Yes, this is certainly my experience. Great soundstage starts with the preamp and amp. The same set of (reasonably good set off course) speakers can sound remarkably better with a better amp. In the end, all components in the audio chain is important.
I humbly do not agree at all with statements like 'if the amplifier has enough power and high enough damping factor there is no improvement to be had'. I can only think someone with that view has extremely un-resolving peripheral equipment. My (historical) experience is that even high-end expensive Japanese brand AVRs are comprehensively outperformed by inexpensive stereo amplifiers for <1/5 the price.
I don't think even a second hand one is in the price range of the OP, but if you think a stereo amplifier has no effect on spaciousness and three dimensional sound stage, then listen to a Pathos TT (Twin Towers) - you won't be able to stop listening.
I don't think even a second hand one is in the price range of the OP, but if you think a stereo amplifier has no effect on spaciousness and three dimensional sound stage, then listen to a Pathos TT (Twin Towers) - you won't be able to stop listening.
In my experience changing to a more transparent amp can make soundstage better (in particular, deeper) but only if the soundstage cues are present at the source. If your source is obscuring those low-level details you won't bring them back again no matter how good your amp.
Have you guys read the description of his room and his needs? This is 100% nothing that an amplifier will solve, please!!
My experiences in a room that size has been uniformly poor with stereo reproduction--nothing like that which is easily obtained in a larger room with the same hardware. If you have a larger room to place your current setup (~15-20 feet wide, 20+ feet deep), then you will be able to hear whether or not the problem is the room you're currently in or your hardware. That costs nothing but a little time to try.
Trying to use electronics or even wall absorption to kill early reflections in-room will likely be a severely limited exercise (in my experience). I've tried it and eventually abandoned the rooms of that size for classical hi-fi stereo reproduction. Headphones are probably indicated.
Even using highly directional loudspeakers and/or dipoles (i.e., AMT-1s), and assuming you have presently toed-in your loudspeakers sufficiently to stabilize the stereo image in-room, I've found that opposite wall reflections from the back of the room are still too great for the human hearing system to perceive a good broad image--or good soundstage. The only exception that I've heard is with a Polk SDA monitor system from the mid-early 1980s that could produce an extremely wide soundstage (180 degrees) if directly on centerline between the loudspeakers (i.e., head-in-a-vise)--but there were other aspects of the sound field that made that soundstage a little odd.
Sorry for the bad news...but there really is a minimum-sized room for good or outstanding orchestral soundstage reproduction--and I believe the dimensions of your room are just too small.
YMMV.
Chris
Stockings for tubes and socks for mids? Seriously I agree, they are ugly as (****). But being a diy speaker, you have many choices to mask the pillar, but mid-tweeter is more of a challenge.
Dipole or monopole speakers are really working well with classical music, but depending on room some acoustic treatment might be necessary.
Changing the stereo amp has zero effect. DSP multiway like Dolby ProLogic II Music will help too, but installing those 3 extra speakers is not easy.
Classicalfan - you did not say how much you have experimented with speaker placement and listener position. I would suggest moving the speakers further out from the front wall, and moving your listening position further out from the rear wall. This will get you closer to the speakers, and it will increase the angle between listener and speaker (i.e. increase the apparent width of the sound stage). Don't make big changes, try 10 cm at a time.
The closer you are to the speakers, the less you will perceive the sound of the room. With the small size of the piccolos, I suspect you can get quite close to them before they transition to "near field".
Experiment with toe-in as well. Toe-in angle affects how the much of the early reflections splash off the side walls and front walls.
j.
The closer you are to the speakers, the less you will perceive the sound of the room. With the small size of the piccolos, I suspect you can get quite close to them before they transition to "near field".
Experiment with toe-in as well. Toe-in angle affects how the much of the early reflections splash off the side walls and front walls.
j.
Clearly opinions here vary. You might want to consider that while many give their impressions, the fact remains that preamps and amps are designed with the intention to provide gain without signal modification. Speakers, however, all modify the signal very significantly, and room acoustics modify the signal reaching the ears massively and in ways no amplifier possibly could. This is provable both audibly and measurably. Amp and preamp comparisons are typically done without any scientific controls, not even the basic level matching, so results are typically biased and not based in fact. Amp and preamp differences may be measurable, but they are minuscule with respect to speakers and room acoustics.
This means, if you want to make a big change, go for speakers and acoustics. If you want to make a tiny, likely imperceptible change, go for the electronics.
This means, if you want to make a big change, go for speakers and acoustics. If you want to make a tiny, likely imperceptible change, go for the electronics.
In my experience, that threshold is about two wavelengths of sound radius around each loudspeaker--which generally define "near field". So, in my experience, it's not really the size of the loudspeaker, but the frequencies of interest--unless using a large planar dipole, etc. The vertical offset of drivers (-->vertical lobing effects) tends to be the limiting factor in terms of how closely they are placed to the workstation before loudspeaker polar coverage issues start to dominate.
