How tall do you like your images?

IMAGING: width/height/depth (my experiences)

1. setup must be correct (tweeter to seated ear height) & (toe-in for equal tweeter volume dispersion relative to the mids) & toe-in to protect the primary sounds from the reflections of floor/ceiling/side walls:

result is primarily horizontal imaging. phantom off center locations created by the speaker’s L/R relative volumes.

2. Then my mind creates a ’natural/normal sense of height, imagined height of players relative to speaker created horizontal phantom location.

seated ear height as the vertical center, everybody on the same floor height: i.e. Drummer imagined lower than bass player, piano height centered, bass player tallest. Horns higher than the Piano …..

OR, often, imagining relative to a typical stage height from decent orchestra seats: height of piano centered ’above’, all else relative to that ’starting/imagined’ height

3. Depth is created by a combination of mind and open space behind the speakers:

enhanced/limited by the actual amount of space behind the speaker to the rear reflected surface. The depth you perceive is based on your actual live listening experiences, i.e. you ‘know’ the depth of a small stage for a Jazz Trio; you ‘know’ the depth of stage for an orchestra (combined with standard placement of violins left; bass right; horns centered/behind; big drums and big horns rear row.

My experience, BTW, is that not all speakers like to be toed in at all, but compromises for the side walls is often needed.

Also, the ideal height for some speakers is below the tweeter axis.  B&W often does this, some do this by accident.  Ear at tweeter axis / height is a starting point, the sweet spot is often below the  tweeter.

@deep_333

check out this video on upmixing from audioholics

watched the video. not sure his up-mixing comments are relevant to my situation. he starts talking about using a multi-channel receiver or processor as a preamp. and his comments seem to assume everything is already digitized.

not a right or wrong kinda thing, just a different universe of system culture.

and his absolute focus is on sound staging, not musical refinement and tonal density or texture/timbral realism. it never comes up because it’s not his focus. OTOH my opinion is that sound staging is secondary to those aspects of musical touch.

he does not really "get" where i’m at, he needs to experience some different type systems that don’t start from his place to know how this can go. he is talking to a different crowd and set of priorities.

the listener needs to look at the media type they listen to, the quality of the sources, and the potential purity of their signal path before you can judge what to do with the level of purity they have. garbage in<->garbage out. what is at risk of losing with the approaches you are contemplating? i have much to lose. but that varies.

@erik_squires

Also, the ideal height for some speakers is below the tweeter axis. B&W often does this, some do this by accident. Ear at tweeter axis / height is a starting point, the sweet spot is often below the tweeter.

and proper toe in is relative to listening position. if you sit at the top of the equilateral triangle then image height based on toe in is one reality, but move your listening position slightly far field, or slightly near field, the image height will likely vary. and ideal toe in might change.

many listeners are not comfortable listening near field or even considering it, mostly due to too much direct sound in less than mature room acoustics, where there is just too much direct sound and reflective energy. but the near field is where the holographic fireworks live. in my large room, i sit in the near field with twin 7 foot tall, huge towers in my lap visually, yet the acoustics allow for a comfortable natural tonality and cohesive experience.

you have to work at near field acoustical comfort before you dismiss it, and be open to playing with toe in for ideal staging and height.

The acoustic of very small room cannot be set as very big room... And great hall acoustic is very different...

I dont have money , then i decided to embark in a homemade set of experiments 7 days on 7 for more than a year because i am retired...

A dedicated acoustic room make it possible such set of experiments,,,

i learned to experiment with passive material treatment but also with what i called active mechanical controls with a grid of distributed Helmhotz resonators tuned by ears all along the room near the speakers and near to my listening position...

The end results was not perfect but so hugely different from average speakers in a living room , there is not even comparison...my 2 way box system gave me what a multichannels gave in some way...

 

It was not perfect because my speakers so good they were , were not top nor my other gear pieces...

But my experience was so stunning that it resemble being in the sweet spot on a great musical hall and hearing music around me ...

Because my gear was average it can be improved on many acoustic aspects, but learning how to control a room taught me how general acoustic recipe given as solutions can be useful but scratch only the surface of the acoustic puzzles and the acoustic power of transformation in a room...

Those who did not experiment it cannot have an idea...

If someone want to reach the top, he must create an acoustic room for his speakers , buy the best gear, and buy the BACCH filters....No need to multichannel...

Acoustic consist in helping the ears to create, not tricking the ears to go where human brain do not naturally go...The difference between these two roads is very, very small... Milliseconds...

It is only my limited experience teachings...

There is three main focus in my tuning experience of very small room ( 131/2 feet by 15 feet by 8 feet 1/2) : the main aspect is timbre experience, because you can have localization of sound in space with a not optimal timbre experience or a distorted one....Then in second localization of sound sources all around you....But the third last aspect ask for more work and it is immersiveness, the way the listener is included in the recording acoustic translation experience in his acoustic room reproducing the recording but including him with his listener position in the soundfield...

This is possible to some level with purely mechanical means... It is not perfect as i said but going back to normal room listening or even to a room only passively treated with usual acoustic recipe is impossible...But to reach perfection is impossible with homemade mechanical controls made by tuning ears ... If someone read about the BACCH filters i think the next acoustic tool to buy it is this one...

I learned a lot doing it...

I learn at least that it is less the gear but acoustic that is the basis of audio...

We are all different with budget differences and different spaces... Then no one can impose his road to others for sure...

I only advise people to read basic acoustic more than gear review...😊