How to position your speakers perfectly

[Rup 21]

 

 Best music for speaker placement and best speaker placement tutorial???

 

Having acquired a pair of Harbeth P3ESR speakers I'm having fun looking for the ultimate speaker placement. 

 

I have downloaded

The Visual Sound the Sound Liaison DXD Music Sampler 

as it was recommended to me as being a great speaker placement tool.

 (Using the coupon code “XFI2019” you can download the 352DXD for $16 or the 24/ 96 files for $8.)

Especially the phase coherent One Microphone recordings on the sampler seems excellent for that purpose: 

  Carmen Gomes inc. One Mic Recording Session       

Quote

 

     “These guys and this recording just rocks. Pace, rhythm, tone and soundstage are just off the charts.

The precise placement of all four of the musicians perfectly matches the photos of the sessions. The balance of all four instruments is darn near perfect. As you can no doubt tell, I am a huge fan of this recording. It is one of the best in terms of recording quality I have ever heard. Of course, and as always, your view of the actual music content may vary quite considerably from mine. Nonetheless, I think we would all agree that this recording sounds sensational

                                                                                                                                         source;  Sound-Liaison-One-Mic-recordings audiophilestyle review

 

 

  https://www.soundliaison.com/index.php/536-sound-liaison-dxd-music-sampler 

 

On the net i.e.  youtube, there are a great number of tutorials in speaker placement. 

 Any of these you would especially recommend?

                                                               https://www.harbeth.co.uk/speakers/userguide.php    

 

 

Edited May 3 by Rup

[yannakout 31]

If you're Anything like me you may be forever tinkering, it's part of the hobby I guess.

- trust your ears, I find when I get that spot just right I'll feel a sense of enhanced patience and enjoyment.

- avoid the problem spots ( 1/2 Or 1/4 distance to ceiling) Etc Etc...

- Find the right spot in your room(of you have the freedom

- if you're lucky try listen to well set up studio, I learnes a lot from the experience and took this hearing experience and used it to help with my placement of non nearfield listening.

- bring a friend to make slight adjustments while you listen closed eyes.

What I tend to do is find a reference placement and mark it with tape.

My methods and rules:

1) select seating placement that allows the speakers room to breathe from the back wall (my front ported pmc I still give 50cm)

2) Start at the equilateral triangle and NO toe in.

3) ensure that the tweeters are roughly in line with your ear levels

4) speaker width I view like a rubber band being stretched. If the sound is too thin (lacking in fullness and midbass) bring them in closer, move in your self to keep equidistant and reassess. 

Try moving them out wider if the sound is a bit too dense, some speakers really need room to breathe. Be careful to not lose the imaging of the vocalist or get too close to the side walls.

5) check in, is their depth to the soundstage or lacking deep bass? Mess with depth from wall. Also experiment moving either slightly closer or further from the listening position.

6) toe in. More Toe in provides enhanced focus and generally creates a brighter tweeter response. I do 4 quick checks before slow dial in. 1) no toe in, 2) toe in pointed right at my ears 3) toe in aimed 6 feet behind my head 4) half way between 3&1.

Once I find the best blend of soundstage width, focus and enjoyment. I'll make slight alterations.

7) I stand in the spot and see how it sounds if I’m slightly higher or lower than the tweeters (again may affect brightenes) I also again move slightly back and forward.

8 ) have an experienced friend have a listen.

now this is my reference spot. I will leave them like this for a full week to get used to them and truely listen. I will mark this and still have my marking from the equilateral triangle. 
keep these 2 spots marked precisely. Now if you feel you want more airiness, fullness or brightness etc etc make minor adjustments based on the previous rules.

 

 

[yannakout 31]

Also I found this to be quite unique, wont be for everyone, but hey it’s worth a try after you find your first reference spot

 

[Yamaha_man 1,065]

I must say I do envy the ease at which you guys move your speakers around and play with position.

