening area is far from symmetrical, but RT60 is quite low and I do not notice anything like this. With longer RT60, absorptive treatment can help balance this effect out.

Early reflections can really throw off the imaging and soundstage. Treatments here are very beneficial. My own rules for early reflections:

*Less than 5 mS (of additional delay relative to the delay of the direct wavefront from speaker to LP; on an impulse response plot, it will be easy to read that relative delay directly):* disruptive to image clarity, must be absorbed.
*Between 5 mS and 15 mS:* must be VERY summetrical (direction and delay time) and must be perceived as coming from the vertical line of sight from speaker to LP; if the reflections are NOT coming along the vertical line of sight from speaker to LP, or if not symmetrical, then either absorb or scatter them. Scatter them with a reflective surface pattern that does not reflect ANY of the sound directly at the LP (I have gotten into long arguments about this last point, but experiments have proven to me that it is very important for the best imaging, and I do not care what expert says otherwise, they are WRONG).
Example 1: ceiling reflections (flat ceiling) would be on that vertical line of sight, and might be only delayed by 8 mS or so, and would probably be highly symmetrical. They are OK, though, will not smear the image L or R, and will add a small amount of spaciousness to the sound, as well as some height info to the soundstage.
Example 2: in a symmetrical room, reflections off the side walls, if only a few feet from the speakers, would be symmetrical, and would fall within the 5 to 15 mS window, but would NOT be on the vertical speaker to LP line of sight, so imaging would be smeared and softened, so they are not OK. Absorb or scatter (see above).
Example 3: Reflective panels on the front wall on the vertical line of sight from LP to speaker could be angled so the reflections are on or very close to that line of sight and are very summetrical and fall in the specified delay range. These are OK, can enhance the soundstage and imaging. However, the natural reflection points on the front wall just inside those panels would not fall on that line of sight and would mess up the imaging. Absorb or scatter (see above) at those natural reflection points.

*More than 15 mS:* less critical. In general, better scattered, and the direction of reflection is not important, although randomized is better.



*Related Articles*

A Soundstage Enhancement Experience, refining and enhancing the soundstage and imaging with MartinLogan ESL hybrid electrostatic speakers in Sonnie Parker's Cedar Creek Cinema, March of 2015.


----------



## Mike0206

Thanks for all the work in putting that together Wayne! Nicely done!


----------



## Greenster

Thanks Wayne for putting this together for us. Some questions that I have is on the front wall.
Would you be able to place the speakers close to the front wall if you were to deaden it?


----------



## phreak

AudiocRaver said:


> *Abbreviations*
> 
> 
> *Option 1 - Best - No Restrictions, Start with the Speaker Positions*
> 
> Place the speakers spaced between the side walls using units of 0.866:1.4:0.866 and 1.4 units away from the front wall (measure from the center of the tweeter). This is good for reducing room mode interaction. Use C=2.4, which also makes A=1.
> 
> For example, in a room 15.66 ft wide, speaker spacing would be 4.33 feet from side walls, 7 feet from the front wall, and 7 feet apart (B). The LP would be 12 feet from the front wall (C) and 5 feet from the speaker plane (A). Following the Golden Mean (1.618:1), this places the speaker positions with left/right room symmetry where they will be least affected by room modes.
> 
> This all works out in most rooms anyway. We suggest always keeping the LP at least 3 ft from the back wall and its reflections, so in some smaller rooms the A, B, and C values must be reduced, keeping the same ratios, until that 3 ft guideline is satisfied. Then the Golden Mean guidelines are no longer satisfied.
> 
> *Option 2 - 2nd Best - No Restrictions, Start with the Listening Position*
> 
> Place the center of head of the LP equally between the side walls, as room symmetry allows, and make the distance from the front wall - dimension C - equal to 2.4 units of measure and the distance from the back wall 1.48 units of measure. Set the distance from speaker to speaker at 1.4 units of length (dimension B), and the distance from the speaker plane to the LP at 1 unit (dimension A).
> 
> For example, if the room is 19.4 ft long, locate the listener's ears 12 ft back from the front wall (C), leaving another 7.4 feet to the back wall. The speakers will be spaced 7 ft apart (b) and the LP will be 5 ft from the speaker plane. Following the Golden Mean (1.618:1), this places the listening position with left/right room symmetry where it will be least affected by room modes.


I'm usually pretty decent with math and this is pretty simple math, but I'm having trouble visualizing how the ratios are derived/applied. May I request a simple drawing to illustrate what is happening here? 0.866:1.4:0.866 isn't sinking in for a starting reference. What is defined as 1?


----------



## AudiocRaver

Greenster said:


> Thanks Wayne for putting this together for us. Some questions that I have is on the front wall.
> Would you be able to place the speakers close to the front wall if you were to deaden it?


With the goal of deep soundstage in mind, there was nothing we tried with speakers close to the wall that helped create it.

With dipoles placed well out into the room and giving the desired soundstage depth, placing an absorptive panel directly behind them to disrupt the rear wave will flatten that soundstage right out.

Some room behind the speakers seems to be a necessity for allowing that quality to develop.


----------



## AudiocRaver

phreak said:


> I'm usually pretty decent with math and this is pretty simple math, but I'm having trouble visualizing how the ratios are derived/applied. May I request a simple drawing to illustrate what is happening here? 0.866:1.4:0.866 isn't sinking in for a starting reference. What is defined as 1?


Diagrams will definitely follow, give me a few days.

I tried to do it so A is always = 1, B = 1.4, C = 2.4

They are the core dimensions, most important to getting that soundstage, so everything else builds around them, although the order of doing the calculations might be in reverse.

The 0.866 value then relates to B=1.4 by the Golden Mean (1.618): 1.4 / 1.618 = 0.866


----------



## AudiocRaver

Just added a couple of sections and - hopefully - clarified a few things.

Diagrams in a few days.


----------



## english210

Awesome write up!! Thanks. Good thing the phone has a calculator my room is not cooperating, though. My LP is 15' back from the front wall, but the room is only 12' wide, so I'd have the speakers in my wife's seat on the side couch to make the ratios work. . The speakers would be so close together, I'm leaning way forward to get close. But it's working for depth of stage, that's for sure!!!


----------



## AudiocRaver

Thanks. Yes, our "real-world" rooms often do not cooperate with our audio ideals. The A and B values and ratio and the speaker toe-in angle end up being the most important for odd-sized or odd-shaped rooms, as long as the speakers are well away from the walls. Perfect symmetry of distances and angles makes a big difference.


----------



## eddieg69

Not really sure how forums work, but here goes. Did you ever post the diagrams? If so how can I find them? Thought they would be part of this thread. Thanks for the guide will be checking out the Audyssey guide next.


----------



## AudiocRaver

eddieg69 said:


> Not really sure how forums work, but here goes. Did you ever post the diagrams? If so how can I find them? Thought they would be part of this thread. Thanks for the guide will be checking out the Audyssey guide next.


Have not done it yet, thanks for the reminder. There are a few areas of the guide I would like to update in the coming weeks, will add diagrams then.


----------



## fokakis1

I noticed the results being observed in the CCC shootouts. This peaked my curiosity so I gave it a try.

The depth you guys described was there for sure. It was as if I could peer in to the music beyond the speakers, while still pinpointing where each sound was coming from. This formula worked in my listening room.

I can't leave the speakers there, of course. Fortunately my sweet spot near the front wall (where B/A = 1.22) yields even better results with regard to depth acuity. It so happens to yield flatter frequency response as well. I may be able to credit this to the fact that I have 4" panels on the front wall behind each speaker. Also, the side wall 1st reflection points are non existing due to openings.

I've got pics but the app keeps crashing.


----------



## AudiocRaver

I am glad you gave it a shot and found a combination that works for you. That deep soundstage is something else, isn't it?

Happy listening!


----------



## Savjac

Very Very good guidelines, your attention to detail is something I will forever be amazed at. 
I think if we all follow these guidelines we will be in a much better place, even if small adaptations are needed, these numbers will bring us all so close to correct. 

This kind of takes the worry out of being an audio nut to be sure. Well Done Wayne. :hail:

Now can you also cure the neurosis ?? :rofl:


----------



## AudiocRaver

We are all more than a little bit crazy or we wouldn't be here.


----------



## NBPk402

Excellent write up! I am going to try this when I start building our garage Home Theater. I will have my 3 Klipsch La Scalas behind the screen but the cavity where the speaker will be will be around 4' deep. I know it will not be optimum but I hope it will allow me to get a deeper sound stage. I did something similar to this years ago when I had my Martin Logan Sequels, and I had an awesome sound stage. Thank you for bringing this up as it is definitely lacking in my current setup.


----------



## fokakis1

As you can see, the speakers were waaaaay out in to the room. The listening experience was "nearfield-like."


----------



## AudiocRaver

Love it. Getting that soundstage all around you is quite an experience!


----------



## fokakis1

This gave me a target sound to shoot for when determining final placement. Great thread by the way.


----------



## JoeESP9

I wish you guys had published this in 1976 when I bought my first Magneplanars. Yeah, I know there was no internet then.:bigsmile:

I'll be recommending this thread to others. You guys manage to do more for your posters than just about any other site. I just want you to know that I for one appreciate it.:T


----------



## AudiocRaver

Glad you think so. Thanks for the feedback.


----------



## Lumen

Hello AudiocRaver!
First off, Kudos for your innovative approach and eloquent write-up! :yay2:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start Sidebar

Is that proper forum etiquette? Why does everyone else refer to you as "Wayne" :huh: I guess I should start off by asking forgiveness for such transgressions :cop:. Please understand I'm fairly inexperienced with forums (hey, you can't expect all that much from an old geezer who got his first cell phone only a year ago) :unbelievable: !!! 

Aside from addressing you properly, I also mean to quote part of your message, and think I've followed the instructions, but I don't see it while writing my "Quick Reply." Have you guessed yet I'm from the "self-esteem" generation? :flex: 

When I hear from the forum-police :cop: I'll know I went too far :hide:

End Sidebar
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Frame of reference for the questions that follow:
My Revel Ultima Salon's (original model) have curved front baffles interrupted by artsy grill assemblies, sloped and rounded tops, as well as slanted backs. 

Now for my questions (which relate to laser alignment in case the intended quote doesn't appear):


I believe your intentions are to align speaker toe-in regardless of actual driver position or angle, correct? Results should be the same for odd-shape designs as for typical box enclosures, provided identical measurement criteria are afforded to both the left and right channels.

Soooooooo......


Given your emphasis on the importance of measurement accuracy, it seems crucial to have a reliable and repeatable method for laser mounting, especially in the case of polygonal and curved cabinet enclosures. Now my next question may not be realistic given the variety of available laser devices, but can you offer any guidelines for effective mounting techniques in those cases? Please don't say "duct tape"  I'm guessing a laser with bubble level to indicate relationship between speaker mounting surface and horizontal plane parallel to floor?

Thanks in advance for any advice!
Louie


----------



## AudiocRaver

BlueRockinLou said:


> Why does everyone else refer to you as "Wayne" :huh:


I use my regular name on the reviews I post on HTS, so I get referred to by that sometimes.



