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

Darned right ieales." There can never be a surplus in image specificity. If one can localize the source, it's a fatal flaw. Frequency response beyond a certain point is irrelevant. Imaging is about PHASE and TIME. Most systems are appalling on those parameters. "
  I bet hardly any Audiogon commenters set things up with DSP and bi or tri amping and have no clue.

I think those who cavalierly toss the "high end audio gear" salad around and garnish it with Audiophile dressing like to talk shop to each other but not really seek best solutions. Klipsch Cinema systems have been doing this for a LONG time and generally have at least 104db efficiency and are capable of providing stereo sound in a huge sweet spot. Of course these Klipsch systems don't come with Audiogon bragging rights. All they come with is superb and superior sound quality and high efficiency.
  So, how long did it take you to figure this out besides way to long?
 

I gather you’re not handed the same, specific seat that says "Reserved to Mr./Ms. [insert name]" as the one and only place to have a proper concert experience, in fact there’s a range seats centered to the stage that will be quite excellent sound-wise.

Actually, our seats are reserved. Took me three years to get them. I've paid stupid money for good seats in the great halls. If we can't get great seats, we don't go.

you could easily move your head about a foot ... it’s hardly relevant with regard to any changes in sound

In my retirement, I'm technical director for a production company. For acoustic music, mostly true. For amplified, not necessarily. Before I became TD, we've moved seats because the phasing of the direct and amplified sound was intolerable.

you’re projecting the head-in-vise experience from your home set-up

Hardly. I attended and played in live concerts before I had a HiFi. As a retired recording engineer, I spent thousands upon thousands of hours trying to recreate as close a facsimile to a live venue as possible. My HiFi is not head in a vice, but it accurately presents what a recording engineer put down. Most people have never heard a HiFi do that. For 40 years, musicians have been telling me that the music is "Right THERE!!"

No domestic set-up I’ve heard has come even fairly close to resembling a live acoustic concert.

Me neither. No one no how ever got the sound through the glass.  However, a well setup system can transport you and make you believe. If Joe Pass is playing a 10 x 5 foot guitar, no one is ever going to even consider him even in the same room.

A surplus in mage specificity, to a certain point, takes away from the holistic experience of music and in turn makes it more about something that’s supposed to impress sonically rather than musically, but that’s also about frequency response and the target curve at play.

There can never be a surplus in image specificity. If one can localize the source, it's a fatal flaw. Frequency response beyond a certain point is irrelevant. Imaging is about PHASE and TIME. Most systems are appalling on those parameters.

Isn’t this the audiophile tendency to miss the forest for the  trees? Just sit down and enjoy the damn music.

Hardly. IMO, more artist are hindered than helped by sound reinforcement. People may not realize why they didn't groove on a favorite artist.

you still get to experience the totality of the event, something your home set-up can’t recreate

One recent visitor, a lifelong classical musician, lover of most music and frequent concert goer, seated next to her hubby & neither with their head in a vice, upon hearing Queen's "Bohemian Rhapsody" queried "Who needs concerts?" 

My thought on the post is along the same line as @mlsstl noting that at a Live 'unconstrained - varied' venue ambience with psycho acoustic space
input presents much for the overall enjoyment as does HiFi Playback (to a degree-extent being discussed).
Some of my best HiFi moments have been outside of a 'limited sweet spot).
Perspective also comes into play IMO (as being notable).
Headphones may not be the best comparison for many spatial cues.
One of my most memorable 'Listening Events' at RMAF was a Presentation of a Remastered (ATT) DSotM in Quad on R2R Tape Playback. 
With the listening position being 5-7 seats across by 8-10 deep (approximate) and my relative position being L Front Row.
I believe everyone there appreciated and enjoyed the experience. 

Very important observation....Thanks....

Which observation make me able to say that imaging is important soundwise but LESS difficult to obtain than natural timbre perception in an acoustic settings which perception and experience are the benchmark test of not only sound perception in audio but also of musical perception....

Audio is important but music surpass it, including it .... Electronic is important but acoustic surpass it making it shine or not....

It is MY experience for sure....But the experience of any musician i suppose....

Then the main central concept is no much mainly the "sweet spot" but more the dynamical "envelope " of the sound... One concept is more deep and englobe the other in a SMALL room and this subordination is understood well by any small room acoustic experiments which demonstrate that it is more difficult and ask for more fine tuning of the parameters controls to recreate the timbre dynamical envelope over some imaging ....

