I do not understand why you assume that, the author of the paper has numerous articles that, although they may be summarized for a better understanding of those who have an average level of knowledge of electronics, is not a "sell smoke" or "snake oil".
I don't know if he designed an amplifier, but surely he has a clear idea of how they work, all the mathematical formulas he provides make technical-theoretical sense, surely he must have studied and solved many "old-fashioned" exercises, only with a scientific calculator .
And probably P-Spice didn't even exist when he wrote those articles, a very advanced program but one that needs advanced studies to use it and design an amplifier, be it something basic or one that stands out from the point of view of efficiency and fidelity.
And regarding his statements about the cables, the Zobel network, etc., which part would be wrong for you? It would be useful for all of us if you clarify, that is what the forum is about, contributing and sharing knowledge.
"The exit network is there for a reason" and "perhaps one should read this or that author" says absolutely nothing.
A reply to the OP:
You may be able to widen the sound stage merely by placing the speakers further apart. However, from the details you gave, I estimate that your speakers are 43 degrees apart. Arguably, the optimum spacing for stereo speakers is around 30 degrees. Much narrower, and the sound stage width suffers. Much wider, and the quality of the sound images can vary. So, increasing the spacing may not be beneficial anyway.
Your Denon AVR may offer a solution, if it has a "3 channel stereo" mode? This mode digitally extracts a center channel from the two stereo channels, and feeds it to a center speaker. Placing the third speaker between the existing pair allows a 30 degree spacing between adjacent speakers, and a sound stage up to 60 degrees wide, and offers a degree of compatibility with 5.1 and 7.1 surround sound.
However some people, myself included, are not fans of center channels and center speakers. An alternative is the use of four speakers. In this mode, the the left stereo channel is fed directly to the left "front" and "surround" channels of the AV amp, and the right stereo channel to the right "front" and "surround" channels. Four speakers are then placed in line, with the "surround" speakers up to 90 degrees apart, and the "front" speakers placed equidistant between them.
On the plus side, this achieves:
o A spacing of approximately 30 degrees between adjacent speakers.
o A sound stage up to 60 degrees wide.
o No digital processing is required.
On the minus side:
o The layout of the speakers requires a space that is wider than it is deep, and is not compatible with surround sound usage. On second thoughts, isn't that a plus? 😉
Note: In normal usage of the four speaker system, the "surround" speakers lie outside the sound stage. This helps to dissociate the sound stage from the speakers, and create an illusion that the sounds are appearing from empty space.
You may be able to widen the sound stage merely by placing the speakers further apart. However, from the details you gave, I estimate that your speakers are 43 degrees apart. Arguably, the optimum spacing for stereo speakers is around 30 degrees. Much narrower, and the sound stage width suffers. Much wider, and the quality of the sound images can vary. So, increasing the spacing may not be beneficial anyway.
Your Denon AVR may offer a solution, if it has a "3 channel stereo" mode? This mode digitally extracts a center channel from the two stereo channels, and feeds it to a center speaker. Placing the third speaker between the existing pair allows a 30 degree spacing between adjacent speakers, and a sound stage up to 60 degrees wide, and offers a degree of compatibility with 5.1 and 7.1 surround sound.
However some people, myself included, are not fans of center channels and center speakers. An alternative is the use of four speakers. In this mode, the the left stereo channel is fed directly to the left "front" and "surround" channels of the AV amp, and the right stereo channel to the right "front" and "surround" channels. Four speakers are then placed in line, with the "surround" speakers up to 90 degrees apart, and the "front" speakers placed equidistant between them.
On the plus side, this achieves:
o A spacing of approximately 30 degrees between adjacent speakers.
o A sound stage up to 60 degrees wide.
o No digital processing is required.
On the minus side:
o The layout of the speakers requires a space that is wider than it is deep, and is not compatible with surround sound usage. On second thoughts, isn't that a plus? 😉
Note: In normal usage of the four speaker system, the "surround" speakers lie outside the sound stage. This helps to dissociate the sound stage from the speakers, and create an illusion that the sounds are appearing from empty space.
Last edited:
I must say that with a Lowther backloaded horn, going from Denon mini amplifier to PMA-1500AE definitely was an improvement I could hear and there was still a bit more by going to a all valve class A SET amplifier (a chinese one, cost around 200 USD). If you have a chance to test your speakers with a class A SET amplifier (no need for fancy 300B stuff, any will do), please do if that makes a positive difference for you. I also have a quite small listening room as you do and this is what worked.