> Frame of reference for the questions that follow:
> My Revel Ultima Salon's (original model) have curved front baffles interrupted by artsy grill assemblies, sloped and rounded tops, as well as slanted backs.
> 
> Now for my questions (which relate to laser alignment in case the intended quote doesn't appear):
> 
> 
> I believe your intentions are to align speaker toe-in regardless of actual driver position or angle, correct? Results should be the same for odd-shape designs as for typical box enclosures, provided identical measurement criteria are afforded to both the left and right channels.


The assumption is that a speaker pair has left/right symmetry and they are being aligned to that symmetry.



> Soooooooo......
> 
> 
> Given your emphasis on the importance of measurement accuracy, it seems crucial to have a reliable and repeatable method for laser mounting, especially in the case of polygonal and curved cabinet enclosures. Now my next question may not be realistic given the variety of available laser devices, but can you offer any guidelines for effective mounting techniques in those cases? Please don't say "duct tape"  I'm guessing a laser with bubble level to indicate relationship between speaker mounting surface and horizontal plane parallel to floor?
> 
> Thanks in advance for any advice!
> Louie


Most of what is accomplished with lasers amounts to repeatability (the speaker is aimed the same as it was last time) and symmetry (left and right toe-in angles the same).

A *laser pointer* can do this pretty well. I like one that has a beefier body diameter so it is easy to grasp and handle, and a metal push-button switch (they last longer). You have to watch alignment of the laser in the body, many are not precisely aligned. You can check it by rolling it slowly on a counter top while holding the button on, and noting the range of up/down motion on a far wall. At the center of that range, the "reference" surface of the body of the pointer is touching the counter top. Mark it somehow and always orient it the same way when using it.

But it does need a flat side to rest on, and speaker designers generally do not think of our practical setup needs, or they might build lasers into their speakers to help us out.

Speakers that have all curved surfaces are good for sound and hard to align. We have worked with a few like that. The *laser distance meter* - like the Bosch DLR130K Digital Distance Measurer Kit - sometimes works better. The laser is well-aligned relative to all surfaces including the rear end. It can sit across a tweeter cone or, with a _very flat_ piece of wood taped to the back, across a midrange or woofer driver cone for alignment purposes. Sometimes a speaker cone is the only flat reference point available.

Strictly as a repeatability reference for each individual speaker, a *laser sight,* like the UTG Combat Quality Tactical Laser Sight with Adjustable Windage and Elevation can be attached with thick double-sided tape. This one has a pressure switch on a short cable so it can be activated without touching the laser itself. A target point on a wall allows for quick reference checks to ensure a speaker has not been moved or nudged.

Hope that helps.


----------



## kevin360

Wayne, I decided to try something which violates a couple of 'rules' which I took to be inviolable. All I can say is that it works brilliantly for Magnepan 3-series speakers (a number of us have recently adopted the arrangement and our results are uniformly excellent). It's specific to dipole designs that aren't of the single element variety. It's referred to as the HK/Limage setup, which places the speakers (tweeters to the inside of the room) quite close to the side walls with no toe-in at all - absolutely perpendicular to the side walls. The recipe calls for a placement which is approximately 40% into the room, but it seems to really only require somewhere between 8 and 9 feet off the front wall (I can get 8'7" with my cables).

I scoffed (inwardly) at the suggestion when I first read about it. After all, the manufacturer is pretty clear about _not_ setting their speakers up in such a fashion. Well, I must now feast on crow, because this has resulted in the most impressive soundstage I have _*EVER*_ experienced from a stereo system. I think one of the requirements is that the listening room should resemble a bowling alley as mine does - quite long and comparatively narrow.

The amazing thing is the variability of the scale, which always seems appropriate to the music being played. If I'm listening to a jazz ensemble or a string quartet, the sound is intimate, with accurately scaled instruments. If, on the other hand, I'm listening to something 'big', it can explode my room into a massively open space with sound apparently emanating from points in space which completely engulf me. In all cases, these large speakers _completely_ disappear, as do the confines of my room. I think the most impressive thing is that this amazing soundstage doesn't come at a price in any other area (I expected frequency response aberrations, but I don't perceive any - haven't done any measurements yet).

It's positively magical.


----------



## fokakis1

kevin360 said:


> Wayne, I decided to try something which violates a couple of 'rules' which I took to be inviolable. All I can say is that it works brilliantly for Magnepan 3-series speakers (a number of us have recently adopted the arrangement and our results are uniformly excellent). It's specific to dipole designs that aren't of the single element variety. It's referred to as the HK/Limage setup, which places the speakers (tweeters to the inside of the room) quite close to the side walls with no toe-in at all - absolutely perpendicular to the side walls. The recipe calls for a placement which is approximately 40% into the room, but it seems to really only require somewhere between 8 and 9 feet off the front wall (I can get 8'7" with my cables).
> 
> I scoffed (inwardly) at the suggestion when I first read about it. After all, the manufacturer is pretty clear about _not_ setting their speakers up in such a fashion. Well, I must now feast on crow, because this has resulted in the most impressive soundstage I have _*EVER*_ experienced from a stereo system. I think one of the requirements is that the listening room should resemble a bowling alley as mine does - quite long and comparatively narrow.
> 
> The amazing thing is the variability of the scale, which always seems appropriate to the music being played. If I'm listening to a jazz ensemble or a string quartet, the sound is intimate, with accurately scaled instruments. If, on the other hand, I'm listening to something 'big', it can explode my room into a massively open space with sound apparently emanating from points in space which completely engulf me. In all cases, these large speakers _completely_ disappear, as do the confines of my room. I think the most impressive thing is that this amazing soundstage doesn't come at a price in any other area (I expected frequency response aberrations, but I don't perceive any - haven't done any measurements yet).
> 
> It's positively magical.


That's awesome! I would expect that with a good set of Maggies, an open-opportunity floor plan, and gobs of time and patience one could achieve something very special. With Wayne pushing the envelope of experimentation I figured it was a matter of time before someone reported back with reports of audio nirvana. Kudos and enjoy!

Seth


----------



## AudiocRaver

Kevin360:

My wife is going to hate you. The only way I can try what you are suggesting is to totally empty out my living room. Hopefully some flowers and a few Amazon book orders will make things right on the homefront.

Actually it sounds like it might be similar in principle to what I stumbled on with the Martin Logan ESLs, with the rear reflected wave playing a much bigger role in the development of the soundstage. And there is a rear wave path which reflects off the sidewalls and then front wall, providing a little extra delay, which gives the soundstage a.very dense presence with incredible depth acuity.

You did not mention listener position relative to the other dimensions. Is it roughly twice as far from the front wall as the speakers are?

Interesting that you are not noticing high frequency rolloff from being off-axis as far as you are. The Maggie's are so directional. The rear wave is definitely making a difference in the perception of high frequencies and you are less off-axis in the reception of that rear wave off the front wall. And the tweeter to the inside of course is helping as well.

I appreciate the post. It sounds like you have experienced the kind of huge, deep, densely detailed soundstage that is almost mind altering and completely addictive. Our little speaker setup guide is due for an update, your information will certainly be included as a possible approach with dipole speakers. Thanks again.


----------



## kevin360

My listening position is fixed at 250” off the front wall, so it's a bit more than twice the distance from the front wall as the speakers. More importantly, that's 155” off the rear wall (~38% - a good distance for modal considerations). The plane of the speakers is 103” off the front wall, and the subs are positioned another 55” out (~38%). The outer edges of the speakers are 15” off the side walls, which is as close as I can get them due to ceiling shape. It's close enough to get a fair amount of side wall reinforcement of the bass.

I'd be surprised if this worked well with the MLs. The true ribbon tweeters are anything but directional, having nearly perfect 360 degree dispersion (well past 20KHz) – the benefit of being so narrow. Actually, one of the things that I feared was that the ribbons would become intolerably dominant, but that didn't happen. With a single element dipole, the off axis response is going to be a problem. At least, that's what I'd expect, but these Maggies keep violating my expectations (I've tried some weird things that worked), so what do I know?

I know one thing. This setup works exceedingly well with the 3-series Maggies (3.7s, in my case). Indeed, this (huge, deep, densely detailed soundstage) is _intoxicating_. For some time, I've coveted MBL's Radialstrahlers, but this arrangement images better than anything else I've ever heard – at least, in a long rectangular room.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Of course, I was forgetting the ribbon tweeters! That is obviously (now that you have reminded me!) why the HF response does not suffer.

As far as working with the MartinLogan design, my approach with them is to get the desired soundstage, then use a single HF shelf filter (in foobar2000) to lift the high end back up to almost flat. As far as reflection paths are concerned, it would seem they would create the soundstage pretty much the same.

Alas, my project backlog prevents me from barging into a new setup experiment right now. The approach, while not intuitively obvious, is certainly "sound,"  and confirms in a fashion that my own findings are valid and not total insanity! Thank you for the additional detail. I am certain you will enjoy the fruits of your experiment immensely!


----------



## Blacklightning

I followed your guide and I ended up losing a lot of low frequecies at the listening position. I ended up adding two large bookshelve speakers and an amp to my LFE channel and ran a 80hz cross over.

Are you guys really getting sub 60hz bass in your room with your speakers 6 feet off the front wall?

My setup is different now but this was my failed setup.

Note: 2 speakers on the floor (Left and right) close to the wall.


----------



## fokakis1

Blacklightning said:


> I followed your guide and I ended up losing a lot of low frequecies at the listening position. I ended up adding two large bookshelve speakers and an amp to my LFE channel and ran a 80hz cross over.
> 
> Are you guys really getting sub 60hz bass in your room with your speakers 6 feet off the front wall?
> 
> My setup is different now but this was my failed setup.
> 
> Note: 2 speakers on the floor (Left and right) close to the wall.


Did your soundstage change/improve? I have subs in all 4 corners. This allows me to place my mains for optimum soundstage while leaving the sub system to handle <80hz.


----------



## KLH007

Placing my planars as far from the wall as 6', and removing anything between them including a tall equipment rack and a TV, made a bigger improvement in soundstage than other acoustic treatments.


----------



## Blacklightning

fokakis1 said:


> Did your soundstage change/improve? I have subs in all 4 corners. This allows me to place my mains for optimum soundstage while leaving the sub system to handle <80hz.


Yes the soundstage did improve. I just missed out on the awesome bass my speakers made. I have since moved my speakers 1 foot back and added a real sub. (Paradigm Servo 15)



KLH007 said:


> Placing my planars as far from the wall as 6', and removing anything between them including a tall equipment rack and a TV, made a bigger improvement in soundstage than other acoustic treatments.


The TV is now gone and I do not know were I could place my equipment rack. Right now my equipment rack is dead center 16" off the front wall.


----------



## KLH007

Blacklightning, Your rack isn't as tall as some are, probably a minor issue, try throwing an absorptive blanket over the rack to see if soundstage changes? I've also found vibration isolation of electronics & speakers can help develop a better stage.


----------



## corradizo

No hope for inwall or on-wall speakers?


----------



## Blacklightning

Blacklightning said:


> I followed your guide and I ended up losing a lot of low frequecies at the listening position. I ended up adding two large bookshelve speakers and an amp to my LFE channel and ran a 80hz cross over.
> 
> Are you guys really getting sub 60hz bass in your room with your speakers 6 feet off the front wall?





corradizo said:


> No hope for inwall or on-wall speakers?


