You must have one HUGE room. I mean like as big as a house, for that much speaker. Otherwise, why?
5 responses Add your response
To be honest, you'd be far better off to spend the money on professional acoustic room treatment. Optimizing the acoustics of your listening room will make MUCH more difference than sinking thousands more into another power amplifier. Plus you'd probably have quite a bit left over to spend on music (LPs, CDs, SACDs, concert tickets, etc.).
I hear you. The room, as an enclosed space is a primary issue too often overlooked by the novice audiophile.
However, let me suggest a way around, or perhaps better, 'through', that troublesome, and usually frustrating circumstance. To quote Siegfried Linkwitz, of Linkwitz-Riley fame, and designer of the Audio Artistry line www.audioartisty.com who's 'Beethoven' model made Stereophile's Product of the Year, and now offers DIY systems on his web page:
'The conventional closed or vented box design, that is used for the majority of loudspeakers on the market, contributes significantly to the room problems below 200 Hz. These designs are omni-directional radiators and they tend to excite a maximum number of room resonances, particularly when located in room corners. While this adds to the perceived bass output at certain frequencies, it can lead to a falsification of the recorded material, namely when the room resonance decays more slowly than the original sound. In general, the low frequency response of omni-directional speakers in small rooms is quite non-uniform. Attempts to treat the room with absorbers will make only marginal differences unless very many absorbers or large absorbing surfaces are used. It is best to attenuate peaks in the bass response with parametric equalization. Holes in the response cannot be filled in (Ref. 1).
By far the most uniform response in the range below 200 Hz is obtained with an open-baffle, dipole or figure-of-eight radiating source. Because of its directionality, the dipole excites far fewer room resonances than an omni-directional source. The difference in bass reproduction is startling at first, because we are so used to hearing the irregular and booming bass of the typical box speaker in acoustically small rooms. Quickly one learns to recognize the distortion of this combination and it becomes intolerable.' www.linkwitzlab.com
I removed all room treatment devices when I obtained his speaker system, and tested. Then gradually moved treatments back in, only to find degrading results the more devices were reinstalled. I moved them all out again, and got the best results with the normal room furnishings.
And I wanted to use those devices that I had become so accustomed to, and had so much invested in. The market for them is such that they all gradually made their way to the dumpster. But now I can say, 'good riddence', because the realism is there to enjoy every day. A condition I was only seeking with various box designs, and all those acoustic devices.
Of course crucial to the results is a distortion free amplifier to power them: the vintage Hafler DH-200/220 ($200); BEL 1001 if you can find one; Muse 160 ($7-1400); any ATI ($500-2000 -probably the best value); the pricy Bryston line; or the very artistic Jeff Rowland Design Group ($8k, if you have it to spend for the aesthetic value).
Guideline: THD/IMD <0.1% at full power; over a bandwidth of 5hz-50khz; and Output impedance <0.4ohms, rules out most. But the one's above exceed these minimums. For instance the ATi line has a THD/IMD of <0.005% and bandwidth of 5hz-100khz. EVen the Hafler is <0.005% as well.
For what its worth.
Sorry, I am new in the forum and take me a while to log-in. My room is reasonable big: 25ft x 35ft x 21ft(Ht). I use as little as possible the acustic tuning material, because I want my music sound living without un-necessary absorption like Didactically mentioned in his response. My speaker is Goldmund Apologue not Epilogue. It is older generation than Epilogue, but it is a complete system with two bases, one midrange and two tweeters.