Great systems in butt-ugly rooms

Ugly means the wife, or other significant other, will spend little time in the room checking out your latest purchase. Be grateful. And yes, ugly does not mean the romm will be acoustically dificent.

Kenscollick: One simple reason:
I don't know how to use my wife's camera.
:)

I think more than the appearance of the room, which for some in a dedicated room is not as important, is the number of systems in these tiny little rooms. I have seen some systems with upwards of $25,000 - $50,000 worth of equipment in rooms that don't appear to be more than 8-10 feet wide. Some of these systems are running large, very large speakers that appear to be about 1 foot from the side walls and about 4 feet apart.

We all have compromises of some degree or other, whether it be appearance or room size, but it seems to me that many ignore the match between the system and the room (not just the accoustical treatments that can be applied, but buying the wrong sized equipment for the available space).

Jorge

I agree and in fact, your point was the inspiration for my current room.

I have always enjoyed listening late at night and in the dark.

But even under those conditions I would agree that a "butt ugly", ill conceived, cluttered, garage like atmosphere detracts from the experience and pleasure of listening to music on a high end system.

Having said that, it can be very difficult and very expensive to create a beautiful and serene listening environment.

Nonetheless, something everyone should consider, and an excellent strategy for coping with WAF issues.

Like Tvad says..So what..if thats what it looks like then it is what it is.. there's no accounting for taste.the real issue should be, putting those superb, expensive systems and stuffing them into something no bigger than a guest bathroom. Now, thats a real shame. But, I suppose thats another thread ;-)