Two surprising things I found that improved my imaging and staging...

All this from system that costs less than $500 and no ac treatments or room treatments?

No you are wrong here...

My room is treated completely with passive reflective diffusive and absorbing surfaces...

Not only that but my room is actively controlled by a grid of more than 40 tuned Helmoltlz resonators and diffusers ... I call that a "mechanical equalizer" created after Helmoltz method and many over devices ( a Schuman generators grid and a ionizers grid etc) i will not spoke about here all of my creations homemade.... I dont bought tweaks , i create mine...


My motto is:

Dont upgrade BEFORE embedding mechanically against vibration and electrically decreasiing the HOUSE noise floor, and especially never before working passively with acoustic material surfaces and actively with Helmholtz mechanical devices control your room...

I can only say this, and I’m not being facitious, I’m rather envious of you. Perhaps, my obsession and others, with reaching for highest sound quality has all been a waste of time. Just as with the phantom center image, it’s all delusion anyway. If I had the perceptive powers you have I needn’t have spent all this money and obsessed over every single detail in this needless pursuit.

You could be envious in a way,   because even if  my low cost well chosen system is not the best ever, most people here own better system than mine but they are not well embedded and especially put on non treated and non controlled room acoustically, my system though is one of the best possible for his PRICE/S.Q. ratio....

This is the reason why i smile at the idea to upgrade my system ...

I already calculated the cost for a true upgrade from my system of 500 bucks : 15,000 us dollars at least and perhaps more for example from my Sansui AU 7700 to a Berning ZOTL 40 amplifier...

But this upgrade even if it will be a real one is not so much appealing because of what i really already have for the price of peanuts...

Audiophile experience is mainly acoustic for at least the bigger half part.... 😁😊

Marketing is not science.... Acoustic is a science...

Staying away from toe-in might be minimizing cross wall first reflections while maintaining same side wall reflections, which are now reduced in volume and slightly more delayed by having the speakers further from the wall, thereby minimizing or perhaps even optimizing comb filtering effects. Same side wall reflections tend to widen the soundstage. Cross wall first reflections can be a mixed bag, often not helping with imaging but under the right circumstances might help with spaciousness without harming the imaging. In your smaller space they probably aren’t helpful. Having the speakers closer together helps to solidify the center image.

Agree with follow your ears through the journey. In my experience, having nearfield or having a television involves being closer to the speakers. I notice that most deep bass then is harder to create since long waveforms need room. Some things are lost in this configuration you just may not know are missing. Also placement and toe in are great ways to listen and understand how the speaker interacts. For years I have had my Maggie’s with the tweeters inside. For fun I swapped them to the outside and to me it’s radically more listenable. Positioning speakers in your room is far preferable to swapping out equipment or cords to learn what sounds good to you. 

According to Cardas my 16 ft wide room should have the speakers 7 ft to rear wall, HUH ?

Correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t the goal to get a solid center soundstage, great sound,and the speakers disappear? Towing in too much gives away the location of the speaker. Again I’m referring to my Monitor Audio broad desperation speakers.