Well put, mahgister - I certainly agree. 

@ieales --

I doubt I’ve ever moved my head 8-10 inches either side at a live performance. Or stood up.

But I gather you’re not handed the same, specific seat that says "Reserved to Mr./Ms. [insert name]" as the one and only place to have a proper concert experience, in fact there’s a range seats centered to the stage that will be quite excellent sound-wise. Once seated, if that’s what you do, you could easily move your head about a foot shifting occasionally from one side in the chair to the other, and even so it’s hardly relevant with regard to any changes in sound. If you believe there is something tells me the you’re projecting the head-in-vise experience from your home set-up.

Properly set up and integrated, HiFi can do an amazing job at recreating a performance bet it Joe Pass playing acoustic alone, The Who or The London Phil. The trade off, due to physics, is the sweet spot is somewhat constricted.

No domestic set-up I’ve heard has come even fairly close to resembling a live acoustic concert, not to say some set-ups aren’t more successful in their approximation here than others, which is also to say: the effort isn’t futile. Let’s not fool ourselves though - the trade off is the recreation itself; you’re not there at the live event, you’re not going to fully experience it as such. A surplus in mage specificity, to a certain point, takes away from the holistic experience of music and in turn makes it more about something that’s supposed to impress sonically rather than musically, but that’s also about frequency response and the target curve at play.

In a live performance, if one has the ability to wander about, one will find there are gross variations in the sonic field, sometimes in as little as a foot.

Isn’t this the audiophile tendency to miss the forest for the trees? Just sit down and enjoy the damn music. A few changes in seating position shouldn’t make it a hit or miss; you still get to experience the totality of the event, something your home set-up can’t recreate - even perfectly positioned right smack in the middle.

It’s my experience that a wide sweet spot never elicits comments like "Joe Pass is sitting RIGHT THERE!"

Wide, narrow - to me it’s finding the proper balance somewhere in between here.

I used the Sumiko Masterset method with some small Thiels (CS1.6) and got a very wide sweet spot, even beyond the width of the speakers. It’s useless for the Naim NBLs I use at the moment as they’re designed for back against the wall placement, 5.5cm in my current room. I can still get a wide image but not as wide as with the Thiels, though it goes deeper into the wall.
If my next room permits I’d like to give Omnis a go, Duevel Bella Lunas are available locally.

quote:       It's my experience that a wide sweet spot never elicits comments like "Joe Pass is sitting RIGHT THERE!"
   Love it. +1

^^ see  ieLogical SubterraneanHomesickBlues for a little insight into integrating subs.

Moving my head over 8-10 inches either side, lost the sweet spot. Standing up? Fugetaboutit! Sounded good as long as I sat completely still. Nah, Not for me.

I doubt I've ever moved my head 8-10 inches either side at a live performance. Or stood up.

Properly set up and integrated, HiFi can do an amazing job at recreating a performance bet it Joe Pass playing acoustic alone, The Who or The London Phil. The trade off, due to physics, is the sweet spot is somewhat constricted.

In a live performance, if one has the ability to wander about, one will find there are gross variations in the sonic field, sometimes in as little as a foot.

It's my experience that a wide sweet spot never elicits comments like "Joe Pass is sitting RIGHT THERE!"

Great discussion. I wonder if anyone can focus on bass. With Magen pan 1.7 planar speakers I’ve lately focused on bass. Since adding two REL subs I’ve realized how much perception of image and air in a recording comes from the air pressure described in this thread. And since very low bass is omnidirectional, I think it’s more critical to my enjoyment of the system. Also even more critical is bass at lower listening levels. The loudness control. If you have powerful bass at low volumes it’s pretty compelling. I used to have to play everything much louder to get satisfying sound. Now it’s just tweaking the subs a bit. Er, well quite a bit since matching the subs isn’t easy. 

I once went to look at the Martin Logan Speakers. Don't remember the model. it was in the '90's I believe. The store attendant said they weren't set up properly. I don't know if that was true or not. I know this. Moving my head over 8-10 inches either side, lost the sweet spot. Standing up? Fugetaboutit! Sounded good as long as I sat completely still. Nah, Not for me. 