 

[Nigel 592]

Yannakout, you left out an important item, the listening position. Just as the diagram above shows one particular freq or wavelength cancelling by the reflection from the wall behind the speaker, the same happens for many more freqs, especially the 3 wavelengths corresponding to the room W,L & Height. Various places in the room have primary and secondary cancellation points ("room modes") coinciding in clusters and you don't want to have your head there else you will be judging the overall sound falsely.

[awayward 2,229]

My speaker and stand totals 93kg, I place then on furniture sliders and they move with ease.

@Yamaha_man

Edited October 31, 2019 by awayward

[Yamaha_man 1,065]

6 minutes ago, awayward said:

My speaker and stand totals 93kg, I place then on furniture sliders and they move with ease.

@Yamaha_man

My speakers tip the scales at 150kg and are sitting on very thick carpet.

Trust me, it’s a mission.

[Gav67 69]

Try 300kgs each.  Very Minor adjustments can be made of the spikes in place but to test various positioning scenarios requires lifting the speakers to replace the spikes with casters. Then they are easy to move.  But I only go down this path if I have a day or two spare and want to try different positions.  

[warweary 607]

In the lounge I aimed for a 3 m by 3 m by 3 m triangle with the front on the speakers 1 m from the front wall.

[MrC 206]

Just now, warweary said:

In the lounge I aimed for a 3 m by 3 m by 3 m triangle with the front on the speakers 1 m from the front wall.

Excellent .. I have mine at just under 4 meters ... its called forming an EQUILATERAL triangle.  The mathematician in me couldn't help myself there!

[Krispy Audio 2,537]

I've found with my P3s that they favour being positioned slightly wider than equilateral, whereas most others favour slightly inside. Try going wider; you'll improve soundstage width yet they hold the centre focus well still. 

[Wimbo 2,334]

3 hours ago, MrC said:

Excellent .. I have mine at just under 4 meters ... its called forming an EQUILATERAL triangle.  The mathematician in me couldn't help myself there!

Isosceles is better. Near and far field 

[MrC 206]

1 hour ago, Wimbo said:

Isosceles is better. Near and far field 

Why is that?  Didn't you know that an equilateral triangle is also an isosceles triangle?  😉

[Wimbo 2,334]

30 minutes ago, MrC said:

Why is that?  Didn't you know that an equilateral triangle is also an isosceles triangle?  😉

Since when?

[MrC 206]

48 minutes ago, Wimbo said:

Since when?

The mathematical definition of an isosceles triangle is a triangle that has 2 sides of equal length.  Well ... an equilateral triangle has this property.  It is the same way we can say that a square is a rectangle (a special rectangle).

[gt1482 90]

Try the following suggestion from a Harbeth facebook group. It really works!

Quote

I prefer nearfield listening with Harbeth, but with speakers on stands (not a desktop) and pulled out into the room, as far away from walls as you can.
Try X meters between tweeter-to- ear, and 1.4X meters from tweeter-to-tweeter, and toed-in so tweeter aims directly at ear. I like X = 1 meter.
If you want to take it a step further, try getting the height of the speakers (or your chair) so your ear is right between the midrange and tweeter.
P3ESRs and LS3/5A types excel like this and image like crazy (and I ahve also done this with 40.1s, 30.1s, SHL5+, etc). You don't have to drive them as hard to get the same SPL level at your ears since you are not losing SPL's to the room. So when they say "85dB/1-watt/1-meter, 1 watt really goes give you around 85dB SPL. You also don't need as much amplifier power. 😉
Speakers also sound more dynamic this way because you are not getting as much smearing of transients from the room, or as much in terms of bass peaks/dips. And as I have said in the past, Harbeth's really excel at nearfield. If you set it up just right, they will pull off a very impressive "disappearing act," and if you listen at night with low light, it enhances the effect even more!

 

 

[Assisi 1,230]

26 minutes ago, MrC said:

The mathematical definition of an isosceles triangle is a triangle that has 2 sides of equal length.  Well ... an equilateral triangle has this property.  It is the same way we can say that a square is a rectangle (a special rectangle).

From a strict perspective an isosceles triangle two sides are of equal length  The third side is a different length.  With an equilateral triangle all three sides are of equal length.  Therefore the listening outcome could be different depending on the lengths of the triangle sides and the sitting position.

