Weim_boy and Blindjim, You can overcome a lot of the effect of the hard wall on the side of one speaker by simply toeing in your speakers til the axis of the speaker crosses at your hear or in front of you. Removes most of the side wall reflection issues, increases center focus, and makes a much wider usable stereo spread. Looks odd but works for most box speakers. Try it.
In treating your room, don't forget that you can use wall hangings, book cases, drapes hung over walls as if they were covering a picture window,etc. It doesn't have to be expensive audio product to get the job done.
If your going to go with the audio stuff before you buy make sure its purpose fits your needs, otherwise you will be wasting your money. |
Tbooze, With box speakers used in a stereo configuration there are two types of sound you will hear when seated in the sweet spot (especially). The first will be the sound which is phase correct, the 'stereo' sound and that will appear exactly withing the confines of the space between your speakers on the same plane as your speakers (in phase stereo sounds can appear to come from outside your speakers but this sound will be behind your speakers, not on the same place, and if you drew a straigt line from your head thru the speaker to the wall behide it it would still be on the inside of the line.
Then there is out of phase information. That is sound which occurs outside of the inner boundies of your speakers. It is most often caused by reflections off walls, ceilings, floors, etc. These out of phase signals can sound pleasant and seem to give you a wider soundstage, but on close analysis they detract from the sharpness of the focus of the stereo sound between the speakers.
In an unbalanced set up, one speaker near a wall and one speaker near an open space the reflections off the wall can not only diffuse the 'stereo' image between the speakers, but it can also cause image shift where in the center image, say from a centered voice, will shift toward the side with the wall.
JFYI, recordings often contain both in phase and out of phase signals. These too will effect the sense of width of your sound stage - but thats a different issue, they should.
For set up purposes there are test disc's which can help you locate problems caused by room reflections. For example, using one I once discovered a set up where when they played an out of phase voice the voice in a very diffused sound appeared on the left wall immediately in front of the left speaker which was close to the wall. The voice should have been, optimally, heard as "coming from all about your room" but as a minimum having no focus. I was able to eliminate that out of phase sounds'location on that wall by using substantial toe in.
If not having sharp center focus (on a sharp center focused signal) which is IMHO essential to getting the best soundstage depth obtainable because you need absolute clarity in the signal to get this effect, then its no problem. Lots and lots of folks love the sense of width they get and are happy with the compromised depth of image, and are really not concerned with getting the best sharpest'stereo' soundstaging available.
FWIW, since some folks forget what 'stereo' sound is all about, in its simplist application you have two microphones placed in front of a group of performers. One on the left side and one on the right side. A performer on the left sides signal will be picked up by both mic's but for the one on the left side the signal will be much stronger and on the right side much weaker. In a well set up system you will be able to exactly locate the position of the performer. A performer standing in the middle will be heard equally by both mic's and as a result you'll get equal signals from your speakers which will cause them to be heard as one speaker exactly in the center. There are no provision in the 'stereo' concept for 'stereo' signals to be heard outside the boundries of the speakers - out of phase, yes, but not 'stereo'.
Hope that helps to answer your question......... |
Re last question, see my comments to Tboooe's thread on Room treatments if you're interested in my opinion.
I'll defer to Rives on your first question - I'm sure he would know - thats why he get paid the big bucks. :-) |
Shadrone, In reference to your first sentence. I must say I'm at a loss as to the nature of the common 'misconception being purpetrated' here, unless of course you believe that setting up the speakers as you have described, or as you have in your systems photograph, is the definitive or only way of setting up speakers and there is only one possible end result.
In my experience there are many ways of setting up speakers which present a satisfactory stereo image to a particular group of listeners. I'm not talking multi channel, home theater systems, which is an entirely different issue/sound. Just simple two speaker stereo.
My personal choice is a sound which is pinpoint source specific which reproduces most accurately the sound of the recording. This requires exacting set up (as far away from all walls as possible, especially the rear wall, having a triangulated listening position, and the elimination of as much of the room's reflected sound as possible, including (most importantly) deadening as much as possible 1st reflection points. This set up, properly executed, gives you exactly what is on the recording, nothing more, and little less. I reemphasize that is my personal choice and when I discuss set up, that is my point of reference. I don't care much for a set up which presents a larger 'apparent' sound stage by utilizing room surfaces. Again, MY choice - MY preference.
Many folks prefer a different sound (whether they really even know that they do because they may have never actually heard a set up as I descrbibed) and that is a 'bigger apparent sound stage'. This will include a good sense of presence of the musicians between the speakers and as well, provide for a greater sense of ambiance created by the reflected sounds from room surfaces. In fact this sound is so preferred by so many that speaker manufacturers make speakers to specifically produce that result, such as panels, many electrostats, bipolar's using dynamic cones, as well as Omni's.
