If you don't have a wide sweet spot, are you really an audiophile?


Hi, it’s me, professional audio troll. I’ve been thinking about something as my new home listening room comes together:

The glory of having a wide sweet spot.

We focus far too much on the dentist chair type of listener experience. A sound which is truly superb only in one location. Then we try to optimize everything exactly in that virtual shoebox we keep our heads in. How many of us look for and optimize our listening experience to have a wide sweet spot instead?

I am reminded of listening to the Magico S1 Mk II speakers. While not flawless one thing they do exceptionally well is, in a good room, provide a very good, stable stereo image across almost any reasonable listening location. Revel’s also do this. There’s no sudden feeling of the image clicking when you are exactly equidistant from the two speakers. The image is good and very stable. Even directly in front of one speaker you can still get a sense of what is in the center and opposite sides. You don’t really notice a loss of focus when off axis like you can in so many setups.

Compare and contrast this with the opposite extreme, Sanders' ESL’s, which are OK off axis but when you are sitting in the right spot you suddenly feel like you are wearing headphones. The situation is very binary. You are either in the sweet spot or you are not.

From now on I’m declaring that I’m going all-in on wide-sweet spot listening. Being able to relax on one side of the couch or another, or meander around the house while enjoying great sounding music is a luxury we should all attempt to recreate.
erik_squires
Post removed 
It's definitely been one of my objectives to have a system that sounds good all around the room, even though it's still best when directly between the speakers. Speakers with smooth off axis performance and some degree of directionality in the treble seem to do the trick when given an appropriate toe-in. 
There is a saying that people that understand a topic well can explain it in the simplest terms.

I am not sure there is a saying for the opposite, but I can show you some examples :-)

 Report this
You are right this times audio2design.... 

It is not always possible to reduce a very complex problem in simple term.... The tensor curvature problem in geometry cannot be simplified....especially not here...

The "timbre" comcept and perception is in the same order...

But some here are very able to explain it with 2 words...

Frequency response only.....




I've never understood what Mahgister was talking about, especially concerning timbre. I assumed what we heard in relation to timbre was on the recording. I'm glad someone could decipher his tome like posts.
I'll give my layman version, timbre is how I can tell a trumpet from a clarinet playing the same notes. What acoustic embedding has to do with it I don't know I don't even know what acoustic embedding even is much less the other two though I have tried to figure out what he's talking about.