John

[Batty 4,979]

24 minutes ago, Assisi said:

From a strict perspective an isosceles triangle two sides are of equal length  The third side is a different length.  With an equilateral triangle all three sides are of equal length.  Therefore the listening outcome could be different depending on the lengths of the triangle sides and the sitting position.

John

Venn diagram would separate and include both Isosceles and equilateral triangles. ( sub group).

 

Does having 2 equal side exclude having 3 equal sides? no, but having 3 equal sides does not include having 2 equal sides.

 

Therefore an Equilateral triangle is a special case of an Isosceles Triangle.

 

All Equilateral triangles are Isosceles, but all Isosceles are not Equilateral.

 

As I see it.

 

[Class A Audio 117]

For anyone in Victoria, you should come to our store to audition the well setup P3ESR.

[HdB 203]

If you want to really learn something about room setups, try Jim Smith's "Get Better Sound" book - it's a direct 'on-line' purchase from "getbettersound.com" - it's still US$38 + postage - also available as a series of DVDs for those people who prefer this way
 

It also has some 'no-nonsense' introductions to "acoustics 101" (beginner acoustics) plus it has a list of specific music and how to listen well (excellent directions on what to listen for, etc)

 

Knowledge is the cheapest upgrade & the benefits last your lifetime.

 

It's great to see the acoustical control panels in use

[Wimbo 2,334]

5 hours ago, MrC said:

The mathematical definition of an isosceles triangle is a triangle that has 2 sides of equal length.  Well ... an equilateral triangle has this property.  It is the same way we can say that a square is a rectangle (a special rectangle).

No. an Eq has three. An isosceles has two. Don't change the math to fit your assumption. Sounds like "WE" is you only. Not me.

[Wimbo 2,334]

4 hours ago, Batty said:

 

All Equilateral triangles are Isosceles,

How? Isosceles has two equal sides. Not three. Seriously, where do you guys get this thinking from? Universities? Making me more and more worried about whats being taught theses days. But, I won't worry for long. Don't give a damn anymore actually.

[swervyn 366]

7 minutes ago, Wimbo said:

How? Isosceles has two equal sides. Not three. Seriously, where do you guys get this thinking from? Universities? Making me more and more worried about whats being taught theses days. But, I won't worry for long. Don't give a damn anymore actually.

Someone will be offended by your assumption, probs a vegan....

[Batty 4,979]

21 minutes ago, Wimbo said:

How? Isosceles has two equal sides. Not three. Seriously, where do you guys get this thinking from? Universities? Making me more and more worried about whats being taught theses days. But, I won't worry for long. Don't give a damn anymore actually.

Quote the whole and it makes sense.

[MrC 206]

3 hours ago, Wimbo said:

How? Isosceles has two equal sides. Not three. Seriously, where do you guys get this thinking from? Universities? Making me more and more worried about whats being taught theses days. But, I won't worry for long. Don't give a damn anymore actually.

You fail to grasp the idea that if there ARE two equal sides in an equilateral triangle then it is also isosceles too.   A Venn diagram that could be drawn has the equilateral triangle set contained completely within the isosceles triangle set.  If you don't get it then you just don't get it mate ... don't worry.

[bob_m_54 1,456]

My mrs just uses the vacuum cleaner as an alignment aid...

[almikel 1,576]

On 02/11/2019 at 10:39 AM, bob_m_54 said:

My mrs just uses the vacuum cleaner as an alignment aid...

mis-alignment aid?

[almikel 1,576]

On 01/11/2019 at 6:18 AM, Nigel said:

Yannakout, you left out an important item, the listening position. Just as the diagram above shows one particular freq or wavelength cancelling by the reflection from the wall behind the speaker, the same happens for many more freqs, especially the 3 wavelengths corresponding to the room W,L & Height. Various places in the room have primary and secondary cancellation points ("room modes") coinciding in clusters and you don't want to have your head there else you will be judging the overall sound falsely.

this diagram...

