Speakers for a “cold” room


I have a terrible room 16 x 18 two bay windows (I do use heavy drapes in front of them). Partially hard wood floors, and plaster walls.  8 foot ceiling.   I have acoustic zen adagio and want to upgrade.  I am also going to upgrade the electronics.  Jolida tube pre into emerald class d amps.   I love the zen’s but find the upper mid’s a bit harsh.  Bass is nice an punchy.    So......  what would be a upgrade for a cold room.  I was thinking golden ear triton 1’s due to build in sub.    Thanks much in advance


mlapenta

@audiotroy wrote: "Duke an austute summation..."

Thank you!

"... but there is no way to know what is causing his problem with the Addagios."

Perhaps not, but what mlapenta describes (upper-mid harshness) is consistent with excess off-axis energy at the bottom end of the tweeter’s range as heard in an unusually reverberant room. I think there is a very good chance he has correctly identified the problem as a speaker/room interaction issue.

Circling back to "Speakers for a cold room", at the risk of over-generalizing: The more reverberant the room, the greater the role the reverberant field plays, and therefore the more important the off-axis response becomes. Not that this is the only thing that matters, but imo it's one of them.

Audiotroy, you have a wide range of experience in the industry. What are your thoughts on "Speakers for a "cold" room"?

Duke


Duke we take a systematic approach which has been honed by having tons of gear incomming and outgoing.

There are the intrinsic attriubtes of the product and then there are the issues in matching the one product to the rest of the products and then then the room.

The issue here is to figure out is it the room, the combination of this set of speakers with the OP's particular set of matching products. 

Sometimes it is a simple fix, we setup our Blades on one side of our big showroom opposite another set of reference speakers at the time, and the Blades sounded horrible, the space was too live in that part of the room, went to Pier One and bought a boat load of different sized pillows which we then piled up behind the loudspeaker and boom the hardenss that was the room feeding back went away completely. Not exactly the look we wanted but the system sounded good.

We have used this trick at Audio Shows as well. 

So for the OP he has a few options one try a different set of speakers in the same space with the same gear and see if that is moving in the right direction, then to try a match with different electronics, digital and cabling and of course room tuning.

Without seeing pictures of the room and knowing exactly the matching gear we are both firing blindly here.

Dave and Troy
Audio Doctor NJ
Therefore, and the reason for my earlier recommendation to listen with the speakers pulled out and nearfield...to eliminate the room and diagnose whether it is system related or not.
Audiotroy, did someone drop a Tympany 3 on your foot? Did you have a nightmare about getting folded up in one? Your description of the sound of dipole planar speaker does not match the reality of properly set up ones. My guess is that you probably make more money selling other stuff or  do not know how to set up these speakers correctly. Frankly I think you have nothing to offer this site but distortion and I wish you would sell your stuff elsewhere.

Very Sincerely,
Mke

@audiotroy , thanks for your detailed reply.

"we take a systematic approach which has been honed by having tons of gear incomming and outgoing."

That makes sense. All parts of the chain matter. But I think the place where problems are most likely to arise is the speaker/room interaction, so imo that’s a good place to focus attention. I see speaker + room as a "system within a system". (Actually imo it’s amp + speaker + room = "a system within a system", but this thread isn’t about amps).

To put it another way, some speaker designers build the best speaker they can and then it is up to the user to fix any room interaction issues. That is not my approach. I try to take the room into account from the beginning.

For instance, you mentioned using a bunch of pillows to fix "the hardness that the room was feeding back". I highly doubt the room took smooth reverberant energy and altered its frequency response such that it became "hardness". Imo it is far more likely said "hardness" was already characteristic of the off-axis energy, and the room was reverberant enough for it to became objectionable.

What if the speaker’s off-axis response had been smooth? In that case we’d be in pretty good shape whether the room reflected back a little or a lot of reverberant energy. We wouldn’t need room treatments to fix a problem that originated with the speakers. If we don’t need room treatments to fix the speakers, we can use them to improve imaging and spaciousness and timbre, which would call for a different approach (emphasizing reflection management and/or diffusion rather than absorption).

I am well aware that different rooms sound different, so I build an unusual amount of user-adjustability into my designs, rather than expecting the end user to fix the in-room sound with room treatments and/or equipment changes.

You mentioned using the pile of pillows trick at multiple audio shows. I haven’t needed anything like that to fix the room. A veteran manufacturer who first showed with us a year ago said that ours was the first room he had ever shown in where "we weren’t fighting with the room for the whole show."

So I do respect your systematic approach of taking everything into account. I haven’t described everything I do here but I think mine is a systematic approach as well, just with emphasis on a particularly problematic system-within-the-system.

Duke