I would not dismiss anyone for proposing a speaker set up procedure. I just think it works only as far as the physics dictate and no further. So, put aside all the known stuff about carpets, distance from walls, seating position and room resonance modes. That then leaves us with ‘how far do I have to move the speaker (or my head) before there is a noticeable difference?’ The answer is a lot more than 2 mm.
Anyway, I’ll bow out of this particular discussion. I have no desire to ruffle feathers any further.
Anyway, I’ll bow out of this particular discussion. I have no desire to ruffle feathers any further.
Last edited:
Okay, so what do you do? I presume you listen to music with speakers. I presume that you put them in your room. Did you do anything specific in doing this? And how do you listen to music? Do you just have sound in the room while you do 5 other things, or do you listen to just the music and pay attention to just the music? I've been pretty open with what I have done, how I have done it, and why I think it is good. So now it's your turn to do the same.
Oh with regard to your above post, room modes were addressed in Dan's post 2 or 3 days ago. And I think I mentioned listening position quite a lot.
+1
Even the monitors in studios don't have to be perfect if such a thing can exists. But known by the sound engineer that need to be familiar to him.
And the best speakers a customer can have to listen to a record should be... the same model of speakers.
We usually work with several speakers. Big ones for the mix, and little ones like Auratone to ensure that basses and treble are balanced enough (not too much losses) for the radios. On my side, I used to bring in the studios I was working in a tiny FM emitter and a little radio "transistor" to make this verification more obvious to the customer.
The situations where recordings are done with a couple of microphones, and no mixes, artificial reverberations and equalization (So called hifi) are exceptional. This existed in the past, for classical music recordings, and companies like Dutch Grammophon, but now, even in this kind of production is done with multi-tracks recordings, close miking, and mixes. Because mikes tend to erase the presence that our ears transmit when we listen to real instruments (unplugged) in a concert hall and increase the room reverberations. Rock'n roll rocks !!!!
About the acoustic, the good studios are acoustically designed to be as dump as possible, but with enough réflexions to not kill the "life". Listening to music in an an echoic chamber is a real miss.
I believe all this story about speakers placement in a millimetric position is like put a bandage on a wooden leg. You better try to add carpets and wall treatments to ensure you have a good listening room: living enough, but without noticeable reverberations. And place your speakers where it is possible and good looking enough, as long as you are in "equilateral near field monitors" situation.
And what were the listening impressions ? Did you decided to exchange your usual amplifiers for those new ones ?
Other than waffle about my set-up etc, I'm mainly asking whether the bass response is smooth when moving around using this method whilst also casting doubt that it is.
Your assertion looks reasonable/plausible but obviously that does not ensure that it is correct.
Therefore we generally need to do some tests to examine if such hypothesises can find corrobation.
Just as an example (not exactly the same but related), from studies we’ve learned that it makes a difference in localization experiments if the listener is moving or the sound sources are moving (same degree of variation in both conditions).
It seems to be just because we are (nearly) always moving that our sensory system is used to the self-moving and compensates for it (most probably not perfect though) while it nevertheless detects the movement of the sources.
M2 Master Reference Monitor Products | JBL Professional
See graph on left hand side. According to Harman, they should.
Tests have been done for electronically replaying sound in room.
Do you have a relevant example of electronically replaying sound in room?
I think he is saying that my question was too hard and he is totally befuddled. I thought it was pretty easy and I wasn't wanting to be critical, I was just wondering what he did.
Well, a question will have a question mark at the end and you have a period. This could be because you answered your own question.
I always stay seated when listening to music, so I don't have an answer to your question.
My own question to you is relevant and I don't think it is too hard. I'm not trying to be critical of what you do, just curious about what you do.
Nailed, and my analogy is improper as I did not compare apples to apples. While the process of focusing binoculars is quite similar to how I set speakers in a room, the actual adjusting is completely different. Yes, I know that.
I used the analogy a few days ago in one of the early posts, as it had been mentioned to me long ago when I was trying to grasp what was going on and it was helpful to me. And when I have mentioned it to interested people they too find it helpful.
I have been criticized a fair bit in my presentation of a speaker set up method that I use to set my speakers in my music room. I appear to have flaunted principles of physics and engineering practices in several ways. So instead of just the negativity of posts, I'd like some constructive criticism.
While I don't think I've broken any laws of physics or engineering practices as I have moved my speakers around, and in the end I get very good sound balanced across the room. I like to think I have been pretty accurate at describing what I have done and how the sound comes out.
So what am I doing wrong and how can I correct myself?
I don't remember seeing one so I will ask, have you measured the room response of your setup? You know, frequency response and modal ringing decay (REW).
Ears first, this is because we can discriminate between the incident and the reverberant field with our total hearing process, but instrumentation has a harder time. I suspect that is WHY we can even evaluate sound in a room. Just normal head movements should drive us to annoyance.
Last edited:
If you are referring to stvnharr's system, he already did. BTW, what his ears picked up won't be shown on someone else's computer screen, at least no where nearly as well as measured graphics.
Microphones and computer sound cards to do such task aren't expensive compared to many DACs discussed on this thread. Plus, REW program is free. Try Google search.
Thanks for the tip, it might be something to look into for general information on the room.
I am quite happy to call you an a-whole. You are welcome...😀
That said, your questions are totally valid..
The human system is capable of ignoring 2 mm placement. Toe in and out, that can be a concern..
Jn
Has anyone here used the Copper Mountain or Tektronix USB VNAs? So nice and small compared to something like a used Agilent 8753ES.
My question was for Dan. The method is supposed to sound right over a very wide area, or is that something else I'm struggling to understand? 🙄
He said "if the bass is not right the mids and highs will never be right and resulting in subjective distortion in vocals and highs." Hence my question about the bass sounding right over an equally wide area using the discussed method. (BTW that's a statement too, it doesn't require a question mark)
I thought the Agilent 8753E on my bench was small compared to an HP8510.
The small USB VNA's look pretty neat. Depends on what you need it to do however.
The Anritsu portable analyzers may be all that's needed and can be had used. There are some neat cheap alternatives, e.g.: xaVNA | xaxaxa Development Ltd.
The small USB VNA's look pretty neat. Depends on what you need it to do however.
The Anritsu portable analyzers may be all that's needed and can be had used. There are some neat cheap alternatives, e.g.: xaVNA | xaxaxa Development Ltd.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.