...is describing Speaker Boundary Interference Response (SBIR), which creates peaks and nulls in the response.

The issue Nigel describes above is room modal response, which is different to SBIR, but also creates peaks and nulls in the response.

 

As @Nigel points out, the listening position is just as important as the speaker position for both SBIR and Room Modes.

Changing speaker position and/or listening position can have a significant impact on both.

 

Room modes result from the room size - the room will have resonant behaviour based on its dimensions dominated by primary modes for length/width/height where each dimension of the room = wavelength/2, and then each multiple above ie wavelength/4 etc.

There are plenty of "room mode" calculators available on the interweb

Room modes in "normal" domestic rooms (ie small) have an impact below 250Hz or so, and create large peaks and dips in the room response below 250Hz or so depending on room size.

If your listening position is in a modal "null" you will hear reduced volume at that modal frequency.

Modal frequencies are set by your room size (with some qualification for lightly constructed rooms).

Changing the listening position will move you into/out of modal nulls (most rooms experience a significant change in bass response as you move around the room).

Changing the speaker position has a different effect on room modes - place them at a null and that room mode won't be energised - this is a technique Toole recommends.

 

As frequency increases, room modes and their multiples "bunch up" - large auditoriums don't have modal issues - their primary axial length/width/depth modes are well below 20Hz, and the modes are so bunched up by 20Hz it doesn't matter any more - very different to "domestic" listening rooms where modal behaviour with their peaks and troughs are smack in the middle of the room's bass response.

 

Room  modes can be treated with absorption etc, but below 150Hz or so the treatment gets too large and deep to be practical.

1 or more subs can help a lot to achieve a smooth bass response <100Hz or so.  

Below 150Hz or so I've also found EQ cut effective for room mode issues when the room response is "minimum phase" - the concept of minimum phase is a topic beyond the scope of this thread - suffice to say that IME EQ cut works well below 150Hz or so.

 

SBIR is a different beast than room modal behaviour - IMHO SBIR is a topic that doesn't receive the attention it deserves.

SBIR is based on path length differences between direct and reflected sounds creating peaks/troughs in the response.

An SBIR calculator is on Ken Tripp's site - an SNA member I haven't seen on SNA for ages...

http://tripp.com.au/sbir.htm

 

"Floor Bounce" is a term used to describe a specific type of SBIR, where the reflected sound from a woofer bouncing off the floor combines with the direct sound from the woofer to create a "null" at the listening position.

By mounting the woofer close to the floor you can ameliorate this SBIR effect.

 

The further a speaker or the listening position is from a boundary, the lower the dip/cancellation from SBIR is...

...unfortunately you need a truly massive room and speakers/listening position a long way from boundaries to push the SBIR dip below say 20Hz - muck with the calculators to see for yourself...

 

A bit contrary to the normal practise of having speakers as far from boundaries as possible, if you want to avoid SBIR dips/cancellations smack in the middle of the bass region you can push speakers closer to boundaries and raise the SBIR dip to a higher frequency where absorption may work effectively.

 

IME it's never a good idea to use EQ on SBIR issues - SBIR is never "minimum phase", and you will get sub optimal results by applying EQ - speaker/listening position adjustment and treatment are the best solutions for SBIR.

 

cheers,

Mike

 

Edited November 3, 2019 by almikel

[Pim 169]

On 01/11/2019 at 6:34 PM, HdB said:

If you want to really learn something about room setups, try Jim Smith's "Get Better Sound" book - it's a direct 'on-line' purchase from "getbettersound.com" - it's still US$38 + postage - also available as a series of DVDs for those people who prefer this way
 

It also has some 'no-nonsense' introductions to "acoustics 101" (beginner acoustics) plus it has a list of specific music and how to listen well (excellent directions on what to listen for, etc)

 

Knowledge is the cheapest upgrade & the benefits last your lifetime.

 

It's great to see the acoustical control panels in use

I too am a member of the 'Jim Smith Get Better Sound' fan club. 

 

There seem to be two camps that I can identify.