Image specificity in the extreme doesn’t exist in a live acoustic performance, and yet it’s a devoured trait in audiophilia.

Very important observation....Thanks....

Which observation make me able to say that imaging is important soundwise but LESS difficult to obtain than natural timbre perception in an acoustic settings which perception and experience are the benchmark test of not only sound perception in audio but also of musical perception....

Audio is important but music surpass it, including it .... Electronic is important but acoustic surpass it making it shine or not....

It is MY experience for sure....But the experience of any musician i suppose....

Then the main central concept is no much mainly the "sweet spot" but more the dynamical "envelope " of the sound... One concept is more deep and englobe the other in a SMALL room and this subordination is understood well by any small room acoustic experiments which demonstrate that it is more difficult and ask for more fine tuning of the parameters controls to recreate the timbre dynamical envelope over some imaging ....



If this is true,we could begin to understand WHY we never listen to speakers ONLY in a small room, but to the room itself united with the speakers...


If this is true we could begin to understand why the room could be conceptualize not like a passive set of walls but like an ACTIVATED and ACTIVE participant filled with variable potential pressures zones able to participate and recreate the timbre perception....








«There exist a hierarchy of concepts and of their function. It means that my ass is not less important than my head but serves it, not the opposite»-Groucho Marx

«Is it true for the hierarchy of angels too?»-Harpo Marx

«You bet!»-Chico Marx

«Is this means that economy is the ass and politic the head?»-Gummo Marx

«Are you a communist?»-Zeppo Marx

@audiokinesis /Duke --

What I’m going to suggest is sometimes called "time-intensity trading", as the off-centerline listening locations which have a later arrival from one speaker compensate by having greater intensity (loudness) from that speaker.

Briefly, start with speakers which have a very uniform radiation pattern of perhaps 90 degrees wide (-6 dB at 45 degrees off-axis to either side) over most of the spectrum. Then toe them in severely, such that their axes actually criss-cross in front of the centeral "sweet spot".

For an off-centerline listener, the NEAR speaker naturally "wins" arrival time, BUT because of the aggressive toe-in and relatively narrow radiation pattern width, the FAR speaker "wins" INTENSITY!

JBL aimed similarly with their DD55000 Everest's (DD for "Defined Directivity"):

The design went through a fairly extensive evolution before arriving at the final configuration. Originally, the concept was to develop a "super L300" with a similar sonic character. It was given the working designation of the L400. However, that designation had a notorious past and was soon dropped (see sidebar below). The system would be designed around a new acoustic concept referred to as "Defined Directivity" (the DD in DD55000). This concept had been pioneered by Don Keele in the professional 4660 ceiling speaker. That speaker was intended to provide rectangular coverage with constant volume from front to back. Bruce Scrogin realized that mounting this horn sideways in a home system could provide constant horizontal coverage. The asymmetric design would force more sound to the distant axis compared to the near axis so that someone walking a horizontal line between the speakers would be exposed to a constant sound level.

http://www.audioheritage.org/html/profiles/jbl/everest.htm

The rationale behind this acoustic concept, to my mind, would seem less realized if it didn't entail an appreciation of a sonic correlation as perceived in the seated sweet spot, apart from offering a wider listening area to move within. Image specificity in the extreme doesn't exist in a live acoustic performance, and yet it's a devoured trait in audiophilia. To me at least the predominant takeaway in the debate about a narrow vs. wider spot is honing in on the "sweet spot" between these two dispersive extremes that most closely emulates the perceived impression of a live acoustic presentation, and this also involves for the listener to be able to move from side to side, as one would at a live performance, without seeing the sonic "image" tilt severely.

I don't care. My Quad ESL57 loudspeakers are not for sale. 

Hello, 
Yesterday I just listened to the Dali Menuet SE. They are an $1800 bookshelf speaker designed to go near the wall. They sounded awesome even off axis.  You wwould swear they had a subwoofer. Under 10” tall they play from 59hz to 25khz. Designed to go near the wall. I was checking them out yesterday at:
https://holmaudio.com/
in the Chicagoland area. They are very unique that they let you try before you buy. If you want a tiny/ powerful sub they have the new KEF KC62 subwoofer that is like a 10” cube that plays way down below 20hz. I like the idea it takes up very little space but can still vibrate the room if you want it too. 

As always, this is entertaining (thanks, Erik), and merely mildly provocative.

