How tall do you like your images?

With my setup the acoustic center at the LP sits just above ear level (~3 1/2 ft.), but the total radiation area reaches somewhat higher (6' 2" - from ground level). To my ears the overall presentation feels more real when being immersed in a large "radiation sphere" that extends well beyond ear level with controlled (relatively narrow) dispersion, while acoustically being treated with sonic "images" right in front of you. 

Right now the images are a little too low,as if the musicians are all seated at my level.If I play with toe in they become taller and the soundstage wider.One of these days I'll spend the time to readjust, but the speakers are so heavy.I prefer the images as if they are raised up a bit on a stage.

@deep_333 

Strong words there. How about listing your system so we can all check it out. 

Iam too dumb, so I got my speakers built by a gentleman who was well regarded for his speaker builds. It was clearly conveyed that my room was small at 11 x 16.5 feet. And that it will be a near field setup with an equilateral triangle of 8.5 ft with the tweeters and ears. And i like the vocals to be at a realistic human height. So from what i understand, the crossover was built to give a coherent balance at the seated ear position. So even though the speakers are big 3 ways, I find them a joy to listen to, with very life like height and massive width. Whereas my other speakers, PMC twenty 26, sound disjointed like 3 different drivers doing their own thing at my same listening position.

When you said 9.3.6, i already know you fooked up with cramming too many quantity over quality speakers in a li’l room ( i have a 30 by 35 room and i refuse to go any higher than 5.2.4 for atmos music listening that will startle all 6.023*10^23 molecules that make up your soul, lol)....When you said Trinnov, i already have a feeling that you heavy handed everything with the room correction algorithms and all kinds of crap that made it sound clinical and digital ( you are indeed paying for that lifetime customer support from a dimdim who knows diddly about what’s going on inside that processor, however)....

@deep_333

when someone calls me out for being on the wrong track, i take them seriously. part of which includes trying to understand where they are coming from and see what i can learn. so i looked at your previous posting history and found this description of some of your systems.

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/spend-on-the-streamer-or-on-the-dac/post?postid=2062410#2062410

you seem to have very strongly expressed viewpoints. yet looking at this, i think that our viewpoints for what is high level performance are not aligned, our expectations for quality performance are not at the same level. yet if you are happy and enjoying your path then more power to you. i wish you the best.

i was a fan of SACD multi-channel myself back 20 years ago. i built a dedicated room for 5.1 SACD listening at the highest levels.

https://www.audiogon.com/systems/615

what i discovered was that my 2 channel smoked it. the media for 2 channel was so much better that the technical advantages of 5.1 could not surpass it. my 2 channel out ’multi-channeled’ the multi-channel. i still own 1000 SACD multi-channel discs.

part of it was vinyl verses digital. the vinyl was much better, even though i had state of the art digital. so i removed the rear channels and surround gear from my 2 channel room and re-tasked those funds to reel to reel tape decks. that was in 2008.

i always had a separate home theater room in my home with multi-channel surround supporting movies. over the years it was improved as technology advanced. now it’s fairly high level with the Trinnov, 9.3.6 Revel surround speakers and 3 Funk Audio subwoofers. i only do movies there. certainly music videos which take full advantage of Dolby Atmos can be entertaining, but my 2 channel is far superior for music only.

maybe also explain your logic of how the Trinnov is not a high level processor. that does not sound right to me.