While browsing the internet I read the 38% rule for speaker placement. Dividing 100 by the golden ratio (1.618) gives 61.8 with a difference of 38.2 from one hundred. In the following example I use 40, 60 and 100 as an approximation.
The ratio of the distances from the walls of the speakers in my room is very close to the golden ratio value. The distribution is asymmetric, the distances are:
- the right speaker is about 100 cm from the right wall,
- the speakers are 60 cm (100 / 1.61) from the back wall,
- the left speaker is about 160 cm (100 * 1.61) from the left wall,
- the distance between the speakers is about 260 cm (160 * 1.61), the sum of the distance from the right wall and the left wall is the distance between the two speakers (Fibonacci)
- the speakers are about 100 cm high and 160 cm (100 * 1.61) from the ceiling.
When I moved the speakers to this room I noticed the improvement in acoustics but I didn't think about the golden ratio between the various distances and the size of the room.
Has anyone tried, or wants to try, an asymmetric distribution of the speakers with golden ratio distances?
link:
https://www.claudiogandolfi.it
https://www.claudiogandolfi.it/cl08fr.html
My contribution:
I recommend, based on some arguments:
Speakers have an image size. Different speakers have different image sizes.
The majority of stereo signals are found on both channels, i.e. "mono".
If speakers are placed too far apart, the sound image is torn apart.
To find a sound that is homogeneous in depth, width and also height, and tonally: recommend placing your speakers about 50 cm (center-center) apart and listening for a while. Then at some point place the speakers 60 cm apart. Then at some point 70 cm. And so on, until the sound image torn apart... Don't forget to move speakers back until they play together again now;-)
With compact speakers, this distance is far less than one meter, with really large floorstanding speakers very rarely more than 1.5 meters.
Angulation: max homogeneity: often so that the outer side walls of the boxes are visible.
Distance to the rear wall: when bass and fundamental engage.
And: sources and amplifiers (and single parts as transistors or caps) and others also have different imaging sizes and shapes. The initially adjusted loudspeaker placement must very often be corrected, even if only by 2 - 3 cm, when replacing equipment.
...and: No DSP: all your equipment, all parts, the system is the "DSP"-)
I recommend, based on some arguments:
Speakers have an image size. Different speakers have different image sizes.
The majority of stereo signals are found on both channels, i.e. "mono".
If speakers are placed too far apart, the sound image is torn apart.
To find a sound that is homogeneous in depth, width and also height, and tonally: recommend placing your speakers about 50 cm (center-center) apart and listening for a while. Then at some point place the speakers 60 cm apart. Then at some point 70 cm. And so on, until the sound image torn apart... Don't forget to move speakers back until they play together again now;-)
With compact speakers, this distance is far less than one meter, with really large floorstanding speakers very rarely more than 1.5 meters.
Angulation: max homogeneity: often so that the outer side walls of the boxes are visible.
Distance to the rear wall: when bass and fundamental engage.
And: sources and amplifiers (and single parts as transistors or caps) and others also have different imaging sizes and shapes. The initially adjusted loudspeaker placement must very often be corrected, even if only by 2 - 3 cm, when replacing equipment.
...and: No DSP: all your equipment, all parts, the system is the "DSP"-)
In my case I cannot proceed with your method, on the left I have the access stairs, furniture and windows forced me to choose this arrangement. I noticed later (almost two years) the ratios between the distances close to the golden ratio. I made small changes, about 10 cm forward and 5 cm to the side and the image improved.
When listening, some instruments are heard in different positions, not all. I perceive a 3D image but I do not know if it is correct. Listening to the CL08FR prototype is very pleasant even at low volumes (80 dB), thanks to the reduced vibrations of the cabinet.
I think that the use of the golden ratio is useful in those cases in which there are non-acoustic constraints on positioning. With the distances of the opposite walls in golden ratio, they are prevented from reinforcing or attenuating the same frequencies, the frequency response should be more regular.
When listening, some instruments are heard in different positions, not all. I perceive a 3D image but I do not know if it is correct. Listening to the CL08FR prototype is very pleasant even at low volumes (80 dB), thanks to the reduced vibrations of the cabinet.
I think that the use of the golden ratio is useful in those cases in which there are non-acoustic constraints on positioning. With the distances of the opposite walls in golden ratio, they are prevented from reinforcing or attenuating the same frequencies, the frequency response should be more regular.
Thanks very much for this. Experimenting as I write with my near field office system.
Not only a logical approach, it works!
I want to report the YouTube channel (in Italian) https://www.youtube.com/@NormaAudioElectronics/videos of the company Norma Audio Electronics https://www.normaudio.com, in particular there are 4 videos on the sound stage. The suggestions convinced me to try the listening point at the vertex of an equilateral triangle, as a result I obtained a better definition of the positions of the instruments in the sound stage.
The overall result is very good. The distances from the walls in golden ratio between them improve the frequency response, opposite walls cannot attenuate or emphasize the same frequencies. In the time domain the first half-wave of the attacks of the notes arrives at the listening point with the same delays from the two channels, subsequently each channel sends to the listening point 8 additional secondary wave fronts coherent, delayed and in antiphase with the first half-wave. The delays relating to the two channels of the 8 secondary fronts are the same as those with the primary emission of the first half-wave and strengthen the perception of the point of origin of the medium-low notes.
link
https://www.claudiogandolfi.it
https://www.claudiogandolfi.it/cl08fr.html
https://www.youtube.com/@NormaAudioElectronics/videos
https://www.normaudio.com
The overall result is very good. The distances from the walls in golden ratio between them improve the frequency response, opposite walls cannot attenuate or emphasize the same frequencies. In the time domain the first half-wave of the attacks of the notes arrives at the listening point with the same delays from the two channels, subsequently each channel sends to the listening point 8 additional secondary wave fronts coherent, delayed and in antiphase with the first half-wave. The delays relating to the two channels of the 8 secondary fronts are the same as those with the primary emission of the first half-wave and strengthen the perception of the point of origin of the medium-low notes.
link
https://www.claudiogandolfi.it
https://www.claudiogandolfi.it/cl08fr.html
https://www.youtube.com/@NormaAudioElectronics/videos
https://www.normaudio.com