I am starting to wonder if a whole-house Sonus system might satisfy some better? <grin> When I listen to two channel music it is for pleasure and I am not walking around in the room, nor in the rest of the home. Music for that walkabout experience is known as ‘background music’ to me. Fortunately my speakers sound fine from other rooms due to large openings.

When I am listening for pure musical pleasure I want the very best experience. My spouse is not concerned. Having a large mushy sweet spot and losing imaging, etc. seems like a poor trade-off for me.  It’s great to want a large sweet spot, if you use it, and if you have company that can actually appreciate it. But, understand you are not getting the very best your system can offer. It may be the best it can average out to over a large zone though.

(+1 to cymbop, prof, musicfan2349, and wspohn, as I remember…)

I think it comes down to how one uses the audio system. I can enjoy my primary at its best in the living room, or in another room if desired for background. I just don’t move around enough in the living room to want to sacrifice the best sound possible for when I am listening critically.

Finally, I’d say it is easier to argue that the true audiophile is the person who demands the single best audio reproduction his system can give.  And that is not from six different seating positions all over the living room. We know that. It makes me chuckle if we are talking ‘true audiophile’. For me, a fat and wide, non-optimum, sweet spot doesn’t fit the bill.

(Remember Dunlavys? The largest wooden floor-standing headphones on earth.)

What you really want is a crossoverless ESL with a 45 degree dispersion angle.

You misspelled line array. :-)

*G* My 'sweet spot' is currently out of town, but that's an another story unto herself... ;) *S*

@erik_squires ...you know how Anything posted is subject to 'topic drift'...*mea culpa*beats on chest*....(mine, not yours)

Mho, that's always been my 'issue' with the 'conventional' loudspeaker, the 'roll-off' one experiences when moving off-axis.  Which triggers the 'sweet spot fixation'; great for critical listening ses, not so much for the 'pause for the cause' day2day listening whilst occupied with the 'd2d'...

(Critical listening is when the TT is cued to one's fav disc, or the like....*S*  Everything is lit, and the fav imbibe in hand (or the equivalent), and all one wants is escape into the selection...)

For self, maps, and those of that distraction, Walsh, Ohms, and the other omnis do allow for both.  Yes, omnis are not 'Perfect' in the sense of razor blade reproduction.  To accomplish that, the room must be treated as an essential element of the equation...everything 'just so', to the point of surgical....

Nice if one can do so....most can't, as the sig 'other' will pitch a fit.  Some have noted, ah, 'excising' that source of complaint....

For whatever rationale, most don't want to 'go there'.  It IS pretty extreme, and tends to expensive....;(

The LS-50s' seem to be getting raves....Me, I'd 4chan and sub them, just because I'm 'bent' like that.  Since it's out of my expendable $'s, I'll stand by and keep playing with my diy's...

Cheers 'n jeers, J

My sweet spot only needs to be big enough to put my head in.  LOL, you may need an extra wide, I don't.

I can also (vaguely) recall that the spot one avoided 
incorporates most of letters in sweet.

No big deal.  I carefully choose my seats for the symphony so I am in the sweet spot for the particular room, and I choose a optimal seating position in my listening room.  I don't walk around when listening so what does it matter how wide the sweet spot is?

Some of us married more petite women but still think of ourselves as audio lovers.

Acoustic is the most misunderstood subject in all audio by audiophiles and ordinary people alike...They all think that the gear magically give the sound almost by itself out of the room acoustic almost and at best "tweaks" are added....Pricier the gear and tweak better it is for sound... This is the market myth....

The room is not first a sum of 6 walls surfaces which passively reflect /absorb/diffuse sound waves...

The room is and could be ACTIVELY an heteregenuous pressurized set of air engines...Helmholtz science here...

Imaging and soundstage are important features of audio experience, but the benchmark of musical experience with an audio system is musical TIMBRE perception...

You can have a apparently relatively good imaging and soundstage without a natural timbre experience...

You cannot have a natural timbre experience without a good imaging and soundstage associated with it...

This is a big distinction....It is my conclusion after my own experiments ....And reading some facts about TIMBRE perception ....

In short if you want a wide "sweat spot" get a speaker that does not image and you will have the widest sweat spot imaginable.