Well I ran some uncalibrated SPL dB readings with my phone and test tones and I found larger peeks and nulls with the speakers placed closer to the wall. Long story short my speakers are 6 1/2 feet off the back wall and the sound is more even but less "FUN". The funny thing is my speakers sound a lot more like my Beyerdinamic DT880 headphones when it comes to bass.

I'm going to live with this for a awhile before I integrate my sub. So for now full range speakers only... I'm going to miss 25, 32 and 40Hz.



corradizo said:


> No hope for inwall or on-wall speakers?


I would all so like to know what you guys think of Inwall on-wall speakers when it comes to sound stage.


----------



## corradizo

I bought some Behringer b212xl foolishly thinking my wife would come to love them. While I had them I thought they sounded great. I sold them this weekend, but before I did I followed this guide. It worked, although mostly with classical music. I didn't have a ton of time but what I did get dialed in was really impressive. 

It was like I was sitting in the audience up front and the orchestra was right in front of me, the violin was what seemed to be beyond the front wall and locked on all the notes coming from one spot to the side. Way cool!

Now I need to see if I can accomplish this with in wall or on walls... I will be building the 2pi speakers from pi speakers to either be in our on the walls.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Blacklightning said:


> I followed your guide and I ended up losing a lot of low frequecies at the listening position. I ended up adding two large bookshelve speakers and an amp to my LFE channel and ran a 80hz cross over.
> 
> Are you guys really getting sub 60hz bass in your room with your speakers 6 feet off the front wall?


With speakers well away from the front wall like we are talking about, any bass reinforcement from wall proximity is lost and you are pretty much stuck with the natural LF rolloff of the speakers as designed. One might consider this a tradeoff of the approach. Adding a sub or subs is the usual fix.



KLH007 said:


> Placing my planars as far from the wall as 6', and removing anything between them including a tall equipment rack and a TV, made a bigger improvement in soundstage than other acoustic treatments.


Agreed, that is exactly the way to get there. We are learning that the rear waves must be handled with as much care as the front waves, extra true with dipoles, but true for all speaker types (except horns). I hope to be updating this Setup Guide soon with that information..



Blacklightning said:


> Yes the soundstage did improve. I just missed out on the awesome bass my speakers made. I have since moved my speakers 1 foot back and added a real sub. (Paradigm Servo 15)
> 
> The TV is now gone and I do not know were I could place my equipment rack. Right now my equipment rack is dead center 16" off the front wall.


Of course the strong bass is missed, but the quality and degree of soundstage improvement can be huge. In your picture, the subwoofer on the right is where the reflection from the rear of the right speaker should be bouncing toward the listener. The soon-to-be-updated Setup Guide will talk about this in detail. Low, centered items away from the wall (a small rack or stack of gear) can usually be tolerated.


----------



## AudiocRaver

corradizo said:


> No hope for inwall or on-wall speakers?


I have only heard a few examples of in/on-wall speakers in use, and have heard at best only mediocre soundstage development - decent width but imaging not great and no soundstage depth at all. If soundstage and imaging are a priority, I would recommend staying away from in/on-wall speakers.

Of course there are rooms and situations where they are necessary or are strongly preferred for aesthetic reasons. If that is the case, you might consider a design where the enclosure floats so it can be aimed for the purpose of finding the best imaging and clearest soundstage.

But it is the delayed reflections coming from the front of the room that give the soundstage its depth, and they do not exist with a normal in/on-wall design.

Another possibility is to create the equivalent of those delayed signals electronically. Another future project.....


----------



## corradizo

AudiocRaver said:


> Another possibility is to create the equivalent of those delayed signals electronically. Another future project.....


That would be awesome!


----------



## Blacklightning

AudiocRaver said:


> Another possibility is to create the equivalent of those delayed signals electronically. Another future project.....


Or two speaker sized metal sheets two feet from the wall on each side of the speaker sending sound back to the wall. The other side of the sheet could be absorbent material. :unbelievable::rubeyes:


----------



## AudiocRaver

Blacklightning said:


> Or two speaker sized metal sheets two feet from the wall on each side of the speaker sending sound back to the wall. The other side of the sheet could be absorbent material. :unbelievable::rubeyes:


Of course you are joking. But it is just the kind of crazy experiment I might try. You would not believe...

Think I will stick to the electronic version this time, the cleanup will be much simpler!:bigsmile:


----------



## bkeeler10

Ah Wayne, you are the mad scientist, the Dr. Emmett Brown, of audio! Of course, only the Doc could have figured out how to build a time machine!


----------



## Audiodreamer

> Determine The Starting Points - The Complex Way
> 
> Option 1 - Best - No Restrictions, Start with the Speaker Positions
> 
> Starting with your room width as 3.130 units ((1 + 1.618 + 1) x (1.4 / 1.618)), a weird number, the logic follows) place the speakers spaced between the side walls using units of 0.866:1.4:0.866 (this would normally be expressed as 1:1.618:1, but we have multiplied these numbers by 1.4 / 1.618 or 0.866 in order to keep with our A = 1, B = 1.4, C = 2.4 starting point) and 1.4 units (C - A) away from the front wall (measure from the center of the tweeter). This is good for reducing room mode interaction. Use C = 2.4, which also makes A = 1.
> 
> For example, in a room 15.66 feet wide, speaker spacing would be 4.33 feet from side walls, 7 feet from the front wall, and 7 feet apart (B). The LP would be 12 feet from the front wall (C) and 5 feet from the speaker plane (A). Following the Golden Mean (1.618:1), this places the speaker positions with left/right room symmetry where they will be least affected by room modes.
> 
> This all works out in most rooms anyway. We suggest always keeping the LP at least 3 feet from the back wall and its reflections, so in some smaller rooms the A, B, and C values must be reduced, keeping the same ratios, until that 3 feet guideline is satisfied. Then the Golden Mean guidelines are no longer satisfied.
> 
> Now skip down to Make Adjustments below.
> 
> Option 2 - 2nd Best - No Restrictions, Start with the Listening Position
> 
> Place the center of head of the LP equally between the side walls, as room symmetry allows, and make the distance from the front wall - dimension C - equal to 2.4 units of measure and the distance from the back wall 1.48 units of measure. Set the distance from speaker to speaker at 1.4 units of length (dimension B), and the distance from the speaker plane to the LP at 1 unit (dimension A).
> 
> For example, if the room is 19.4 feet long, locate the listener's ears 12 feet back from the front wall (C), leaving another 7.4 feet to the back wall. The speakers will be spaced 7 feet apart (b) and the LP will be 5 feet from the speaker plane. Following the Golden Mean (1.618:1), this places the listening position with left/right room symmetry where it will be least affected by room modes.
> 
> This all works out in most rooms anyway. We suggest always keeping the speakers at least 3 feet from the side walls, so in some smaller rooms the A, B, and C values must be reduced, keeping the same ratios, until that 3 feet guideline is satisfied. Then the Golden Mean guidelines are no longer satisfied.


Hello all! If only I knew half as much as I thought. The simple way seemed simple enough, however the complex, for my simple mind needs a little more clarity with the calculations/ratios. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks
Read more: http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...etup-guide-deep-soundstage.html#ixzz3IcHlpclJ


----------



## AudiocRaver

I wholeheartedly agree. Hoping to do an update in the next few months.


----------



## fokakis1

AudiocRaver said:


> I wholeheartedly agree. Hoping to do an update in the next few months.


I'm looking forward to the update.


----------



## AudiocRaver

A related article was posted recently, A Soundstage Enhancement Experience, refining and enhancing the soundstage and imaging with MartinLogan ESL hybrid electrostatic speakers in Sonnie Parker's Cedar Creek Cinema, March of 2015. Some new techniques are covered which will eventually be covered in an update to this Guide.


----------



## inline_phil

Interesting...for solid rectangular rooms this should work nicely. Good stuff! Have a few questions.

In my experience, few listening rooms are solid rectangles where 3 are typically rectangular walls and one asymmetrically opened to another room. Say for example the RH wall is asymmetrical or contains some sort of non-linear feature (sloped ceiling, bay window, etc.?). What adjustments/considerations should be made? Second Q is, what effects do doors have on your scenario?


----------



## tesseract

inline_phil said:


> Interesting...for solid rectangular rooms this should work nicely. Good stuff! Have a few questions.
> 
> In my experience, few listening rooms are solid rectangles where 3 are typically rectangular walls and one asymmetrically opened to another room. Say for example the RH wall is asymmetrical or contains some sort of non-linear feature (sloped ceiling, bay window, etc.?). What adjustments/considerations should be made? Second Q is, what effects do doors have on your scenario?


I have such a room, wall with windows on the left side, 7 ft. wide opening to the kitchen on the right. So basically, I have only one early side wall reflection point, where I placed a Lazy Boy with blankets and a pillow on the back rest, giving me a large, 4 1/2 ft. tall treatment of sorts. It traps the sound, keeping the wall/window reflection from reaching the listening position. It works well, bringing a measure of symmetry, but I still have a few channel imbalances showing in measurements. It is not terrible, but...


Not satisfied with that, and I am working with GIK Acoustics to dial in the room. Amongst the treatments I am ordering, will be a 24″ x 60″ x 4″ Free Stand Bass Trap panel for the left wall. This and the chair will help simulate the doorway on the right.

Furniture works, room treatments are better. You can build your own or get some ready made. It is best to use measurements to guide the process, and talking to an acoustician can be helpful, as well.

We have an acoustics sub forum dedicated to that purpose, if you'd like the advice of professionals here at HTS.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Where there are doors, odd room shapes, and other such variables, they are definitely more of a factor in a more reverberant room. In a room with carpeting, any significant amount of acoustical treatment, lots of draperies, anything that gives a fair amount of sound absorption and keeps the reverb time low, I have found them to be much less of a factor, almost to the point of ignoring them.

Except, as Dennis (Tesseract) has shown with his room, eliminating asymmetrical early reflections is big, as is reflection control in general. More needs to be added to the Guide about that.

A large alcove or hallway off to one side, if it contains no acoustical treatments and has lots of reflective surfaces, would tend to distort and clutter the soundstage and imaging. There is no solution in terms of speaker positioning. If your asymmetrical situation is anything like that, the only real solution is treatment to reduce reverb time.

If your room has low reverb times and no early reflection problems, then the asymmetry might not trouble you. It is also dependent upon how picky a listener you are. For most listeners, I believe the above is a good guideline to start with.


----------



## FargateOne

Dear Wayne,
my sound system for music is hupstair and my HT is in the basement of our house. As I reported in an other thread, your suggestion for a 2 channels made marvels downstairs .
So I decided to try it with my stereo upstairs. Again, I have more depth in the sound stage; specially with a full orchestra for instance.
Your speakers setting does not respect the isocele triangle rule that everybody recommend
It is a surprise. Difficult to explain.


----------



## AudiocRaver

The only explanation I can think of is that those who recommend the - I think you meant equilateral triangle, beg pardon if I misunderstood - have never HEARD a truly great soundstage, which is far more engaging than good frequency response on its own.

I am tickled that you have had such success! Thanks for the feedback.


----------



## FargateOne

Your are right, I meant equilateral triangle.
Like I said on an other thread, I am passionnate about listenning music since I am 15. At 25 I had a very good 2 channels sound system. I got married, 5 children later, no time for music; I sold it. And 6 years ago I went back to sound with HT downstairs and a 2 channels upstairs for music (not as good as the old one but quite respectfull Arcam amp, Arcam cd player and middle range B&W). I have always respected the equilateral triangle rule for the fronts thinking that it was the only way to get a good stage image.
...but now I am in NHL!!
I thank you very much to share all your research on this forum. If it was only for this change in my settings I would have been more than happy .
Wow!
...(again, forgive my english.)