I also have an unorthodox suggestions to try out. Place your speakers back to back into one of the corners (the speakers pointing to the walls) and listen on the diagonal - experiment with the distance, but a little below 1 m from the corner and around 2/3 of the total diagonal away from the speakers is a good start. This should expand the soundstage. I did this before I got the Lowthers and tube amp and it was surprisingly good.
I also have an unorthodox suggestions to try out. Place your speakers back to back into one of the corners (the speakers pointing to the walls) and listen on the diagonal - experiment with the distance, but a little below 1 m from the corner and around 2/3 of the total diagonal away from the speakers is a good start. This should expand the soundstage. I did this before I got the Lowthers and tube amp and it was surprisingly good.
This depends a lot on which model AVR is used, but in general, you introduce your speaker layout to the AVR either manually or with auto-calibration. With LCR speakers, the center can be used with several sound modes (again, AVR depending) that can "extract" a center. Dolby PLIIx will extract a center, and is primarily designed to decode "Dolby Stereo" (the early theatrical surround matrix system) and break Left and Right into Left, a hard Center, Right, and decorrelated Ls and Rs. Adjacent channel separation from the raw matrix is only 3dB, so PLII and its predecessors us acctive "steering" logic, and time delay to the surrounds to hype apparent separation. And there are a few more things going in in there too, mostly because it's predecessor was desiged to decode optical film soundtracks. If you don't have those speakers, the AVR will often virtualize surround channel. However, that form of decoding works best with film soundtracks mixed for it, it will tend to reduce the soundstage width with unmatrixed stereo, and still put someo "magic surround" material into the surround channels.
PLIIx "music" mode is intended for 2-channel music recorded without the film matrix, and the center is not "hard", still clearly center by without reducing the front soundstage, and with a more gentle channeling of material to center. It's one to try. The other commonly found mode would be DTS Neo:X, meant for extracting 5.1 or more channels from 2-channel stereo. It can be good, and can be really soupy, not something you can leave on. But that pretty much applies to any matrix decoding, it's entirely recording dependent and none are perfect all the time.
I'm going to guess that opinion is developed without hearing material specifically mixed for a center channel, like 5.1 music, and without experimenting with Dobly PLIIx Music. But yeah, I do get it. Just dropping in a center often tends to mono-up things quite a bit, without any special processing added. 5.1 music mixed for the stage perspective is really quite an experience.
IMO this setup may extend the width, but will also very much destroy any palpable imaging. Too many arrivals displaced in time. Two-channel stereoo is hobbled enough without componding the problem by adding those signals. Level balancing would be a task too.
The ITU standard speaker plan for 5.1 dictates a total angle of 45 to 60 degrees for Left and Right, and while that plan is meant to standardize a 5.1 layout, it turns out a whole lot...like nearly all...two-channel stereo was mixed for that same separation angle. That means when we mess with the angle, we also mess with the mix. It's a personal choice of course, but worth being aware of how this we listen to were mixed in the first place. All 5.1 music was mixed according to the ITU plan, with the variants being the purpose of the surround speakers, which can be either direct radiators when used as defined sources (like with the "in the band" mix perspective), or diffused field/dipole speakers meant to create large sound field without clearly localizable speaker sources. The two don't play well together, but both work for their purpose.
I can't say enough about well-made 5.1 music. It's the best sounding dead format we've ever had.
Well first of all I want to thank everyone for the many helpful suggestions that have been made to my original post.
Some of the subsequent responses went a little off topic into other things and that’s fine. Those topics weren't ones that I took much interest in, but others did and I’m glad that they had the opportunity to express their many varied opinions.
Just to quickly recap my original post here is the part where I asked the question about listening in a small room
There have been three main approaches offered here in response to widening the sound stage.
The new amplifier idea is the easiest one to do, aside from the money aspect, and was until recently the way that I was leaning. After all, who doesn’t want to upgrade their amplifier?
But something that I just did recently convinced me that the best answer by far is to get new speakers. And here is why.
I brought back out and put into use some full range speakers that I had. They are Audio Nirvana 10” Classics and are what I mainly used prior to the Piccolos. And immediately the difference in the sound stage was dramatic. This is what I have been looking for. Wide and deep sound stage. Lots of power in the lower and midrange sections that just isn’t there with the Piccolos.
Now the AN’s are far from perfect. They have more distortion than I like and being full-range the highs just aren’t there. That’s why I replaced them with the Piccolos to begin with. Those have a smooth and clean midrange and a wonderful high end with the SBA tweeter.
But with only a 6” woofer the Piccolos really don’t deliver very well at the low end. Particularly for the classical music that I mainly listen to. They might be alright for jazz and vocals, but they just don’t hack it for full orchestras.