@erik_squires,@erik_squires, I think you are confusing image specificity with frequency response. Sanders ESLs beam like crazy. You will only get high end directly in front of them but because they beam there is much less room interaction and their image specificity is excellent at the listening position. Move of center and the image falls apart as well as the high end rolls off. Speakers with wide dispersion will sound balanced over a wider area but they also have more room interaction. The on center image is not as specific as the Sanders but it still falls apart off center just the same. The high end just does not roll off. You may not notice the image falling apart as much because the image is not as specific on center. What you really want is a crossoverless ESL with a 45 degree dispersion angle. You will get the sharpest on center image with reasonable frequency response across the listening area. The physics of a two channel audio system are such that the only place you are going to get an accurate image is on the center line. That vast majority of systems do not have a very specific image. This is because of the speaker's dispersion, room acoustics, phasing and time problems and asymmetrical frequency response of the two channels.  

Read about Ambiophonics.

roadwhorerecords:

Personality, i think the self imposed title of "audiophile" is a narcissistic badge of fools.

Not sure how you get "narcissism" from someone saying he is an audiophile. It’s just descriptive.

It’s not like audiophiles are celebrated by society ;-)

How about the enjoyment of the music?

We all enjoy music. No need to virtue signal.

I'm positioned in the sweet spot when listening and usually keep being seated there for the duration of the session, and yet I went for a pair of speakers that have a wider sweet spot compared to my previous speakers, because of what it does to the sound in that more or less fixated position.

If one were to visually outline it, it relates to how the overall presentation is "shaped" in front of you, and with a wider and higher dispersive nature compared to the earlier scenario (that now also involves physically taller speakers) - yet controlled by 90 x 40° Constant Directivity horns - it makes for a more enveloping sphere or bubble of sound, and one in this case more coherent and smooth at that. While sitting centered in front of the speakers is still preferable the presentation doesn't fundamentally change even when moving to the left or right seat in the sofa, and it has a relieving and relaxing effect on the listener. To me at least this type of presentation is more reminiscent of a live music event, if that's your thing. 

Certainly the dispersive nature of dual 15" woofers and a Constant Directivity horn per channel is narrower than smaller, direct radiating speakers, and yet makes for a full, enveloping and rather dense (akin to live music, to my ears) presentation. Maintaining a uniform dispersion pattern over the cross-over region is also very important in creating a homogenous bubble/sphere of presentation.

I suppose with a wider/higher sonic field of presentation as something that relates to a live presentation, it may link more innately to being an audiophile as someone who cares about mimicking such an event, and yet I feel omnidirectional speakers like MBL and others are too "wishy washy" to instill that sense of realism and presence akin to live music. YMMV. 

I hope everyone reading this understands that I wanted to celebrate a wide sweet spot much more than caring about who an audiophile is.  Experience has led me to believe you guys only read threads that seem contentious though, so I had to lead with that.  ;-D

Hmmm... When I sit in the narrow sweetspot that I have and really listen, I’m thinking that what I’m hearing is what the producer wanted me to hear when they mastered the recording with reference to sound stage. Whether the sonic picture is narrow or wide, the relative placement was chosen at the recording console. However, there are times when I’m not all that focused on placement. When is that? When the music is on as background.

Does that mean when I stand up or am in the kitchen suddenly I’m not someone’s idea of an "audiofile"? Perhaps. However timbre and SQ still matter: It’s still has to sound "right" even if I’m not in the optimal physical location for the stereo image. And therein perhaps lies "redemption". LOL The point I’m trying to make is that so much of this avocation is subjective if not downright arbitrary. For my part, I refuse to get wrapped around the proverbial axle due to someone’s pronouncement of what is "right".


Happy Listening.

Plastic surgeons can now tighten and uplift your sweet spot.

I am all for good crossover parts, as I think may be evident in past tweets, but the width of the sweet spot is going to be much more affected by the crossover frequencies chosen than the cost of the resistors.

Other things matter, of course, like the width of the baffle, and the dimensions of the individual radiators and their location, but once those are set, it is the Hz at which the crossovers occur which determine whether or not there will be smooth off-axis response.

