2. speakers
  3. 139767-89202

One speaker observation from the New York Hifi show.

I was just at the New York Hifi show, and perhaps because of the size of the rooms, all speakers were toed in, and most were toed in severely. The result was very little effective imaging.  Most sound appeared to come from one central spot between the speakers.  I realize hotel rooms are not ideal, but even in the larger rooms, noticible toe ins were prevalent  I don’t believe this positioning shows systems off to their best advantage.  To me, speakers pointing straight ahead produces the best imaging.
rvpiano
kalali's avatar
kalali
1,977 posts
 
"I have electrostatic highbred speakers (Martin-Logan Summitt X) - any thoughts on distance from The wall behind the speakers or the side walls?"

Put them as far as esthetically possible from the wall behind them. You’ll get a much deeper soundstage. As for the side wall, in my experience they don’t need to be very far, a foot or two is more than enough. The panels don’t seem to interact much with the side walls but the woofers do a little.
audiokinesis
2,772 posts
 

rbodner wrote: "I have electrostatic highbred speakers (Martin-Logan Summitt X) - any thoughts on distance from The wall behind the speakers or the side walls? And toe in?"

The distance to the wall behind the speakers is ime what makes the biggest difference with dipoles. Basically, the more the merrier. If the bounce off the wall arrives too early, it can degrade clarity. Ime five feet out from the wall works well - you get a nice deep soundstage and great clarity, along with rich timbre. If you have to place them any closer than three feet from the wall, then you might try aggressively absorbing the backwave because it may be doing more harm than good. Back when I was a SoundLab dealer I had them out about seven feet, and I also liked to put a bushy plant (ficus tree) in the first reflection zone behind each speaker, to diffuse the backwave.

Dipoles can go very close to the sidewalls because they have a null to the side. Mere inches is okay.

Use whatever amount of toe-in gives you the best imaging over however wide a sweet spot you want to optimize for. The Martin Logans have a narrow enough pattern that even a little bit of toe-in avoids a strong same-side-wall reflections.

EDIT - oops, I didn’t see Kalali’s post; I shoulda refreshed the page. I agree with everything he says.

Duke


harrylavo's avatar
harrylavo
346 posts
 
prof - well, at least we agree on the Thiels.  I'm a twenty-five plus year user of same, and their coherence and attention to diffraction elimination do pay imaging dividends, for sure.

I also agree that the Thiels, in a decent acoustic environment successfully admit a bit of "roundness" to the sound .... call it "body" if you will.  But I stand by my guns in saying you simply don't hear much roundness when listening to live music from a normal venue seating position, nor can you pinpoint directionality.that precisely.  In an orchestral recording you can generally sense the cellos and bass on the right, and the first violins on the left, but that is about it.  Brassy horns will have a semblance of directionality as will percussion, but not pinpoint definition.  As I said before, I can create it in a dedicated listening room ... it is a matter of placement and sound treatment, one way or the other, but unless you prefer sitting in the conductors chair, or on the edge of the stage, the "hologram" effect we audiophiles strive for is just not realistic.  But more importantly, IMO it is far less important than realistic dynamics and tonal accuracy in conveying the musical import.
rvpiano's avatar
rvpiano OP
2,821 posts
 
Again, I agree with harrylavo. At live concerts, of which I attend many, I generally sit close up where one may hear the most directionality (certainly in the middle to rear of the auditorium, you hear very little.) But even in that position I don’t hear precise directionality, and still less front to back imaging.  Indeed, perhaps because of microphone placement, I get more exact imaging listening to good recordings than I do  sitting at my seat in the auditorium.
rvpiano's avatar
rvpiano OP
2,821 posts
 
Even though my system images an orchestra better than live, it still doesn’t have that holographic effect some strive for (and some achieve.) That’s a “magic trick” brought about microphone placement.  No one sits where those microphones are placed in an orchestra.  Even in night clubs the mikes are placed in a position where almost no one sits.
One doesn’t get it sitting in the audience at a live orchestral performance.  What one does get is a more generalized sound which good stereos can reproduce.  Imaging is secondary to the overall effect.

More to discover