And so, to give credit where it is due there is one poster here who predicted exactly what I have now experienced. And that poster is puppet. In multiple posts starting with #51 he said that the only way to really to increase the sound stage is to use a larger woofer. The room size, speaker placement, and amplifier really don't matter that much for creating a large sound stage if the driver delivering the bass is too small.
So, thank you puppet. You certainly have my attention now to your posts and advice.
Finally, I’m now in the search for what to build. There seem to be very few DIY plans for 2-way, or even many 3-way, speakers with woofers in the 10” range. Even an 8” or 9” driver would be a big step up from the 6” that I now have in the Piccolos.
Some of the subsequent responses went a little off topic into other things and that’s fine. Those topics weren't ones that I took much interest in, but others did and I’m glad that they had the opportunity to express their many varied opinions.
Just to quickly recap my original post here is the part where I asked the question about listening in a small room
"I understand that the small room creates limitations on the sound field that can be achieved. Nevertheless, I would like to optimize things as much as possible in order to increase the size and depth of the sound stage
So finally, to the question. Am I better off building a different speaker design or is the sound stage not going to change much even if I do? In other words, is the small room and speaker placement going to be the dominant factor that determines the sound stage.
Or is it possible that a different amplifier can increase the sound stage for me without having to build new speakers. Right now, I am using a Denon AVR, which admittedly is not a high-end audio component. And I am willing to invest in a good stereo amp designed specifically for music if that will really make a difference in the width and depth of the sound stage.
New speakers or new amplifier. Maybe both are needed, but what should the first move be?"
So finally, to the question. Am I better off building a different speaker design or is the sound stage not going to change much even if I do? In other words, is the small room and speaker placement going to be the dominant factor that determines the sound stage.
Or is it possible that a different amplifier can increase the sound stage for me without having to build new speakers. Right now, I am using a Denon AVR, which admittedly is not a high-end audio component. And I am willing to invest in a good stereo amp designed specifically for music if that will really make a difference in the width and depth of the sound stage.
New speakers or new amplifier. Maybe both are needed, but what should the first move be?"
There have been three main approaches offered here in response to widening the sound stage.
- Tune the room with a combination of reflectors and absorbers.
- Get a different amplifier.
- Get different speakers.
The new amplifier idea is the easiest one to do, aside from the money aspect, and was until recently the way that I was leaning. After all, who doesn’t want to upgrade their amplifier?
But something that I just did recently convinced me that the best answer by far is to get new speakers. And here is why.
I brought back out and put into use some full range speakers that I had. They are Audio Nirvana 10” Classics and are what I mainly used prior to the Piccolos. And immediately the difference in the sound stage was dramatic. This is what I have been looking for. Wide and deep sound stage. Lots of power in the lower and midrange sections that just isn’t there with the Piccolos.
Now the AN’s are far from perfect. They have more distortion than I like and being full-range the highs just aren’t there. That’s why I replaced them with the Piccolos to begin with. Those have a smooth and clean midrange and a wonderful high end with the SBA tweeter.
But with only a 6” woofer the Piccolos really don’t deliver very well at the low end. Particularly for the classical music that I mainly listen to. They might be alright for jazz and vocals, but they just don’t hack it for full orchestras.
And so, to give credit where it is due there is one poster here who predicted exactly what I have now experienced. And that poster is puppet. In multiple posts starting with #51 he said that the only way to really to increase the sound stage is to use a larger woofer. The room size, speaker placement, and amplifier really don't matter that much for creating a large sound stage if the driver delivering the bass is too small.
So, thank you puppet. You certainly have my attention now to your posts and advice.
Finally, I’m now in the search for what to build. There seem to be very few DIY plans for 2-way, or even many 3-way, speakers with woofers in the 10” range. Even an 8” or 9” driver would be a big step up from the 6” that I now have in the Piccolos.
I'm listening to 15" woofers in Peavey SP2(2004): at 1/8 watt for pianissimo music. They don't beam because Peavey built the cabinets trapezoidal with the small part at the back. Crossed to 1.4" CD at 2000 hz. $200 each on craigslist. You can't even buy one driver for that. Peavey SP2-XT should be even cheaper, with charted -3 db evenness of 500hz to 16 khz of 45 degrees. Crossed to 1.4" CD @ 1200 hz.
The only other speakers I liked had dual 10" 16 ohm woofers, with triple mallory piezo tweeters pointed in 3 directions.
There is a Peavey M2600 70 w/ch amp working on ebay today, $140 + freight. Probably needs new e-caps for full power, these are 30 years old. My set of caps cost $50. Listening to mine now. Probably run rings around any receiver on full orchestra sound.