Best,
E

One thing to mention speakers ,since  I have been modding them mainly for myself and a few others for many years, your Xover is the ❤️ or brain 🧠 
of any Loudspeaker, the Vast majority of Xover parts are average quality  at best.
out of a scale 1-15 on average a 7.
Also your binding post 90% are cheap gold over brass, not very musical.and poor conductor.high resistance.
a decent WBT copper gold with  Furutech copper gold crimp on terminals is far better then solder, and upgrading the Xover essential for expended soundstage 
width,depth and precision imaging ,the quality of stock capacitors,resistors, inductors,
even wiring many times is average at Best. If you love your speaker, and the drivers are of good quality well worth the consideration ,if limited on internal space ,then a external Xover with small custom boxes would be the answer ,better quality Xover Bigger parts = a Huge upgrade ,look at Tony Gees capacitor cook book fir starters Humblehomemadehifi capacitor test, and Original pre 2011 Mills resistors excellent ,sonic craft carry, or the Best but $$  Path audio resistors Jantzen awg 14 inductors waxed foil, or open coil for bass,excellent value $$

On the basis that there is rarely a free lunch, it seems to me that if you arrange your speakers and room to obtain a wide sweet spot, it will be less 'sweet' than if you arrange for the one listener optimum.

Indeed the loss may well be of depth, as @emrof, above, suggests.

Compromise always involves sacrifice.

the widest sweet spot i've ever heard was with the bose SR-1 cinemate system. whatever you may think of that firm or its speakers, this system let me sit or stand anywhere in the room and hear basically the same stereo image. didn't have a lot of depth, though. 

A small sweet spot would indicate that the speaker is beaming! This is why in your example of the Sanders ESL’s...which are known to beam, that the sweet spot is small. If you listen to a speaker that is a point source, you will typically get a wider and more accurate sound stage, IME. OTOH, a large dipole flat panel, which is anything but a point source, will typically either beam information...or will scatter information from the front and the back...and again have possibly a more diffuse image. ( Plus one that is typically quite wide!)
Having owned both panels and point source speakers, depending on your room acoustics, both can be very satisfactory. Remember, when we go to a live event, we typically sit or stand in one place...and if one listens to the placement of instruments at that event, the sound source will in fact vary slightly as one moves around the venue, it will also be fairly encompassing as to the sound field ( not in any way pinpoint!) -- IME.

" I drink alone, yeah
With nobody else
Yeah, you know when I drink alone
I prefer to be by myself...."

...and that's the sweet spot issue...;) Thanks, George.....*G*

I'd characterize the Walsh as having a 'sweet line', midway between the drivers at a right angle.  Somewhat similar as that of dipoles...
Main perceived response seems to be 'arrival times' and room reflections, which one can vary to taste with placement, furnishings, and treatments..and where one stands along that line...

Like the revered or reviled 901's, there is a point where sheer volume level can drown any sweet anything into a moot point, unless the room is very large...which I suspect few of us have to play in....but that's an atypical extreme example.

My personal issue with Ohm speakers is the CLS driver which, at the end of the day is just a dome tweeter.  Ohm suggests 'toe-in' of their L~R units, something that nudges them out of being a 'full omni' like a MBL...or a plasma driver...*S*  One has an astounding entry price with 'needs' to match, the second with its' own unique issues...

I like my dipoles for sheer 'accuracy', but the Walsh have 'stage' they really can't match.  But they are a little 'fussy', in their own ways.

Anyway...my 2 centsless....;)
J

As I type I am in my chair to the left side of my family room. My college age daughter is to the right doing school work. We are both in the sweet space. The Ohms are doing their thing. She requested some Michael Jackson. I queued some up on the Squeezebox Touch. “Dad is that Enya?” “Yup”. Nice! Wouldn’t trade it for anything. She listens with me like this all the time to all kinds of music and knows it all from Eminem to Ellington. Stravinsky queued up earlier. She recognized that piece from high school orchestra.
Nice when enjoying music need not be a solo act.

I listen by myself! No one else even cares in this household...they think I’m nuts! Any how, all I need is my one and only sweet spot on my comfy sectional leather couch with many many throws and toss pillows etc. I’m fine with this. Its the same spot I sit in when watching a movie in surround sound. Everyone knows my spot! 👍
The wife, however, has stolen (I mean claimed) the recliner section of the sectional nearest my hifi. That’s where I sit to listen to headphones...😡...well, I guess I can't be in two spots at same time...but she is seemingly always there when I want to listen to my headphones...🥺

Duke / @audiokinesis Does a very good job above of summarizing the reasons why, @tazz2

Erik, your description is spot accurate...I'm not familiar with Magico's but 
my Revels 206's or M20's do exactly as you've described. The reason might be because Revel works so hard at off-axis response accuracy, reasonable to me, but don't know for sure. I only know images stay fixed and focused across the soundstage sitting anywhere from speaker to speaker.