When you look at pictures of very small mastering studio suites, you see loudspeakers that are generally in the extreme nearfield to eliminate in-room reflections down to ~500 Hz with plenty of diffusion on nearby walls to cut down on the cross-wall reflections that I referred to:
Reverberation time plots (RT30) of these types of rooms are generally below 0.4 s down to ~100 Hz...and sometimes lower at 0.2 s, indicating a highly overdamped listening space relative to home hi-fi rooms. These studios are typically not very enjoyable places to listen to music, unlike home hi-fi listening rooms. They are however there to enable listening to the working music tracks in a more clinical fashion-without room reflections dominating the sound perception.
Chris
Buy headphones or a new house with bigger rooms...The second choice will keep you wife around, the first one will divorce you quicker and make you go more often to the philharmonic house in search for a new wife that will always preffer you listen to her on a wider stage than listening to your headphones in your small audiophile room.
Last edited:
How's your toe-in? My favorite is having the speakers axis crossing in front of me.
I would experiment with a nearfield setup in your room and see if that gives you what you're looking for. Then start moving things back until you lose it and then determine what room treatments help restore it.
Also use known good imaging tracks (all genres) to rule out your favorite recordings as a contributor.
I would experiment with a nearfield setup in your room and see if that gives you what you're looking for. Then start moving things back until you lose it and then determine what room treatments help restore it.
Also use known good imaging tracks (all genres) to rule out your favorite recordings as a contributor.
If you dont like the idea of acoustic tiles, you could always hang curtains behind and on the sides of your speakers. Perhaps a bit less industrial in regards to the decor of the room. Being a common vs specialty item, perhaps easier to try - they'd come down a lot easier if the idea fails.
"So why is the phase important? Well, it's a subtle thing. I don't suppose everyone can hear it, and fewer particularly care, but from listening tests we learn that there is a tendency to interpret negative phase 2nd as giving a deeper soundstage and improved localization than otherwise. Positive phase seems to put the instruments and vocals closer and a little more in-your-face with enhanced detail."
Nelson Pass describing the sound quality from the H2v1 and H2v2 from the FIRSTWATT website. DIYStore has the kits for sale, build it for under $40 with an enclosure.
Nelson Pass describing the sound quality from the H2v1 and H2v2 from the FIRSTWATT website. DIYStore has the kits for sale, build it for under $40 with an enclosure.
On loudspeaker imaging, from the person who might just know more than the rest of the world put together when it comes to perception of acoustic space: http://www.davidgriesinger.com/Acoustics_Today/AES_preprint_2012_2.pdf (AES Paper: Pitch, Timbre, Source Separation and the Myths of Loudspeaker Imaging)
"Soundstage" Start by putting down the Stereophile magazine. If you are talking about a more defined image,
amplifiers have nothing to do with it. Pre or main unless they totally screw up the eq. ( Like a passive volume can do) It is 33% equalization, 33% speakers and the other 33% room environment. That leaves 1% magic.
Do some googling on DIY sound management. Key word, management. Not williy-nilley use of overpriced absorption sheets. Amplifier DF of more than 10 is irrelevant. Tubes are just distortion generators ( sometimes nice) and class D amps squeaky clean sound some may like, I do not but have not heard the newest Purify like a March. No, reflections within two feet matter. general moving the midrange up or down a dB or so can move the entire image fore and aft. Play with the toe-in. Where you are probably off axis to the inside, toe in can put you off-axis to the outside and reduce side reflections with the same basic eq. Play with it.
Of course, you won't get anything that was not recorded. Put on an early 60"s record recorded in right and left, and it will never be a stereo image. Some of the processors in APO that do various high blends can help if you are running off a PC.
amplifiers have nothing to do with it. Pre or main unless they totally screw up the eq. ( Like a passive volume can do) It is 33% equalization, 33% speakers and the other 33% room environment. That leaves 1% magic.
Do some googling on DIY sound management. Key word, management. Not williy-nilley use of overpriced absorption sheets. Amplifier DF of more than 10 is irrelevant. Tubes are just distortion generators ( sometimes nice) and class D amps squeaky clean sound some may like, I do not but have not heard the newest Purify like a March. No, reflections within two feet matter. general moving the midrange up or down a dB or so can move the entire image fore and aft. Play with the toe-in. Where you are probably off axis to the inside, toe in can put you off-axis to the outside and reduce side reflections with the same basic eq. Play with it.
Of course, you won't get anything that was not recorded. Put on an early 60"s record recorded in right and left, and it will never be a stereo image. Some of the processors in APO that do various high blends can help if you are running off a PC.
The best soundstage I’ve ever heard come from SET tube amps(single ended triode). Your room is small so you don’t need a lot of power. These amps tend to have the ability to create a 3D image without any digital voodoo or trickery. Try it out for yourself if you can find a loaner or if a friend has one. Simple tends to sound more real and as recorded.