1.  Sound stage lovers

2. Tonal colour lovers

 

Jim Smith is in the second camp and so am I. The guy in the Youtube video who says sound stage is the most important thing for him to listen to is missing out in my opinion.

I have a window that's over 6m wide, 2.7m high with a bar at 1.1m. In the building stage of the room, when the insulation was done and before the gyprock went up, I set up a pair of KEF LS50W on the bar. So there was nothing behind them and everything in the room they were pointing towards was super damped. It wasn't hard to get the most incredible sound stage I have ever heard in my life, from any system in any room. It was so good it was spooky. The music hang it the air like nothing else and even though I could see the speakers, I couldn't identify the sound coming out of them. 

 

You would think I was thrilled.

 

I was thrilled with the accomplishment of creating this incredible sound stage but there was something much more important missing; Tone. Nothing sounded like it's supposed to sound. There was no body to voice or instruments. It didn't sound real.

I'm sure this could be fixed by having much more powerful speakers with better bass. After all, outdoor concerts don't have walls to help out the speakers. But on average I would say setting up your speakers to get the best tone is more important than sound stage in a home setup. 

 

Jim Smith mentions he keep track of the triangle he ends up with after he has set up speakers for his customers and he's come to an average of I believe an 83% (could be 87%, I don't have the book here) width to distance ratio. So if the speakers are 10m away from you ears, they would be 8.3m apart tweeter to tweeter. This is an average, not a rule.

 

I've tried Jim's method in my old room (the new room has 'special' issues) and I found there actually was a point where the tone was best and the sound stage actually became pretty good too. But nothing like that time when I set the KEFs up in the window.

 

There's a lot more in Jims book and I urge everyone to give it a go. It changed my viewpoint of what can be accomplished with a system forever. Even to the point that whenever I listen to some other systems made up of much better equipment than mine I always conclude that mine sounds better, more natural and real.

[almikel 1,576]

On 04/11/2019 at 2:00 PM, Pim said:

There seem to be two camps that I can identify.

1.  Sound stage lovers

2. Tonal colour lovers

at least one more camp   :

3. Bass nuts (which I'm one of) - those that enjoy smooth tight bass  - depending on taste from cavernous (<20Hz) up to 250Hz or so

 

IMHO if you get the room bass right, you're 80% done - not trivial to achieve - and usually requiring 1 or more subs, EQ and room treatment...

 

...I like sound stage and good tonal colour also...

IMHO both require a speaker with a smooth on and off axis frequency response - so reflections off room boundaries have the same spectral content as the direct sound.

I'm not familiar with the OP's Harbeth speakers so I can't comment on their sound stage or tonal colour...

 

Kudos to Harbeth for not overstating the low end capability of their 110mm driver in the P3ESR...but their cutoff at 75Hz would benefit from a sub or 2...even if their "in room" response reached lower...

 

I was amazed at the depth and weight a single sub added to my system - a well integrated capable sub added to the OP's system would make a big difference.

 

cheers

Mike

[yannakout 31]

On 01/11/2019 at 7:18 AM, Nigel said:

Yannakout, you left out an important item, the listening position. Just as the diagram above shows one particular freq or wavelength cancelling by the reflection from the wall behind the speaker, the same happens for many more freqs, especially the 3 wavelengths corresponding to the room W,L & Height. Various places in the room have primary and secondary cancellation points ("room modes") coinciding in clusters and you don't want to have your head there else you will be judging the overall sound falsely.

I did address it just not in detail before the numbers started ( avoid problem spots etc etc) I definitely could have been clearer but I thought it was damn long enough 

[Rup 21]

On 05/11/2019 at 9:47 PM, yannakout said:

I did address it just not in detail before the numbers started ( avoid problem spots etc etc) I definitely could have been clearer but I thought it was damn long enough 

It was, but also very much appreciated!😍😘

[Jason_Coch64 4]

Some great info here guys always good to reconfirm best techniques 

[vivianbl 149]

I too am a member of the 'Jim Smith Get Better Sound' fan club. 