Now regarding the 'in-phase' and 'out of phase' issue. You have admitted that the information which comes from the outsides of the speakers is out of phase with the direct sound between the speakers (as I stated in my post), but you conclude that in a perfect set up it is in-phase with itself and does not effect the quality of the central stereo image. I have no problem with that statement in itself (other than I don't agree that it doesn't effect the quality of sound from the recording), however I fail to see how in any way it supports your statement about someone perpetuating (I think that is the word you meant to use, not perpetrating) a misconception.
As I said in my other post, folks have preferences, and I have mine as you yours. Interestingly, what I describe and what I personally prefer, only came after I was exposed to a system that was capable of that level of performance. Until then I really didn't understand what folks meant by 'specific' depth of image comments, I thought it was all about equipment hype by salesmen as I only heard a more 'generalized' sense of depth of image, much as I thought break in being a bunch of hype by salemen and manufacturers.
Now, since you have joined this thread why not share with us your views of how both Blindjim and Tbooose can set up their systems - you will note both have sidewall problems (one speaker near a wall and another near an open space) and at least Tbooose has a backwall issue as well.
BTW, I looked at your system and photos. What a great looking HT system. Looks like you put in a lot of effort. Congratulations........... |
Shadorne, I thought I pointed out in my first paragraph what I thought was offensive in your post - your statement that you were going to clear up a "common misconception being perpetrated here", when in fact there was no 'common misconception' being perpetrated and all you really did was to say that in a perfectly symetrical set up the out of phase information appearing to the outside of the speakers did, in essense, not damage or effect the in phase information appearing between the speakers.
I didn't take offense, however I did want to make sure that folks reading all of these threads did not become confused by your statements and to what kinds of systems, and individual sonic goals, they might apply.
I would suggest however, as this has come up in other posts you have made, it is very helpful, and you'll draw far fewer flies, if the content of your post really matches the subject line of your post which you use to draw peoples attention.
FWIW. JMHO. |
Blindjim, Re diffusing materiels for use behind your speakers.
Assuming we are talking about high frequencies, and assuming that your talking about diffusing sounds directly radiating from the speakers, plants (live or artificial) can work well. I've used big Boston Ferns, medium sized dense palms, and weeping figs quite effectively for electrostats and boxes. Personally, I don't care for the 'audio room' look so many prefer, and even without book cases I would (and do) place strategically located wall mounted shelves with typical domestic garbage, books, CD's, Lp's, lamps/tables etc.
As Psychicanimal suggests, if you're crafty at all, it would be fairly simple to replicate the Skylines. All you need is some 1 1/2" square pine boards, a small table saw (easier to do cuts) some wood glue and clamps, paint, and patience. A friend of mine has done this several times very effectively. Your really don't have to be very scientific about it to get excellent results but it helps if you have the dimensional variations used in the Skylines. You could also do it with foam of some type as that could act as an absorber for the higher frequencies and diffusor for the lower (not LOW) frequencies, but I think foam would be tough to work with.
If you talking about a whole, or major part, of a back wall, because of bouncing reflections from other wall surfaces, I wouldn't go the dispersion route.
I'm sure its occurred to you already, but, FWIW, the further you can bring your speakers out into the room the less you need to be concerned with the need to diffuse or deaden the sound radiating directly from the speakers, and unless it is a hard surface such as glass, in the typical room after you hit the 6ft mark its probably of little consequence because there is sufficient time differential between the inital signal and the reflected sound (doesn't necessarily apply to bipoles, panels, or electrostats). I've heard speakers set up in front of an untreated glass that sounded excellent, with only one caveat to bear in mind. The other three walls had differing wall surfaces and were not uniformly reflective which eliminated 2d and 3d relect points so there were no strong high frequencies bouncing about the room.
Interesting stuff. Have fun, but don't get too anal - it will be very frustrating if you do! :-) |
I use "The Sheffield/XLO" test and burn in disc. It provides some tracks useful in set up including some good out of phase tracks as well as a 'walkabout' and signals for burn in use.
I also use a Stereophile Test disc, which measures low frequencies, in conjunction with a Radio Shack Sound level meter. I also use a test disc put out by Rives which is already calibrated for the RS meter.
Lastly I use a disc which is really a compilation of very simply recorded music performances which is an outstanding way of charting your progress in setting up your system and room. Its Test Disc 1, "Depth of Image" by Opus 3. It has been suceeded but is still available in a similar disc put out by Opus 3 and I understand its available on the 'net. The only negative part of owning this disc is that its a standard thats hard to meet. The will tell you on each track what to expect but you may not hear it! All that means is you still have work to do.
Have fun!
P.S. I also have the Chesky disc but I don't use it. |