----------



## Blacklightning

Sorry posted incorrectly.


----------



## bkeeler10

So I was reading this article linked from Home Theater Review, and it reminded me of this thread and the quest for superb soundstage and imaging. As I read about his experience with his soundstage falling apart, I immediately thought of Wayne and his patience in getting things set up just so for a fantastic result. Very small differences in speaker placement can make a big difference in SS&I, and this guy found that out. Interesting read.


----------



## wes

Look at page 5, 6 ,7, 8 

http://www.dynaudio.com/media/1923/dyn_focus_manual.pdf

This can also be useful http://www.focal.com/usa/en/content/571-focal-tools


----------



## AudiocRaver

Thanks for the link and the heads up.

The Dynaudio instructions are typical of the recommendations usually given, and in my experience are not even a particularly good starting point for most speakers. That includes the Dynaudio speakers we evaluated in our Official $2,500 Speaker Evaluation / Home Audition Event.


----------



## wes

AudiocRaver said:


> Thanks for the link and the heads up. The Dynaudio instructions are typical of the recommendations usually given, and in my experience are not even a particularly good starting point for most speakers. That includes the Dynaudio speakers we evaluated in our Official $2,500 Speaker Evaluation / Home Audition Event.


OK, so what are the best instruction I want to learn :nerd:


----------



## AudiocRaver

Although this guide is badly in need of an update, it is my best first shot at a setup guide that puts soundstage and imaging first, if that is your goal.


----------



## NBPk402

Question...

We have a 15' wide AT screen with our speakers behind it...with the horns being 3' wide each (Bass Bins are almost 5' wide, and are under the Horns) for our LCR. I currently have the L+R each angled to the MLP. The room sounds great but I usually listen to it from the 2nd row even though it was tuned from the first row.

The last few days I have been listening from the MLP, and noticed that the imaging moves when I go to get up, as does the tonality. Since my speakers are so wide, and take up the whole wall...would it be better to not angle the speakers?

I am thinking that since the first row seating is 12', and the 2nd row 17' that the sound stage might go wider if I do not angle them. If it does make the sound stage wider will it also make it less deep? All of my speakers are horns, or horn loaded including the subs.


----------



## arkiedan

I've owned decent mid-range speakers since I was a young man way back in the fifties and I've always set them up using the speaker placement that virtually every speaker manufacturer recommended; the equilateral triangle. That is, until I started reading some of the speaker shootout material here at HTS. The first thing I noticed was that all of the speakers were setup wider and nearer to the primary listening position than I'd ever seen before. That, coupled with Wayne's excellent articles on speaker placement, got me thinking "What do you have to lose? Try some of these recommendations." Fortunately, I have the luxury of doing whatever I want (can afford) in my media room and so pulling speakers out to what appears to be the center of the room is no problem. The wife has her space and I have mine.

And so began the lengthy process of moving my Ascend Sierras slowly out into the room, moving them wider and wider and nearer and nearer to the my primary seat in fraction of an inch increments. I'll admit I began to get a little alarmed as they encroached on the room more and more. Still, there was no denying the fact that they were sounding better and better. My old standard of looking for great response soon gave way to the terrific soundstage and imaging I was hearing. By the way; as I set them wider and wider I was constantly worrying about a "hole in the middle" of the stereo image but it never happened. The stage was spread cleanly across the front and instruments and sections were exactly where they should be.

The sound of a symphony orchestra, played through a setup like this, was fantastic, with the soundstage spread wide beyond the speakers, and with pinpoint imaging. Frankly, I stopped focusing on frequency response because it was just there. The downside is that many old vinyl rock recordings were engineered so badly as to be nearly a joke, with no attempt at proper stereo imaging. But that's okay! Classical music is where I am now and I listen to little else.

And by the way; the $1,000 speaker shootout led me to my present Martin-Logan Motion 12s (many thanks to the guys involved) and, like the shootout noted, properly setup they sound wonderful! In spite of their fairly small size they do dominate the room. Ahhhh....but the sound! The Cleveland Orchestra never sounded better. 

I'll admit I initially positioned them in the time-honored triangle but it didn't take long for me to realize what I was missing. At that point they began their slow, inch by inch, journey out into the room. The wife still watches TV and movies (when I'm not listening to music) and she can only shake her head, completely puzzled, at my setup. Me? I can only laugh. It was her deal when we bought this house; if she got a craft room the media room was MINE! I couldn't be happier with _her_ arrangement.

All this is to say tha speaker manufacturer placement recommendations are compromizes that try (unsuccessfully in my view) to fit into every listening space. My Motions, placed where Martin-Logan recommended, sound just OK, nothing more. But, after working with them a day or two they now sound great. I couldn't ask for better sound within my budget. 

So, my recommendation is to first con your wife into giving you free rein to setup your two-channel system however you want. How do you do that? Quid pro quo! Man! Promise her something nice if she'll remain quiet while you fill the center of_ your _room with speakers. Nothing to it!

My music system is fairly basic:

Denon AVR3313ci AVR
Martin-Logan Motion 12 L/R
Epik Vanquish 12" sealed subwoofer

And my newest favorite: Plex Music Server (my entire music library burned to flac files)

Funny? I didn't mention and I don't listen to surround sound hardly at all anymore, except for my Sony Blu Ray player and it's good 5-channel or 7-channel sound. For me, two-channel fills the room beautifully without augmentation. And that's what careful main speaker placement has done for me. 

I'm a happy old man! lddude:lddude:lddude:


----------



## bkeeler10

^^ Great post! 

We'll probably be moving within the next year or so, and I am really hoping to find a place that allows me to have free reign in my listening room as you have in yours. Then I will be trying the same things, which in my present room are completely impractical even in my view.


----------



## AudiocRaver

arkiedan said:


> I've owned decent mid-range speakers since I was a young man way back in the fifties and I've always set them up using the speaker placement that virtually every speaker manufacturer recommended; the equilateral triangle. That is, until I started reading some of the speaker shootout material here at HTS. The first thing I noticed was that all of the speakers were setup wider and nearer to the primary listening position than I'd ever seen before. That, coupled with Wayne's excellent articles on speaker placement, got me thinking "What do you have to lose? Try some of these recommendations." Fortunately, I have the luxury of doing whatever I want (can afford) in my media room and so pulling speakers out to what appears to be the center of the room is no problem. The wife has her space and I have mine.
> 
> And so began the lengthy process of moving my Ascend Sierras slowly out into the room, moving them wider and wider and nearer and nearer to the my primary seat in fraction of an inch increments. I'll admit I began to get a little alarmed as they encroached on the room more and more. Still, there was no denying the fact that they were sounding better and better. My old standard of looking for great response soon gave way to the terrific soundstage and imaging I was hearing. By the way; as I set them wider and wider I was constantly worrying about a "hole in the middle" of the stereo image but it never happened. The stage was spread cleanly across the front and instruments and sections were exactly where they should be.
> 
> The sound of a symphony orchestra, played through a setup like this, was fantastic, with the soundstage spread wide beyond the speakers, and with pinpoint imaging. Frankly, I stopped focusing on frequency response because it was just there. The downside is that many old vinyl rock recordings were engineered so badly as to be nearly a joke, with no attempt at proper stereo imaging. But that's okay! Classical music is where I am now and I listen to little else.
> 
> And by the way; the $1,000 speaker shootout led me to my present Martin-Logan Motion 12s (many thanks to the guys involved) and, like the shootout noted, properly setup they sound wonderful! In spite of their fairly small size they do dominate the room. Ahhhh....but the sound! The Cleveland Orchestra never sounded better.
> 
> I'll admit I initially positioned them in the time-honored triangle but it didn't take long for me to realize what I was missing. At that point they began their slow, inch by inch, journey out into the room. The wife still watches TV and movies (when I'm not listening to music) and she can only shake her head, completely puzzled, at my setup. Me? I can only laugh. It was her deal when we bought this house; if she got a craft room the media room was MINE! I couldn't be happier with her arrangement.
> 
> All this is to say tha speaker manufacturer placement recommendations are compromizes that try (unsuccessfully in my view) to fit into every listening space. My Motions, placed where Martin-Logan recommended, sound just OK, nothing more. But, after working with them a day or two they now sound great. I couldn't ask for better sound within my budget.
> 
> So, my recommendation is to first con your wife into giving you free rein to setup your two-channel system however you want. How do you do that? Quid pro quo! Man! Promise her something nice if she'll remain quiet while you fill the center of your room with speakers. Nothing to it!
> 
> My music system is fairly basic:
> 
> Denon AVR3313ci AVR
> Martin-Logan Motion 12 L/R
> Epik Vanquish 12" sealed subwoofer
> 
> And my newest favorite: Plex Music Server (my entire music library burned to flac files)
> 
> Funny? I didn't mention and I don't listen to surround sound hardly at all anymore, except for my Sony Blu Ray player and it's good 5-channel or 7-channel sound. For me, two-channel fills the room beautifully without augmentation. And that's what careful main speaker placement has done for me.
> 
> I'm a happy old man! lddude:lddude:lddude:


Thank you for the very detailed post. I am absolutely tickled with your results. You have totally made my week.


----------



## tonyvdb

AudiocRaver said:


> Thank you for the very detailed post. I am absolutely tickled with your results. You have totally made my week.


couldn't agree more. That was a great read and I can totally see you sitting in the room moving the spoeakers and sitting and then moving more


----------



## AudiocRaver

ellisr63 said:


> Question...
> 
> We have a 15' wide AT screen with our speakers behind it...with the horns being 3' wide each (Bass Bins are almost 5' wide, and are under the Horns) for our LCR. I currently have the L+R each angled to the MLP. The room sounds great but I usually listen to it from the 2nd row even though it was tuned from the first row.
> 
> The last few days I have been listening from the MLP, and noticed that the imaging moves when I go to get up, as does the tonality. Since my speakers are so wide, and take up the whole wall...would it be better to not angle the speakers?
> 
> I am thinking that since the first row seating is 12', and the 2nd row 17' that the sound stage might go wider if I do not angle them. If it does make the sound stage wider will it also make it less deep? All of my speakers are horns, or horn loaded including the subs.


First I will say that for your setup, horns are probably the best choice. My experience is that they make the imaging and soundstage much less room dependent than any other kind of speaker, benefiting you by their location, close to the wall at the front of the room, and also because of the size of your room.

It might not be as clear as it should be in the Setup Guide, but horn seem to give the best sound stage and imaging with the listening position on the speaker axis, as a general rule. That means quite a bit of toe in. The situation you describe has them actually toed in a little beyond that point with you sitting in the second row. I could see that effectively making the normal rock steadiness of the soundstage that you would get with horns perhaps somewhat more susceptible to listening position variation. I would start with repositioning them for straight on axis at the listening position in the second row and see if that takes care of your problem. Even less toe in is certainly a possibility though. Clear out to the possibility of leaving them straight ahead with no toe in. I'm going to guess that you'll probably prefer a more on axis sound with some toe in, but we will be interested in hearing your conclusions.