Your choice of audio gear plus your speakers and their placement in your room determine the size of the sweet spot. But even a wide sweet spot has a sweeter spot within it. A sweet spot so narrow that the listener is afraid to move an inch is not my cup of tea, but to each his own. A wide-dispersion set-up can be problematic as well, especially as pertains to imaging. As has been said, "Variety is the spice of life."

I'm another Ohm Walsh fan.   

I haven't seen this mentioned in this thread, but when I go to live music performances, I rarely sit in the same spot. One gets a slightly different perspective when in different areas of the venue. That is one thing I really like about my Ohms -- as I move to different spots in the room, the perspective changes, but it does so naturally. Unlike speakers with a very tight sweet spot where the sound quality suffers radically when you move out of the "dentist's chair", I find the Ohms give me an enjoyable -- and natural -- listening experience no matter where I am sitting, standing, or even moving around as I listen.  It has become one of the favorite traits of my current system.

Personality, i think the self imposed title of "audiophile" is a narcissistic badge of fools. How about the enjoyment of the music?  In one of my systems I have a single seating position for me to enjoy. Eventually I plan on having the ultimate headphones....either a pair of Duntech Sovereigns or Dunlevy SC-Vs. Do I care if anyone considers me an Audiophile, HAHAHA hell no. Unless they are paying the bills I couldn't care less what they think.

Magico or Paradigm or anything of that ilk, as my pal Bob said, spreads the image like mayonnaise. I'm less kind and call it a bucket of mush.  I want the image to be as I recorded and mixed it. If I have that, then I have a good representation of what anyone else also recorded and mixed. No one ever recorded or mixed a singer or hi-hat with a 10 foot wide image. 

Anyone who comes to listen sits in the sweet spot while I drive from outside the sound field.

If you want a wide spread, listen in mono.

size of sweetspot in room is just one of numerous tradeoffs made in speaker selection, setup and system building

To me the 'audiophile' tag has more to do with the synergy of your gear inclusive of the room delivering certain nuances that appeal to you. If you can get that plus a wide sweet spot then you've achieved audio nirvana.  I certainly get that from my Ohms.

I know about the dentist chair scenario... experienced it with a Wilson Chronosonic/ D'Agostino / & room DSP'd.
At the listening spot everything was razor sharp at the exact dead center in the sweetest spot. After a while I wanted to relax, and slouched a little in the chair. That few inches drop in height was already enough to yank me out from the sweet 3D spot, even though I was still dead centered between 2 speakers. Also, move head 1 inch to either side, and the 3d and EQ balance just both collapsed in a major way. Those unfortunate suckers in the rest of the room suffered the same. (After a few minutes, I gave up my seat and joined the suffering team... after all, we are all suckers in audio ; )
Now, that was a super narrow and tight dentist chair! Long live DSP (preferably limited to the car industry and appliances...)Indeed, a big part of being an audiophile is to get together with your buddies and listen to the music together, and talk stories. With that type of scenario you get a bad feeling in the mouth, excluding everyone from the fun but one.My speakers are omni, I can enjoy an uplifting experience that fills the room at the sofa, the floor, in front of one speaker, anywhere.
I love to stretch out on the carpet, and watch a movie from there. From that vantage point the screen fills up the entire field of vision.. :)  I have my "home theater" running from the 2 ch stereo. With the omni speakers it gives a much more coherent immersive experience than any gazillion speaker variant I heard.In general, when the speakers on axis and off axis response are super close, then the sweet spot will be wide. The bigger the on/off axis discrepancy, the  narrower the sweet spot

Hi Erik,
Have you heard of the Sumiko speaker setup method? I’ve been reading/hearing great things on the web. Apparently it drastically expands the sweetspot and stabilizes the image over a wider space. I’ll be trying to execute it in the next few days.
Bruno

The lost focus and diffuse sound rob dynamics, focus, and tonality.

Not true. You just have to hear it done correctly and well. 

You still might not like it. It’s different and different strokes......