Radical toe in once more

Below the frequency defined by the baffle width, no difference at all as the sound is omni-directional to start with. Above that, it is all about the directivity of the tweeter. 

Every room is different, every listener has their preference. Correct is what ever sounds best to you. 

Thanks everyone. Like I suspected, no consensus. Same thing from my web searches. I read about a guy who went back to conventional toe-in although radical sounded better. Why? It «looked wrong»!

Sure, I will follow my own ears, but in this case I’m not sure. Is there something slightly «artificial» with radical toe-in? Or just my imagination? The one effect that I am sure of, regarding the front sound, is that the tweeters are a bit tamed – less direct beaming – with radical toe-in. Which can be OK in my case. I am also fairly sure that there are positive effects on the back-firing sound, as mentioned, although some are debatable (like more bass but maybe less tight from the room corners). I can well understand listeners who have used a long time, getting the angle right!

Ceiling and floor reflections – yes this is a valid point. I first overdamped the ceiling, and later removed most of it, to good effect. A silk carpet does a good job on the floor (not wall-to-wall). The speakers are designed to sound lively and immersive in a normal (not overdamped) room. They are big and heavy, and my back is not so good, so quick A – B testing is not easy. Disconnecting the back drivers would defeat the bipole speaker design. Likewise a lot of absorption or diffusion behind the speakers, although a little bit is fine.

So what do I do? Go back to conventional and forget the rest? My wife says, maybe radical is better, so why dont we keep it that way.

Radical toe-in is the main suggestion from the speaker designer, although other positions may also work well in a large room like mine.

My thinking might change if someone told me I am breaking a basic law of audio, my membership here should be withdrawn and whatnot! Has not happened yet. So I will keep it radical, for now.

Two more thoughts. I can easily hear differences in the sound from the frontfiring tweeters, depending on their angle. They can sound strident, a bit hard and bright, if pointing directly at my ears. When they point in front of me, they are ‘tamed’, as mentioned. How much depends on how far in front the crossing point is. Someone wrote, one foot is best, and this may be right in my case also. One or two. It depends on the tweeter off-axis sound, too far off axis is not good. Note that I am not trying to widen the sweet spot, it is OK as is in my room. The other thought concerns the crossing itself. With radical toe-in the main direct sound waves from the speakers (esp the treble) cross before they reach my ears. Does this create a kind of disturbance? Or ‘pre-processing’? Just speculating, here.

Too much sound in your mind, not enuf in your ears I think. There is no right or wrong re toe in, it's what actually works for you. I would agree the aesthetically it might be a bit hard to think it could be right (for you) because few seem to do this. However, it is often done at audio shows to accommodate room/set up problems. 

You mentioned the tweeter off axis sounding better because it dials down the sound, but consider that the same 'off axis' can be achieved by pointing the speakers straight ahead. Much of what is achieved by toe in (or actually toe out for the really venturesome) is brought about by the change in sound from room reflections. Ditto diffusion/deadening wall treatment. 

One thing to think about, and much depends of speaker design, i.e. strength of the off axis signal, is what happens to the off axis signal when you change the speakers toe in. Pointed straight ahead you get a strong side wall reflection (if you have a side wall!) but toed in you change that reflection (but you knew that). Probably what you did not consider is what happens to the off axis signal on the other side. What you have by doing 'severe' toe in is to point that off axis signal off the wall between your speakers. Enter again the importance of the use (or not) of reflective/deadening/dispersive material between the speakers, not just  behind or to the side of, the speakers. For the really anal amongst us, don't fail to consider the 2d reflections points, they can be important as well. :-)

Too complex for the poor mind I think. It may be just simpler just to move your speakers about and listen to the results as you go. DON'T be in a hurry, beyond initial first impressions, the effects of moving speakers which are already established in a good place can be subtle and in my case affect the sound stage, especially image's third dimension, depth of image. No kidding, it probably took me over a year to set up my Quad 63'. And they don't have a strong off axis signal. My present speakers which are just forward firing boxes, not near so much!

Enuf for now, I'm even boring myself. :-)

Thanks @newbee. I'll think about it...no no! on with the music : - )

Hi @newbee 

Jokes aside - I agree with most of what you said. Listen. Take time. Small changes can have a large impact. - This is all the more true with dynamic bipoles like mine.

Just to clarify: my room is large enough that radical toe-in is not needed in order to avoid sidewall reflection (or to enlarge the sweet spot). In fact for several years I have used conventional (slight) toe-in, where the speaker axes crossed some feet behind the listener position. It is just recently that I've changed to radical.

I also agree that listening for soundscape depth is important, and often intriguing. I find that radical toe-in is as good or maybe better in terms of depth (it was good before also). 

What I have not considered, or not so much, is the area behind and between the speakers. There, I have my stereo rack, and sadly, there is not much I can do about it, although I know its not ideal. Oh well. 

Here is what I did not understand: "What you have by doing 'severe' toe in is to point that off axis signal off the wall between your speakers." Are you describing the off-axis sound from the backfiring drivers? In my case, radical / severe toe-in means that the sides of the speakers point towards the middle of the wall with the stereo rack, yet the sides are 4 feet away from the rack, and there are no drivers mounted at the sides of the speakers (only back + front). So I hear less direct sound, when listening close to the sides. And the off-axis sound from the backfiring drivers hits the wall at the sides, not in the middle with the rack, but close to the corners. Maybe I should do the 'mirror test' for first reflections, but it seems to be a non-issue. I could also stack something in front of the rack, or use more absorption/diffusion on the wall, but Ive tried these things before, the improvement is only marginal. Thinking I am lucky, since I have the space to let the speakers 'breathe'.

One of the joys of experimenting with speaker positioning and toe-in is to discover more of the speakers' potential. Recently I brought a pair of stands to a holiday house and was amazed at how much better a pair of Audioengine A5+ sounded. And it was really easy to do mini-adjustments to get them "just right". I wish it was just as easy with my heavy floor standers.

Yet my experiments, so far, have confirmed my positive impression of these speakers. They are indeed chameleon-like, changing according to the music and production. When set up correctly, especially with the right material, they can sound like electrostats, but with dynamic punch, both in the treble and bass. This is also due to excellent amp and speaker matching.

The speakers are a sophisticated attempt to use "best of" reverberant energy in order to improve the perception of the sound as a whole. So, for example, the output is spectrally correct, or quite similar, wherever you are in the room, the main timbre is the same. This is way beyond Bose 901, which I used many years ago. A main 'trick' is to postpone the reverberant sound, so it arrives at least 10 msec later than the direct sound from the front of the speakers - and according to my experiments, 15 msec (by radical toe-in) is even better.

So yes, my ears guide this journey. I would welcome some hardcore science also - if there is a problem with the sound waves from the front drivers crossing in front of the listener, and if so, what is this, and in practice, can we hear it, or is it totally marginal.