----------



## AudiocRaver

ellisr63 said:


> Question...
> 
> We have a 15' wide AT screen with our speakers behind it...with the horns being 3' wide each (Bass Bins are almost 5' wide, and are under the Horns) for our LCR. I currently have the L+R each angled to the MLP. The room sounds great but I usually listen to it from the 2nd row even though it was tuned from the first row.
> 
> The last few days I have been listening from the MLP, and noticed that the imaging moves when I go to get up, as does the tonality. Since my speakers are so wide, and take up the whole wall...would it be better to not angle the speakers?
> 
> I am thinking that since the first row seating is 12', and the 2nd row 17' that the sound stage might go wider if I do not angle them. If it does make the sound stage wider will it also make it less deep? All of my speakers are horns, or horn loaded including the subs.


First I will say that for your setup, horns are probably the best choice. My experience is that they make the imaging and soundstage much less room dependent than any other kind of speaker, benefiting you by their location, close to the wall at the front of the room, and also because of the size of your room.

It might not be as clear as it should be in the Setup Guide, but horn seem to give the best sound stage and imaging with the listening position on the speaker axis, as a general rule. That means quite a bit of toe in. The situation you describe has them actually toed in a little beyond that point with you sitting in the second row. I could see that effectively making the normal rock steadiness of the soundstage that you would get with horns perhaps somewhat more susceptible to listening position variation. I would start with repositioning them for straight on axis at the listening position in the second row and see if that takes care of your problem. Even less toe in is certainly a possibility though. Clear out to the possibility of leaving them straight ahead with no toe in. I'm going to guess that you'll probably prefer a more on axis sound with some toe in, but we will be interested in hearing your conclusions.


----------



## FargateOne

You know what? Since I am a member of this forum, I sold my Yamy (will replace it soon) but in the mean time, I have put my B&W in my home theater system, and run it with me stereo amp Arcam A80 (which is for sale btw !). And guest what! I can wait because of a very good SS&I since I read Waynes recommandations and get rid of the equilateral triangle law !! Of course I will have a 5.1 opne day but I can wait even when I am listenning movies!!:rofl::neener::spend:


----------



## AudiocRaver

FargateOne said:


> You know what? Since I am a member of this forum, I sold my Yamy (will replace it soon) but in the mean time, I have put my B&W in my home theater system, and run it with me stereo amp Arcam A80 (which is for sale btw !). And guest what! I can wait because of a very good SS&I since I read Waynes recommandations and get rid of the equilateral triangle law !! Of course I will have a 5.1 opne day but I can wait even when I am listenning movies!!:rofl::neener::spend:


Thank you, another great testimony that we are not totally insane with all the things we have tried and reported around here. So often it seems that our recommendations are just met with shrugs like, you guys are just insane, everybody said to do it the triangle way. But when someone actually tries our approach and finds that it works, it is great to hear about it. Welcome to the insanely magical and satisfying soundstage and imaging club.


----------



## subwoofery

What do you guyz think about Gedlee's suggestion for his horn speaker? 
Having like speakers 10 feet apart and being further apart than that (like 14-16 feet) 

As always, keeping sides clear if possible @ about 3.3 feet out and 5 feet min from the front wall. 

When I use your calculation for my small room, I get a much different result. 

Just asking coz I don't have my speakers yet but am planning coz that will determine the size of my projection screen  

Understand his speakers are not dipole like I'm planning to (Spatial M4) 

Thanks, 
Kelvin


----------



## AudiocRaver

Horns have their own set of rules. They are much less room dependent than other speaker types. They usually work well with enough toe-in to put the LP right on the axis of the tweeter, and can be placed very wide. I can see those guidelines working very well.


----------



## Savjac

I have horn speakers in my system and I can say that in some ways they do differ from the non horn speakers. They can be placed quite widely and still work fine but using your common sense methods of this forum, they will truly dial in quite well and give an excellent sound stage bearing in mind that one has to have the proper equipment in the first place that would allow one to decode same.

I have found that in my room, 16' wide by 23' long, I place my speakers about 9' apart and I sit 9' back. They are several feet from the wall behind them and about 2' in from the walls.
If I leave them speakers perpendicular to the front wall they have a very nice sound, kind of mellow for a horn speaker but the soundstage can be somewhat diffuse. If I toe them in to the point wherein the tweeters, not just the horn, face my ears then the high end goes away and the sound stage dies. So at this point I found a happy set up with the speakers toed in about 12° from straight and slightly elevated at the front end of the speaker cabinet and I get a wonderful stable soundstage with excellent center fill. The only real downside I notice is that on occasion singers and instruments located directly in the middle of the sound field will bloat a bit, making them sound the giant players, and this seems to be dependent on the frequency of the voice and how close they may be to the mic. 

The good thing about the horns are they are so very efficient and have dynamic swings that are tremendous. The bigger horn speakers are not always very good at playing very delicate as do the Martin Logans, but once again, a minor complaint.


----------



## subwoofery

Savjac said:


> I have horn speakers in my system and I can say that in some ways they do differ from the non horn speakers. They can be placed quite widely and still work fine but using your common sense methods of this forum, they will truly dial in quite well and give an excellent sound stage bearing in mind that one has to have the proper equipment in the first place that would allow one to decode same.
> 
> I have found that in my room, 16' wide by 23' long, I place my speakers about 9' apart and I sit 9' back. They are several feet from the wall behind them and about 2' in from the walls.
> If I leave them speakers perpendicular to the front wall they have a very nice sound, kind of mellow for a horn speaker but the soundstage can be somewhat diffuse. If I toe them in to the point wherein the tweeters, not just the horn, face my ears then the high end goes away and the sound stage dies. So at this point I found a happy set up with the speakers toed in about 12° from straight and slightly elevated at the front end of the speaker cabinet and I get a wonderful stable soundstage with excellent center fill. The only real downside I notice is that on occasion singers and instruments located directly in the middle of the sound field will bloat a bit, making them sound the giant players, and this seems to be dependent on the frequency of the voice and how close they may be to the mic.
> 
> The good thing about the horns are they are so very efficient and have dynamic swings that are tremendous. The bigger horn speakers are not always very good at playing very delicate as do the Martin Logans, but once again, a minor complaint.


So you have your setup @ 9' apart and 9' back... interesting. 

Gedlee suggested when using horn speakers to sit further back - having the speakers toe in and have the on axis cross in front of you so it's not aligned to your ears @ all. 

Kelvin


----------



## NBPk402

subwoofery said:


> So you have your setup @ 9' apart and 9' back... interesting.
> 
> Gedlee suggested when using horn speakers to sit further back - having the speakers toe in and have the on axis cross in front of you so it's not aligned to your ears @ all.
> 
> Kelvin


That would explain why my horns sound better in the 2nd row than the front. I have been debating about not toeing them since the horns are 3' wide, and i have 3 of them behind a 15' wide AT screen. What I am thinking is that the natural angle of the Butt cheek JBLs would still intersect before the MLP. What I don't know is whether this would cause my soundstage to get wider at the expense of the depth.


----------



## Savjac

Thank you for bringing this up as I do respect Gedlee and his findings and I guess now that you mention it, I should try toeing them in like you said. I do not understand why that would work but what the he is a smarter man than I in this subject. As far as sitting back further from the speakers, that I have done and it does work, good sound still abounds there. However, my choices are more room dependent that anything else. I love a good sounstage second only to authentic sonics and if I sit back too far the bass becomes less solid as there is a dip in the bass. If I move the speakers further into the room so I can sit back further then I get a bump upward in the bass region and it sounds rather icky.

I guess I have settled for something in the middle. I would really love to hear his speakers some day as his horns are so well made compared to mine and would most probably work much better.

Oh and I remeasured and the speakers are 10' apart and my chair is about 10' out.


----------



## Savjac

ellisr63 said:


> That would explain why my horns sound better in the 2nd row than the front. I have been debating about not toeing them since the horns are 3' wide, and i have 3 of them behind a 15' wide AT screen. What I am thinking is that the natural angle of the Butt cheek JBLs would still intersect before the MLP. What I don't know is whether this would cause my soundstage to get wider at the expense of the depth.


I have found with mine, which are truly small compared to yours, that leaving them positioned flat to the MLP will give you the widest and in some ways nicest sonic field with sound field width for days when listening to music. On the other side, if they are far apart you may loose some solid images within the sound field between the speakers, especially the center fill. As I do like the wide sound field I also like the pinpoint accuracy within that field between the speakers so I have again compromised and toed my in 12 degrees. This way I tend to get both with a center image that is almost reach out and touchable.


----------



## NBPk402

Savjac said:


> I have found with mine, which are truly small compared to yours, that leaving them positioned flat to the MLP will give you the widest and in some ways nicest sonic field with sound field width for days when listening to music. On the other side, if they are far apart you may loose some solid images within the sound field between the speakers, especially the center fill. As I do like the wide sound field I also like the pinpoint accuracy within that field between the speakers so I have again compromised and toed my in 12 degrees. This way I tend to get both with a center image that is almost reach out and touchable.


My MLP is 12' from the center JBL.... I only have about 6' total space between all 3 front horns (about 3' between horns). I am going to have to mark where they are and try them parallel to the AT Screen, and see what happens to the sound stage.:T


----------



## subwoofery

Savjac said:


> Thank you for bringing this up as I do respect Gedlee and his findings and I guess now that you mention it, I should try toeing them in like you said. I do not understand why that would work but what the he is a smarter man than I in this subject. As far as sitting back further from the speakers, that I have done and it does work, good sound still abounds there. However, my choices are more room dependent that anything else. I love a good sounstage second only to authentic sonics and if I sit back too far the bass becomes less solid as there is a dip in the bass. If I move the speakers further into the room so I can sit back further then I get a bump upward in the bass region and it sounds rather icky.
> 
> I guess I have settled for something in the middle. I would really love to hear his speakers some day as his horns are so well made compared to mine and would most probably work much better.
> 
> Oh and I remeasured and the speakers are 10' apart and my chair is about 10' out.


When using Gedlee's method, it's probably why you need to use his second suggestion: multiple subwoofers in order to smooth out the peaks and dips in the low frequencies and even out the bass from the MLP as well as other LP 

Kelvin


----------



## subwoofery

ellisr63 said:


> My MLP is 12' from the center JBL.... I only have about 6' total space between all 3 front horns (about 3' between horns). I am going to have to mark where they are and try them parallel to the AT Screen, and see what happens to the sound stage.:T


Would love to know if you sound improves... Would feel better knowing that my small question could help someone achieve sonic nirvana  

Kelvin


----------



## macddmac

Any thoughts on a diagonal setup in a square room? 
10x10x9 ish office with Dynaudio focus 110's 
Thanks in advance!
Mac


----------



## Savjac

subwoofery said:


> When using Gedlee's method, it's probably why you need to use his second suggestion: multiple subwoofers in order to smooth out the peaks and dips in the low frequencies and even out the bass from the MLP as well as other LP
> 
> Kelvin


I agree and I do have two subs to do just that. It works well for me.

Thanks for the advice


----------



## Savjac

macddmac said:


> Any thoughts on a diagonal setup in a square room?
> 10x10x9 ish office with Dynaudio focus 110's
> Thanks in advance!
> Mac


 Hi there Mac, 
By Diagonal do you mean with the corner of the room centered between the speakers ??