The only other speakers I liked had dual 10" 16 ohm woofers, with triple mallory piezo tweeters pointed in 3 directions.
There is a Peavey M2600 70 w/ch amp working on ebay today, $140 + freight. Probably needs new e-caps for full power, these are 30 years old. My set of caps cost $50. Listening to mine now. Probably run rings around any receiver on full orchestra sound.
classicalfan ... was my pleasure as I'm sure it was everyone else who contributed to this discussion.
Truly a great website diyaudio is for the exchange of ideas.
Truly a great website diyaudio is for the exchange of ideas.
There is one think that might have also some influence - and that is the point
source coherence of the full range driver. In my small room, the Lowthers sound the best, even compared to my Yamamoto YS-500 clones (which were also very nice). The truth is that the horn gives out some really nice bass though. Maybe a WAW/FAST type speaker would be a good thing to try out. I am a big fan of the 3FE22, it has a good efficiency and high end better than many tweeters. For best performance, they need a woofer below crossed over somewhere between 100 and 200 Hz.
It depends on how large boxes you can tolerate, but something in the style of WLM Diva Monitor - with a better coaxial by BC Speakers or better BMS or Beyma would be easy to build, most of the manufacturers provide a ready made crossover (or at least a free design) for their coaxials. You guessed it, I am a big fan of coaxials as well🙂
source coherence of the full range driver. In my small room, the Lowthers sound the best, even compared to my Yamamoto YS-500 clones (which were also very nice). The truth is that the horn gives out some really nice bass though. Maybe a WAW/FAST type speaker would be a good thing to try out. I am a big fan of the 3FE22, it has a good efficiency and high end better than many tweeters. For best performance, they need a woofer below crossed over somewhere between 100 and 200 Hz.
It depends on how large boxes you can tolerate, but something in the style of WLM Diva Monitor - with a better coaxial by BC Speakers or better BMS or Beyma would be easy to build, most of the manufacturers provide a ready made crossover (or at least a free design) for their coaxials. You guessed it, I am a big fan of coaxials as well🙂
OP:
A new topic arises here:
Because you attribute the absence of soundstage to low frequencies, as part of the phenomenon.
The theory says that they are omnidirectional, so, do we not locate the point from where the thunder comes?
Medium and high frequencies are also present in the sound field.
Which does not mean that some speakers may be better than others to achieve it.
You will have to try the ones you have "in your sights" in your room before buying.
A new topic arises here:
Because you attribute the absence of soundstage to low frequencies, as part of the phenomenon.
The theory says that they are omnidirectional, so, do we not locate the point from where the thunder comes?
Medium and high frequencies are also present in the sound field.
Which does not mean that some speakers may be better than others to achieve it.
You will have to try the ones you have "in your sights" in your room before buying.
Troels has kits with woofers in all sizes, but they are a bit pricey.
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/
Planet 10, here in the forum, I imagine that could help you.
He makes speakers.
Just a couple of points to be clear:
1. The largest modifier of the signal that arrives at your ears is the room. It changes, literally, every aspect of the sound by as much as 20dB, with timing issues measured up to 100ms to seconds, room depending.
2. The second largest modifier of the signal that arrives at your ears is the speaker. Outside of timbre, it interacts with the room. The two are not exclusive. The speaker is responsible for adding the first level of response changes, plus distortion, and a bit of timing error. The room scrambles all of that again.
3. The smallest modifier of all, by several orders of magnitude, is the electronics path, including the amplifier. Literally, response changes by fractions of a dB to 1dB max, tiny shifts in time, microscopic distortion levels. Everything done by the room and transducer exceed those changes by 100X to 1000x or more.
1. The largest modifier of the signal that arrives at your ears is the room. It changes, literally, every aspect of the sound by as much as 20dB, with timing issues measured up to 100ms to seconds, room depending.
2. The second largest modifier of the signal that arrives at your ears is the speaker. Outside of timbre, it interacts with the room. The two are not exclusive. The speaker is responsible for adding the first level of response changes, plus distortion, and a bit of timing error. The room scrambles all of that again.
3. The smallest modifier of all, by several orders of magnitude, is the electronics path, including the amplifier. Literally, response changes by fractions of a dB to 1dB max, tiny shifts in time, microscopic distortion levels. Everything done by the room and transducer exceed those changes by 100X to 1000x or more.
ClassicalFan, it is a bit serendipitous that you have decided that you would like the sonic presentation a larger woofer brings to the table; Jeff Bagby (who designed your Piccolos) authored a paper specifically describing this sort of occasion:
The Kairos and Continuum Three-Ways (And other possibilities too)http://meniscus.lightningbasehosted...he-Kairos-and-Continuum-Three-Way-Writeup.pdf
It describes how to add woofer modules to an existing two-way bookshelf type loudspeaker design, using his own designs as reference.