 

Jim Smith mentions he keep track of the triangle he ends up with after he has set up speakers for his customers and he's come to an average of I believe an 83% (could be 87%, I don't have the book here) width to distance ratio. So if the speakers are 10m away from you ears, they would be 8.3m apart tweeter to tweeter. This is an average, not a rule.

 

What do you then do with the toe in angle?

Do you adjust them so that they continue to point them to your ears.?

[Pim 169]

17 hours ago, vivianbl said:

What do you then do with the toe in angle?

Do you adjust them so that they continue to point them to your ears.?

The answer to that question and probably all questions is 'it depends', because every room is different. That's what I like about Jim's set up method. It's not a magic bullet approach but more a journey.

 

This is an example of toe in in my experience; Same system, two rooms. In my previous living room we had reasonably ok damping on the walls. I had my speakers toed in to cross about half a meter behind my head. Now we're in a larger living room and we're not done yet with room treatment. There's a full glass wall on one side and a kitchen on the other and there's no way to treat those hard surfaces. So I had to deal with slap echo.

 

My solution, after trying lots of positions, was to have the speakers closer to the wall than where I started. This makes the bass a little bit bloated but because they're stand mounts I needed the extra body that the speakers just couldn't deliver on their own.   This way I didn't have to play as loud to get the same impact so less echo. That was a compromise.

 

I toed them in to point right at my head so there was less slap echo compared to the direct sound. It's not ideal but it works better than with slap echo. That is another compromise.

 

I have a timber floor and we can't have rugs so when I really want to enjoy some tunes, I put one of our two couches (the right one) in from of the speaker. The one on the left already sits in that position as it is. That way there's no reflection from the floor. The speakers are high enough to point over the couches to that works quite well. That's probably the most successful thing I've done.

 

I have a Lazy Boy XXL chair. It's quite high and soft so my head just flops into it. That way I don't get much echo from the wall behind me either.

 

So that's my setup. Yours will most likely be very different. The trick is to identify the problems and know what to do to fix them and that's where Jim Smith comes in very handy.

 

My setup is far from ideal. The old living room sounded much better and I doubt very much that I'll ever get this new one to sound great. I'm planning to turn a spare bedroom into a listening room. That way I'll have total control.

 

Hope this helps.

Cheers,

 

Pim

[almikel 1,576]

On 09/11/2019 at 3:45 PM, vivianbl said:

What do you then do with the toe in angle?

Do you adjust them so that they continue to point them to your ears.?

I choose a large toe in angle - my PSE horns are pointed so the throat of the left horn points at the right extreme of the listening couch and vice versa - the axis where they cross is about 1m in front of the listening couch.

This is an approach recommended by Geddes for his speakers, but the theory applies to speakers with a "smooth off axis" response to maintain a stereo image for the listener when they're listening off axis.

 

Anywhere on my listening couch and beyond, I can still hear a stereo image - it just shifts left or right with me...compared to say ESL57's or Martin Logan electros where the stereo image collapses very quickly to one side or the other.

 

I'm not bagging out electros - in their sweet spot, nothing else comes close - Peter Walker was a genius - and don't forget when the 57 came out they were sold as singles because stereo didn't exist...

...the only reason I don't run electros is they're no party proof - I crank my stereo and expect it to survive abuse when someone else grabs the remote and I'm not around...and I've experienced the aftermath next day numerous times when "normal" speakers have also experienced toasted tweeters and woofers etc, but replacing a blown driver is much cheaper than fixing a 57 panel that was pushed to arcing all night long...

 

If I only listened at low SPL then IMHO, the Quad 57 would be the best speaker of all time (adding a suitably integrated sub), and I would appropriate the central listening position and ignore their response outside the primary listening position - at the central LP, they are sublime.

 

cheers

Mike

[vivianbl 149]

I choose a large toe in angle - my PSE horns are pointed so the throat of the left horn points at the right extreme of the listening couch and vice versa - the axis where they cross is about 1m in front of the listening couch.

This is an approach recommended by Geddes for his speakers, but the theory applies to speakers with a "smooth off axis" response to maintain a stereo image for the listener when they're listening off axis.