----------



## macddmac

Savjac said:


> Hi there Mac,
> By Diagonal do you mean with the corner of the room centered between the speakers ??


Yes, speakers are about 7' apart, 6' from Lp 
Baffles are 2' from wall behind them
Sounds ok but but center image is skewed all the way left with very little sound stage.
I know these speakers can "disappear" nicely in a different room.
















Edit: it works! Just not getting a wider than speakers stage.
Imaging is very good with typical vocals with drums behind in center. 
C=11'
B= 96"
A=69"
Great stuff! Thanks!!


----------



## AudiocRaver

If you can do it with the speakers set up symmetrically in the room on the diagonal, it should work great.


----------



## Savjac

Wayne is right as usual, but might I suggest that some of the problem may result from the speakers being so close and possibly directed right at the listener ? Set up as they are seems to be the best way of doing so in the office room. It appears that it may be helpful to put some sound deadening material on the walls outside of either speaker. That may stop those early reflections that can kill side imaging. 

I am going through the same issue myself and have not quite dialed it in. And maybe there is no perfect way and maybe the sound will not go beyond the edges of the speakers, but being a maniac I will keep trying.
Good Luck


----------



## Lumen

Yes, as Wayne and Jack have pointed out, symmetry is key. Damping first reflections is also a worthy cause, as is moving the speakers to position the baffles flush with the desk's edge. That will eliminate the desktop as a source of reflections. More importantly though, I believe you're experiencing the hole-in-the-middle effect. Locating the speakers too far apart can easily cause this, and it doesn't hurt to try something different. Experimentation is as key as symmetry. 
The section entitled "Making Adjustments" in the first post offers some good pointers how to go about this. Not implying you don't already know how - just saying there might be something in there you haven't yet tried. To get a really special soundstage, we have to be willing to compromise on aesthetics and practicality. You didn't really need the desk to do actual work, did you? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Blacklightning

macddmac said:


> Yes, speakers are about 7' apart, 6' from Lp
> Baffles are 2' from wall behind them
> Sounds ok but but center image is skewed all the way left with very little sound stage.
> I know these speakers can "disappear" nicely in a different room.


Macddmac,

Play around with this. Center your chair in that room and place it 65%-80% from the front wall. Get another TV tray and place your speakers 3-4 feet from the front wall and 7 feet apart (as long as they are 30" to 3' from the side wall.

Test out the sound and report back.


----------



## macddmac

Will play with it some more but i think I'm as as good as it gets givin the room limitations.
Imaging is very good to excellent depending on source quality.
Soundstage width/depth is good to very good.
I can't achieve perfect symmetry do to furnishings/ open doorway- left speaker is 4' plus from diagonall wall,
Right is 16" from sidewall.

Will build some treatments when I have some time, but I doubt that I'll realize significant improvement.
Every little bit helps thou
Cheers, Mac 

PS- was in basement theater last night using same technique- that one is more of a work in progress as I have a sofa seriously hindering my width placement.
Great speakers down there too: PE Usher UA-721's.. Crazy wide stage- depth will be a challenge..


----------



## AudiocRaver

I doubt that perfect symmetry is absolutely necessary. General symmetry plus a few treatments probably do the trick. A room with longer RT60 times might have "unbalanced spaciousness" effects where one side sounds bigger than the other. My own listening area is far from symmetrical, but RT60 is quite low and I do not notice anything like this. With longer RT60, absorptive treatment can help balance this effect out.

As pointed out, early reflections can really throw off the imaging and soundstage. Treatments here are very beneficial. My own rules for early reflections:

*Less than 5 mS (of additional delay relative to the delay of the direct wavefront from speaker to LP; on an impulse response plot, it will be easy to read that relative delay directly):* disruptive to image clarity, must be absorbed.
*Between 5 mS and 15 mS:* must be VERY summetrical (direction and delay time) and must be perceived as coming from the vertical line of sight from speaker to LP; if the reflections are NOT coming along the vertical line of sight from speaker to LP, or if not symmetrical, then either absorb or scatter them. Scatter them with a reflective surface pattern that does not reflect ANY of the sound directly at the LP (I have gotten into long arguments about this last point, but experiments have proven to me that it is very important for the best imaging, and I do not care what expert says otherwise, they are WRONG).
Example 1: ceiling reflections (flat ceiling) would be on that vertical line of sight, and might be only delayed by 8 mS or so, and would probably be highly symmetrical. They are OK, though, will not smear the image L or R, and will add a small amount of spaciousness to the sound, as well as some height info to the soundstage.
Example 2: in a symmetrical room, reflections off the side walls, if only a few feet from the speakers, would be symmetrical, and would fall within the 5 to 15 mS window, but would NOT be on the vertical speaker to LP line of sight, so imaging would be smeared and softened, so they are not OK. Absorb or scatter (see above).
Example 3: Reflective panels on the front wall on the vertical line of sight from LP to speaker could be angled so the reflections are on or very close to that line of sight and are very summetrical and fall in the specified delay range. These are OK, can enhance the soundstage and imaging. However, the natural reflection points on the front wall just inside those panels would not fall on that line of sight and would mess up the imaging. Absorb or scatter (see above) at those natural reflection points.

*More than 15 mS:* less critical. In general, better scattered, and the direction of reflection is not important, although randomized is better.
These guidelines have also been added to the Guide in the first post.


----------



## macddmac

AudiocRaver said:


> I doubt that perfect symmetry is absolutely necessary. General symmetry plus a few treatments probably does the trick. A room with longer RT60 times might have "unbalanced spaciousness" effects where one side sounds bigger than the other. My own listening area is far from symmetrical, but RT60 is quite low and I do not notice anything like this. With longer RT60, absorptive treatment can help balance this effect out.
> 
> As pointed out, early reflections can really throw off the imaging and soundstage. Treatments here are very beneficial. My own rules for early reflections:
> 
> *Less than 5 mS (of additional delay relative to the delay of the direct wavefront from speaker to LP; on an impulse response plot, it will be easy to read that relative delay directly):* must be absorbed.
> *Between 5 mS and 15 mS:* must be VERY summetrical (direction and delay time) and must be perceived as coming from the line of sight from speaker to LP; if the reflection is NOT coming along the line of sight from speaker to LP, or if not symmetrical, then either absorb or scatter them. Scatter them with a reflective surface pattern that does not reflect ANY of the sound directly at the LP (I have gotten into long arguments about
> this last point, but experiments have proven to me that it is very important for the best imaging, and I do not care what expert says otherwise, they are WRONG).
> Example 1: a ceiling reflection (flat ceiling) would be on that line of sight, and might be only delayed by 8 mS or so, and would probably be highly symmetrical. It is OK, though, will not smear the image L or R, and will add a small amount of spaciousness to the sound, as well as some height info to the soundstage.
> Example 2: in a symmetrical room, reflections off the side walls, if only a few feet from the speakers, would be symmetrical, and would fall within the 5 to 15 mS window, but would NOT be on the speaker to LP line of sight,
> so imaging would be smeared and softened, so they are not OK. Absorbe or scatter.
> Example 3: Reflective panels on the front wall on the line of sight from LP to speaker could be angled so the reflections are on or very close to the line of sight from LP to speaker and are very summetrical and fall in the specified delay range. These are OK, can enhance the soundstage and imaging. However, the natural reflection points on the front walls just inside those panels would not fall on that line of sight and would mess up the imaging. Absorb or scatter.
> 
> *More than 15 mS:* less critical. In general, better scattered, and the direction of reflection is not important, although randomized is better.
> 
> These guidelines have also been added to the Guide in the first post.


Great stuff- I'm going to run REW in both rooms to determine what treatment would be appropriate.
Cheers, Mac


----------



## BloomBloom

Hello I'd love to hear your thoughts on how best to set up my Martin Logan Electromotions in my room. Thank you!

My set up is: 
Jriver (on RPI) -> Schiit Yggy DAC -> ATI6002 amp -> ML electromotion (also using a REL S/3 sub - connected directly to the DAC).

I'd love to get some advice on how to organize my listening room. I have great sound but I'm lacking the 3D sound stage... 

It is a large room (in UK standards) 32sqm - with a high ceiling (3m). 
It's a dedicated listening room, though my wife still mistakes it for a living room so I can't go all crazy with room treatments and speaker placement - though I can do around 1.5m from the side and back walls easily. 

My main problem, I think, is that the front wall (behind the speakers) is angled, so one speaker is closer to the back wall than the other - if I place them parallel to the sofa and the bottom wall. 

What I've tried to do now is to angle the sofa to be parallel to the angled front wall and place the speakers in the same distance, again try to make them parallel to that wall. It sounds OK but I'm not getting that holographic 3D sound-stage - it's wide but not especially deep. 

The room is quite resonant. Lots of empty surfaces and a wooden floor - the speakers and sub are sitting on Townshend seismic isolation platform that work very well. 

I use REW and a calibrated microphone to integrate the sub - since I don't have a seperate sub channel I 'play it along' with the speakers and apply EQ (via Jriver) to both to get the response back to earth - works a treat.




























Please share your thoughts.
I've tried applying the formulas in the first post and got a bit lost...

Thank you!


----------



## macddmac

Nearly square room with lots of reflective surfaces..add to that, the electrostatic speakers, which can have a smallish sweet spot.
Stick to the ratios mentioned in the opening post and adjust from there.
A larger thick rug, perhaps a tapestry on that fireplace wall, adjust the blinds so that they're not completely closed for some possible diffusion.
Failing that, try a diagonal layout.
Looks to be a rather live room which can pose challenges due to multiple reflective surfaces.
Try a few adjustments based on the principles layed out in the opening post first, while considering the reflective nature of the room.
Let us know what you come up with .
Cheers, Mac


----------



## Talley

Just wanted to share a bit of info of some recent tests.

The center channel... behind my head is diffusion... I sit 3' off the wall... currently nothing near my projector to kill the ceiling first wave reflection for me so here is some impulses

Center Channel on all 3 tests

1. Orange line at 4.5ms is diffusion while the green/purple is a 2'x4'x4" absorption panel behind the MLP so this is the direct result of absorbing vs diffusion when you are within 3' of the back wall.

2. Green line major spike at 7.2ms is the first reflection at the ceiling part for me is behind my head on the ceiling since i'm a vaulted ceiling. The purple/orange have a significant reduction due to me placing a 2x4x4" panel above the MLP acting as a cloud. This was temporary and I was just holding it in place but shows a significant reduction at this particular spot.

I need to rethink my diffusion stuff. I'm thinking of placing absorption on any spot less than 15ms on the impulse response as it'll be easier for me to chase around the room with an absorption panel in my hands and testing to find the trouble spots. anything beyond 15ms will be diffusion IF the distance is greater than 6 feet away if it is under then I will stick to absorption.

I did some initial tests and I like the sound w/ the absorption behind the MLP better so this tells me I need to change up my back wall a bit. It's OK though since I can reuse my diffusion panels elsewhere. The spot at 2ms is probably the reflection off the floor and will test this at a later point as well.

I mainly posted this for others to clearly see the affects of aborption vs. diffusion within the critical 0-5ms and 5-15ms areas.


----------



## AudiocRaver

You have some interesting challenges.

In this thread I discuss the setup methods I have used successfully in 2 different rooms with the very speakers you are using.

You might consider using the added reflective surfaces to bring your room and the main reflections all "back to square" in spite of the room's shape. I think it is your best shot at getting a great SS&I result.


----------



## BloomBloom

AudiocRaver said:


> You have some interesting challenges.
> 
> In this thread I discuss the setup methods I have used successfully in 2 different rooms with the very speakers you are using.
> 
> You might consider using the added reflective surfaces to bring your room and the main reflections all "back to square" in spite of the room's shape. I think it is your best shot at getting a great SS&I result.


Thanks Mate - I did see this thread. 
I'lll try following it, can I ask you where I should start placing my speakers according to your method? I tried following the method in this current thread but end up with speakers about a meter fro the listening position and ridiculously wide apart...

Also how high should the reflective panels be? I have a wife with her own ideas about aesthetics... ;-)

Thanks mate, perhaps we should move to the other thread?

Thank you!


----------



## AudiocRaver

BloomBloom said:


> Thanks Mate - I did see this thread.
> I'lll try following it, can I ask you where I should start placing my speakers according to your method? I tried following the method in this current thread but end up with speakers about a meter fro the listening position and ridiculously wide apart...
> 
> Also how high should the reflective panels be? I have a wife with her own ideas about aesthetics... ;-)
> 
> Thanks mate, perhaps we should move to the other thread?
> 
> Thank you!











I am embarrassed that I did not get a better photo than this. It is of one of the two panels Sonnie Parker had built for his room. Two boards joined by piano hinge to be self-supporting and can allow any angle between the two pieces.

Each board is 16" wide (I think) - I would go 12" wide (minimum/optimum) for the back piece and 18" (min) to 24" (optimum) wide for the side piece, 3/4" or 1" thick, 4 ft high (minimum/optimum) for the ESL speakers. It can be finished nicely to be minimally obtrusive, or decorated (let your wife) as long as the surface is hard-reflective.

Placement and angles are critical, so small tack strips to control that once it has been determined are important.

My ESLs are 58" c-to-c apart (dimension B in the Guide), 49" LP to speaker plane (dimension A), and LP is 109" from the wall (dimension C). I am away from home right now, I will measure the toe-in angle when I return in a week.

Be sure to put absorptive material on all of the front wall area between the panels. It can actually be reflective (a diffuser) but only if NONE of the angles involved reflect sound directly from back of speaker to LP. Most diffusers do not accomplish this, that is why I say to make it absorptive.

With the reflective panels controlling the main rear reflections, your setup becomes independent of the front wall and you can square up your setup relative to the other three walls of the room.


----------



## Savjac

Hi AC

It seems you have some very near field listening going on there. Is that because of your room or do you just prefer it that way ?
I have not tried it your way because I have always had large rooms, but I think I will give it a go today.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Mid-field, by my way of thinking, and it is mainly because of room dimensions & arrangement. I could actually place them wider but I cannot widen the placement of the reflective panels mounted on the front wall (stairway to the left, wall & hallway to the right) accordingly.

In a bigger room, I would spreqd them more.

The soundstage is much wider than the speakers, does not feel restrictive at all, and the spaciousness feels symmetrical even though the room is not (proper reflection control helps).


----------



## Savjac

I totally agree with your presentation, I just have not previously listened at what I thought to be relatively near field. Today is my day to do whatever I want so I will give this a try with my Tang Band home made speakers. They are easier to move


----------



## BloomBloom

Thanks Wayne,
I don't think the Mrs will allow me such reflective surfaces in the room (partly because they'll hid the windows)...

in any case I rearranged the speakers in a 'mid-field' set up (as per ML's extra tweak in the manual). 
I'll see how it sounds. It did bring the speakers in a bit more into the room. They are now 1.82m from the front wall.

Can I ask you what method you'd use to place these ESL speakers in a room? Ignoring the reflections part?
Also what do you think about the rake angle?

Thank you!


----------



## Defcon

Can someone suggest a song I should listen to while doing this, with specific points in the music and what I should be listening for, i.e. where should a certain instrument sound come from etc.


----------



## Dwight Angus

FInally had a chance to try the 2 channel setup recommended by Wayne. Took a bit of work as I had to move my Triton Ones from behind an acoustically transparent screen & down off a front stage. After some placement adjustments I settled for the Tritons to be 14 ft from front wall & 4 ft 6 inches from side walls. The speaker plane is 7 feet from mlp with speakers about 8 feet apart centre to centre. The first thing I noticed was the huge depth of the sound stage & strong centre. Voices were crystal clear as if there was a speaker directly in front of me. The depth extended back much further then distance between speakers. The width of the sound stage would extend to behind both speakers then extending further to the left & right. 

I used Wayne's ratio's & then adjusted due to rear part of room being asymmetrical. I also toed in speakers directly at the mlp eliminating some mid/high frequency roll off. 
By bringing speakers further into the room I was able to increase bass levels yielding much better results. The bass sounded much fuller. The Triton Ones have powered subs build in with a control dial on the back. When speakers are located behind acoustical screen I turn bass turn down due to proximity to front wall. They can become very boomy if you don't turn them down. 

My mlp is 8ft back from tweeters but occasionally I hear music directly from right speaker. Not sure if I need to increase distance from mlp or increase distance from side walls. More tweaking to be done.

Overall very happy with results. Speaker location is however temporary as this being a theatre room speakers will go back behind acoustic screen. If I had the real estate I would definitely build a dedicated 2 channel listening room. 

Thanks Wayne I appreciate all your hard work in getting this out to us.

Sent from my iPad using HTShack


----------



## AudiocRaver

Dwight Angus said:


> FInally had a chance to try the 2 channel setup recommended by Wayne. Took a bit of work as I had to move my Triton Ones from behind an acoustically transparent screen & down off a front stage. After some placement adjustments I settled for the Tritons to be 14 ft from front wall & 4 ft 6 inches from side walls. The speaker plane is 7 feet from mlp with speakers about 8 feet apart centre to centre. The first thing I noticed was the huge depth of the sound stage & strong centre. Voices were crystal clear as if there was a speaker directly in front of me. The depth extended back much further then distance between speakers. The width of the sound stage would extend to behind both speakers then extending further to the left & right.
> 
> I used Wayne's ratio's & then adjusted due to rear part of room being asymmetrical. I also toed in speakers directly at the mlp eliminating some mid/high frequency roll off.
> By bringing speakers further into the room I was able to increase bass levels yielding much better results. The bass sounded much fuller. The Triton Ones have powered subs build in with a control dial on the back. When speakers are located behind acoustical screen I turn bass turn down due to proximity to front wall. They can become very boomy if you don't turn them down.
> 
> My mlp is 8ft back from tweeters but occasionally I hear music directly from right speaker. Not sure if I need to increase distance from mlp or increase distance from side walls. More tweaking to be done.
> 
> Overall very happy with results. Speaker location is however temporary as this being a theatre room speakers will go back behind acoustic screen. If I had the real estate I would definitely build a dedicated 2 channel listening room.
> 
> Thanks Wayne I appreciate all your hard work in getting this out to us.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using HTShack


Dwight, so sorry I missed your post. My "non-audio" life has kept me hopping recently.

I am always tickled to hear about successes like yours. Getting that huge, deep, precisely-defined soundstage is such a trip, most people have no idea what we are talking about and what they are missing. Of course, being your home theater room, you must move it back to being usable as a home theater, understood. Now that you have heard the possibilities, you can look forward to having that 2-channel or even surround music room with speakers in the middle of the floor and WAF measuring in squarely at 0.:foottap:

Thanks again for posting your results.


----------



## NBPk402

Do you think one of these would be good for aiming speakers at the MLP?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/20MM-Tactic...172286?hash=item35f54479fe:g:EDQAAOSwv~xXDfqy

My horns are 3' wide so they are not easy to aim by yourself, and a laser would help tremendously. My horns have a 90x40 degree pattern, and my MLP is 12' from the center horn. My soundstage is awesome, but I want to dial it in with measurements now instead of by eye to see if it gets even better.


----------



## willis7469

Yeah Ron, especially for that price. I used a laser level to aim my speakers. Should work just as well. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NBPk402

willis7469 said:


> Yeah Ron, especially for that price. I used a laser level to aim my speakers. Should work just as well.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks, I had some eBay cash so it was free,


----------



## willis7469

Free.99!!! Can't beat that. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## AudiocRaver

Lasers are a great idea, especially with a speaker like yours where there is no good flat area to use for aiming a laser distance meter or laser pointer from.

I have used something very similar to what you are purchasing.


----------



## NBPk402

AudiocRaver said:


> Lasers are a great idea, especially with a speaker like yours where there is no good flat area to use for aiming a laser distance meter or laser pointer from.
> 
> I have used something very similar to what you are purchasing.


What I am planning on is making 2 uprights that would have a board connecting them, and i would clamp it on each side to the horn sides. I would then have a mount in the middle that the laser could be mounted on. 

I have also thought about doing something similar for the mic... get a long board, and drill holes for the different mic positions to make the whole process of room tuning 100% repeatable.


----------



## AudiocRaver

ellisr63 said:


> What I am planning on is making 2 uprights that would have a board connecting them, and i would clamp it on each side to the horn sides. I would then have a mount in the middle that the laser could be mounted on.
> 
> I have also thought about doing something similar for the mic... get a long board, and drill holes for the different mic positions to make the whole process of room tuning 100% repeatable.


Other than the MLP position for measurement number 1, repeatability is not important. If it makes the measurement process quicker and easier, that is worth something. You have to be very careful that the board does not introduce any reflections. For MLP, I have a mark on the dropped ceiling and use a piece of string hanging from there to get the right point for measurement 1, the mic hangs by its cable from a boom for that measurement. All other measurements are with the mic pointing up.


----------



## Primare Knob

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjTebqyTZf1mjFzt5JsmKMkHJ9jl

I am trying to share a video I made but this site doesn't seem to allow video embedding. 

Reading through the guide and the reviews of the Martin Logan speakers I have rigged a system that allows me to visualize early reflection points per speaker and seat in 3D. I also rigged a system that allows me to move and place the reflection panel for the widest angle without reflecting into the speaker, per speaker and seat in 3D

Red lines are early reflection points. Dark blue line is direct sound and light blue line is manual reflection point. This setup also allows me to calculate and compare the length/distance of the sound paths on the fly.

I have done this for one speaker with 6 seats, and as visible from the picture all manual reflection paths cross each other close on the side of the speaker. As you use this point as the center you can see that the yellow reflection panels starting to form an arch like the blue panel.

Would a round panel work in reflecting the manual path towards each seat in a proper way, or does a round surface not reflect the sound back under the opposite angle in which it arrived?


----------



## Primare Knob

This is something that I yet don't fully understand. As I understand the dispersion pattern of an ESL speaker is very controlled and linear, which is claimed a good thing when it comes to room interaction. But why are we still paying much attention to early reflection points, and why do we calculate it in the same way as regular speakers? I seem the miss something here.

As shown in the picture the ML speaker panels have a 30 degree cone projection which "visually" doesn't seem to interact with the side walls. Also none of the back wave comes close to where my early reflection points for the front wall are calculated (red lines)


----------



## AudiocRaver

Nice job with the Autocad "utility," very useful.

Good questions on the projection angle of the electrostatic panels. Two factors help reduce the horizontal angle of projection.