 

Anywhere on my listening couch and beyond, I can still hear a stereo image - it just shifts left or right with me...compared to say ESL57's or Martin Logan electros where the stereo image collapses very quickly to one side or the other.

 

I'm not bagging out electros - in their sweet spot, nothing else comes close - Peter Walker was a genius - and don't forget when the 57 came out they were sold as singles because stereo didn't exist...

...the only reason I don't run electros is they're no party proof - I crank my stereo and expect it to survive abuse when someone else grabs the remote and I'm not around...and I've experienced the aftermath next day numerous times when "normal" speakers have also experienced toasted tweeters and woofers etc, but replacing a blown driver is much cheaper than fixing a 57 panel that was pushed to arcing all night long...

 

If I only listened at low SPL then IMHO, the Quad 57 would be the best speaker of all time (adding a suitably integrated sub), and I would appropriate the central listening position and ignore their response outside the primary listening position - at the central LP, they are sublime.

 

cheers

Mike

 

One of the advantages of the 57s I use in my listening room is that I can sit about a metre to the side of the centre listening chair and still have a stable image - because of the type of components of the treble panel construction that John Hall used. Can also use higher powered amps and play louder as well.

 

My other pair of original 57s peak at the central point.

 

Currently use a 18wpc PSE 300B mono blocks that give more than enough in my listening room that is “3/4” dedicated to that function. I’m the only one who operates the equipment in that room! In the past I used to set up different speakers and amplifiers if there was a party!

 

I am getting a very wide and deep soundstage and imaging with the front of the soundstage about a 1m behind the speakers, but currently trying to figure out how to bring the front of the soundstage forward without losing the tone and depth!

 

Have experimented with placing the speakers wide - adjacent to the side wall- brought them forward to 1.7m to centre of speaker from back( behind speakers) wall, various toe ins at those positions etc. The difficulty is there are so many variables to contend with, including where the room treatments are relative to the position of the speakers.

 

The room is 5m by 9m and 2.4m to ceiling Currently, the speakers are 1.5m (to centre of speaker) from the back wall and 0.5m from side wall to side of speaker. Centre of treble panel is about 0.75- 0.80m from sidewall.

Speakers are 2.8m apart from centre treble panels and listening chair 3m from centre treble panel.

 

Only making very small adjustments now, but they make pronounced differences to the presentation.

 

[vivianbl 149]

I too am a member of the 'Jim Smith Get Better Sound' fan club.   

There seem to be two camps that I can identify.

1.  Sound stage lovers

2. Tonal colour lovers

 

 

I suppose I am striving to achieve both!

When I first moved the equipment into the listening room and used portable acoustic treatments ( polyester/ Dacron) batts to experiment, I found a sweet spot that did both- it was spectacular to see, feel and hear. I wasn’t using measurement as such just moving things around and listening!

 

Unfortunately, I wasn’t doing this as systematically as I should have and did not keep a record of the position of speakers, treatments and other variables. I also read and took heed of all the advice on the net about equilateral triangles, equal symmetry and ESl positioning from Quad Gurus etc. and decided to implement that approach, thinking that should improve things even further.

 

To my chagrin I was not able to achieve that and despite attempts to retrace the original position I have not been able to replicate it. What I do remember was that one of the speakers was not symmetrically placed in relation to the other- one was about 5-10cm closer to the back wall and that one had much more toe in than the other; and distance from side wall was also not the same!

 

On a side note, I recollect an audiologist commenting that my ear canal shape in one ear was different to the other and that also affects the hearing. Not sure if this adds another variable to the positioning of speakers for the “sweet” spot!🤷🏽‍♂️

 

 

 

[Pim 169]

21 hours ago, vivianbl said:

On a side note, I recollect an audiologist commenting that my ear canal shape in one ear was different to the other and that also affects the hearing. Not sure if this adds another variable to the positioning of speakers for the “sweet” spot!🤷🏽‍♂️

 

 

 

Since you are the person who's listening to the system I can't see anything wrong with adjusting it to suit your ears. 

[Rup 21]

This is all very informative. Thank you all and please do keep the advice coming.