The width approaches the wavelength of HF signals that it drives, making them more directional.
The dipole nature of the panel design makes them more directional.
:sweat:


I like to treat the sidewalls where first reflections from opposite the source speaker, on the R wall for reflection from the toed-in L speaker. Experience has shown this to make a difference with improved imaging.

Remember that dispersion pattern is not perfect, that there is SOME signal coming off toward the side wall, easily enough to disrupt imaging.



> ...why are we still paying much attention to early reflection points, and why do we calculate it in the same way as regular speakers?


It is a matter of degree. The calculations are the same, same angles, with the amount of signal being much lower. Much lower but not nonexistent.


----------



## ajinfla

Primare Knob said:


> This is something that I yet don't fully understand. As I understand the dispersion pattern of an ESL speaker is very controlled and linear, which is claimed a good thing when it comes to room interaction. But why are we still paying much attention to early reflection points, and why do we calculate it in the same way as regular speakers? I seem the miss something here.


We??:smile:
I use dipolar speakers also and would never "treat" the sidewalls. There is large body of scientific evidence to support this. There is *zero* scientific evidence to the contrary.
Here is a nice summary of why: http://www.audioholics.com/room-acoustics/room-reflections-human-adaptation
Floyd's book contains all the AES references to the studies that support this. This is not "his opinion". To the contrary, it is based on the established science. Much of what is bandied about on audio forums is studiophile folklore, based on sighted beliefs and "intuition" long ago discredited (like LEDE). Again, there is zero science to support such beliefs.
With 2 channel phantom center image audio, side reflections play a critical role in filling in the acoustic interference combing from the L and R speakers, increasing intelligibility and clarity of the central images. This has been double blind* listening* tested repeatedly. It is not "opinion".
If you wish to please your eyes or an "ETC" measurement pressure mic, treat away. If you wish to please your ears, read Floyd Tooles writings and videos, which are a nice compilation of a large body of work by many many scientists in the field of acoustics study.
Btw, a little known fact is that the highest ever rated speakers (blind, controlled, "trust your ears only" listening) during Tooles time at the NRC, was the Mirage M1, a bi-directional radiator speaker, much like yours. Properly implemented in a room, they can lead to very enjoyable sound, specifically related to spatial rendering of stereophonic/phantom center images recordings.

cheers


----------



## ajinfla

Primare Knob said:


> As shown in the picture the ML speaker panels have a 30 degree cone projection which "visually" doesn't seem to interact with the side walls. Also none of the back wave comes close to where my early reflection points for the front wall are calculated (red lines)


Where did this 30 degree diagram come from? It is completely unrepresentative of reality.
A typical panel speakers radiation pattern looks more like this:








Please note the frequency contour colors on right.

cheers,


----------



## Savjac

AJ, its time for you to take a trip north to give some of us a class on the science of these things. I can read Floyd's words and they go in my eyes but somehow fall into the dark empty space in my skull reserved for stuff I dont really get. Many of us have languished under the "Old" beliefs for a long time, I guess I should learn some science.

When you coming ?? :grin2:


----------



## willis7469

Savjac said:


> AJ, its time for you to take a trip north to give some of us a class on the science of these things. I can read Floyd's words and they go in my eyes but somehow fall into the dark empty space in my skull reserved for stuff I dont really get. Many of us have languished under the "Old" beliefs for a long time, I guess I should learn some science.
> 
> 
> 
> When you coming ?? :grin2:




Rofl!!! I have a similar storage space in my head! I won't say what's in there... lol


----------



## Savjac

willis7469 said:


> Rofl!!! I have a similar storage space in my head! I won't say what's in there... lol


Does the light in your space no longer turn on ??


----------



## ajinfla

Savjac said:


> AJ, its time for you to take a trip north to give some of us a class on the science of these things.


I was oh so close to returning to Axpona this year, but alas...
Maybe next year if schedule allows, but I'm having a harder time each year convincing myself to go through the excruciating pain in the posterior of exhibiting cross country. Maybe I'm just getting lazier with age. 
Was here at my friend Mikes place last weekend for the monthly club meet, couldn't convince him either 

cheers


----------



## Lumen

Sooooo jealous! Sarasota? My favorite! That's a sugar-sand beach voted one of the top-10 in the USA a few years back.
And those rooms are gorgeous. Bet the systems/room sound glorious.


----------



## Savjac

ajinfla said:


> I was oh so close to returning to Axpona this year, but alas...
> Maybe next year if schedule allows, but I'm having a harder time each year convincing myself to go through the excruciating pain in the posterior of exhibiting cross country. Maybe I'm just getting lazier with age.
> Was here at my friend Mikes place last weekend for the monthly club meet, couldn't convince him either
> 
> cheers


I cannot imagine the trouble and expense involved in bringing your wares to Chicago from Florida. Those hotel rooms can be horrible to set up and make a proper presentation, not to mention the hundreds of folks attending. I do hope to see you again in the years to come.


----------



## AudiocRaver

ajinfla said:


> We??:smile:
> I use dipolar speakers also and would never "treat" the sidewalls. There is large body of scientific evidence to support this. There is *zero* scientific evidence to the contrary.


AJ, AJ, AJ, zero?? Zero?? *ZERO??* That's a pretty small number, zero, be careful how you throw it around.

NO ONE values good science more than I do. My father was a scientist, a researcher, and a _pioneer_ in the field of remote sensing. We talked about science and research all the time. And we talked about serendipity, about new discoveries and how they are made, about not being afraid to question authority when there is good reason and good evidence to do so. In my own way, I feel that I am honoring his work and training by being willing to think out of the box. 

I admit, it will depend on what you are listening for and what your listening priorities might be. Mine is the best SS&I possible, and it can be helped in _some_ situations by _some_ early reflection treatment with dipoles like the ESL. I have found that to be true with the ESLs in several different rooms and with varying amounts of treatment. I have experimented for endless hours with positioning and treatment and have found there to be a difference in my room. Remember that no dipole speaker is capable of ZERO interaction with the side walls of a listening room. And remember that double-blind testing of room treatment changes with near-instant A-B comparison switching time is very difficult, if not near impossible. And remember that even while we are learning from the work and studies of these men, that new science comes when people with good brains, like you and me, are not afraid to disagree and try new possibilities.

If I have misinterpreted any of your statements, please excuse me, I am not trying to be argumentative. But I stand by my work, and if someone states that I am _ignoring the science_, I can not sit still.

AJ - final note - I hope you know that I appreciate and respect your work and words here as well, we have had some good listening sessions together. Love ya, brother.:wink2:


----------



## ajinfla

AudiocRaver said:


> Remember that no dipole speaker is capable of ZERO interaction with the side walls of a listening room. And remember that double-blind testing of room treatment changes with near-instant A-B comparison switching time is very difficult, if not near impossible.


Hi Wayne,

To be clear, none of my comments were directed at your work, but referencing what Primare had posted.
Yes, there are zero blind test studies that support lateral absorption improving things...and a of a lot supporting the opposite. This is what I am referring to. Tooles book and articles repeatedly reference the AES papers regarding phantom central imaging and ears only listening preferences for lateral reflections in home listening environments. I could reference all those AES papers, but it requires membership to read.
Actually, it was Tooles book referencing this that created much uproar in the studiophile community and numerous personal attacks against him not understanding reflections, from the same folks who gave us LEDE. Of course, they couldn't cite any blind studies to support their intuition beliefs about reflections either. There aren't any.
That uproar lead directly to this paper: http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=16640
Studiophiles claimed that all the papers Toole referenced didn't apply to them, because they had much greater sensitivity to (and awareness of) reflections than all the trained listeners used in the AES papers.
So McGill University took that exact matter to task and did a listening study using only seasoned studiophiles (the types that hold such beliefs).
The results were rather amusing.
All that said, I have zero issue if someone wants to treat every inch of their space...if it pleases them. Ultimately, that's all that matters. I only take issue with statements about this being "better"...to anyone other than them and their personal taste.
The science clearly runs contrary to this.

cheers


----------



## Primare Knob

ajinfla said:


> We??
> I use dipolar speakers also and would never "treat" the sidewalls. There is large body of scientific evidence to support this. There is *zero* scientific evidence to the contrary.
> Here is a nice summary of why: http://www.audioholics.com/room-acoustics/room-reflections-human-adaptation
> Floyd's book contains all the AES references to the studies that support this. This is not "his opinion". To the contrary, it is based on the established science. Much of what is bandied about on audio forums is studiophile folklore, based on sighted beliefs and "intuition" long ago discredited (like LEDE). Again, there is zero science to support such beliefs.
> With 2 channel phantom center image audio, side reflections play a critical role in filling in the acoustic interference combing from the L and R speakers, increasing intelligibility and clarity of the central images. This has been double blind* listening* tested repeatedly. It is not "opinion".
> If you wish to please your eyes or an "ETC" measurement pressure mic, treat away. If you wish to please your ears, read Floyd Tooles writings and videos, which are a nice compilation of a large body of work by many many scientists in the field of acoustics study.
> Btw, a little known fact is that the highest ever rated speakers (blind, controlled, "trust your ears only" listening) during Tooles time at the NRC, was the Mirage M1, a bi-directional radiator speaker, much like yours. Properly implemented in a room, they can lead to very enjoyable sound, specifically related to spatial rendering of stereophonic/phantom center images recordings.
> 
> cheers


Thanks for this, I'll have a read and see if I can come to understand it. Sorry for the later reply. Tappatalk wasn't keeping track of things.

Related to your other post. The 30 degree is coming from Martin Logan. 30 degree curvature in the panel resulting in a 30 degree dispersion pattern/angle.

On a similar note. How about treatment of the front wall? I wonder if I should go for an acoustic transparent screen to allow for acoustic treatment of the area behind the screen.


----------



## ajinfla

No worries. With dipoles, if you are going to treat the wall behind them, aka front wall, I would strongly suggest diffusion, not absorption, unless truly broadband, bare minimum 6" thick (3' better, yes feet).
The dipole panel radiates 6db less power into the room than the monopole bass section. Turning down the treble further with absorption not such a good idea for power spectrum at listening seat. Of course, preferences count, so YMMV


----------



## mark3141

Thanks for putting together this information. It looks like the recommendations are largely empirically based, but can anyone explain why these positions tend to work best? I've seen various places recommending placement based upon the golden ratio, but I haven't seen any explanation of why beyond vague statements like it 'reduces room modes'. 

In addition to being an interesting question, I'm curious because another forum recommended I deal with my odd shaped room by placing the speakers centered the room's diagonal instead of centered between two parallel walls. This has been much better, but the placement was largely arbitrary - I looked for a spot that got the speakers away from wall while leaving enough room for my listening position.

Unfortunately, you cannot directly mimic the ratios provided here for this arrangement. For example, if I keep the distance between the speakers the same as the distance between the midpoint of the speakers and the wall, then the line between the speakers will have dimensions 1:2:1 (moving along the line between the speakers, distance from wall to first speaker is 1, distance between speakers is 2, and distance from second speaker to wall is 1).

Any thoughts on what I should be looking to do in my case? Thanks! 

And for what it's worth, I have REW measurements from the current position as well as a lay-out of my room available. I'd love some feedback and thoughts on how to start putting together room treatments, but should this wait until I find a better spot for placement, and in either case, is this something I should place in another thread (if so, recommendations on which thread?).

Thanks again!


----------