Meniscus audio sells the kits specifically outlined in the paper: https://meniscusaudio.com/product/kairos-woofer-module-kit/
The Kairos and Continuum Three-Ways (And other possibilities too)http://meniscus.lightningbasehosted...he-Kairos-and-Continuum-Three-Way-Writeup.pdf
It describes how to add woofer modules to an existing two-way bookshelf type loudspeaker design, using his own designs as reference.
Meniscus audio sells the kits specifically outlined in the paper: https://meniscusaudio.com/product/kairos-woofer-module-kit/
Last edited:
Here is that phase thing. 🙂
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/zobel-phase-damping.246525/post-3717548
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/zobel-phase-damping.246525/post-3717548
Jaddie, I used to think that too. That an amplifier is just "a wire with gain". Most of the time, it is like that. That was until I got the Denon amp. I could not believe the change it made. Even more, class A SE tube amps provide more of this effect. Push pull tube amps are somewhere in between having a different sound signature. I think that tube amps add something to the sound, so it is not strictly hi-fi, but definitely nice to the ear.
I definitely agree that room/speaker combination has by far the biggest influence - but once dialed in, it can be still improved.
I definitely agree that room/speaker combination has by far the biggest influence - but once dialed in, it can be still improved.
I agree in general, except in his appreciation of the importance of the amplifier in the sound stage.
I don't want a new front for debate, but I think you are referring to the classic SS amps with negative feedback.
I recently went back to using a NAD 3020 - considered "a killer of giants" at the time - at 20 Watts/channel for a few days.
I went back to my 28 watt/channel tube - in triode mode - immediately.
The ears get used to good sound, which of course includes the sound stage.
I'm referring to any amp at all. If you look at what speakers and rooms do, amps of any kind are simply incapable of modifying the signal to that degree. They literally do 1/1000 as much in every aspect.
But I'm going to leave it right there. I well know others put a lot of stock in what an amp does.
And notice: I didn't say amps do nothing, nor did I say they all sound the same!
I'm not sure that I agree with this. Certainly, the room modifies the sound that you hear. But to conclude that it is a larger modifier of the sound than the speaker itself might be going a bit too far. There is still a great deal of direct sound that you hear, particularly in a small room sitting fairly close to the speakers as I do.
However, I feel pretty confident now in putting the amplifier and other electronic components further down in the list of potential modifiers. Not quite down to the very bottom level of cables and other passive components, but certainly not very close to the top.
Last edited:
Yeah, thanks. I'm aware of Jeff's work and the Kairos woofer module. It is one of the things on my list to consider. And Meniscus is the source I used for buying the Piccolos kit.
My contention is that there are differences in soundstage between amps.
OK, it's not as big as a change of room or speakers, but I saw some exaggeration to say "x1000 or more".
The electronics in an amplifier can modify the phases, this gadget works with that premise.
https://exclusive-audio.jp/en/products/sa-u
Attachments
I can't shed a great deal of light, but I will share a recent experience. 5 or so years ago I picked up some PSB 1b bookshelves that are similar in size to the piccolos. Tried them with various amps (nothing to0 interesting. T-amps, an old audiolab, a few others i don't remember) and they just sounded lifeless and small. Relegated to computer use. Then i found a Harmon Kardon Citation 12. Lent some friends my usual main speakers and brought those PSB's downstairs and they sounded huge. Very enjoyable. (I don't recommend vintage because of the hassle of getting them to work optimally, unless you enjoy that sort of thing. Mine still has a hum that I've decided to live with since I'm tired of lugging the thing to the tech's place).
We all know Jeff Bagby's reputation, and if i was putting $20 down on a bet, I'd say those speakers have a lot to give that you are not currently squeezing out of them. Great designer, great drivers, classic form factor. As already pointed out, you can always add a woofer, and it's possible Jeff's own write up on converting some of his other designs to three ways will work for you. There is also DSP.
The amp, on the other hand, was never really intended for the role you are using it in. Not to say its not good, because i dont know (i have a Denon AVR, but older, and its not very enjoyable, but I've learned not to generalize since I've been VERY wrong in the past), but considering the nature of the thing, its unlikely it was optimized for reproducing a large audio scene in a two channel music setup. If you buy used, you will likely be able to get your money back if you dont like what you buy.
If you succeed in finding something worthy, you will have a good platform for future experimentation, if you are so inclined. Which you probably are since you're here.
Regarding the big drivers for big image suggestion, I had some of those 4 inch radio shack/fostex full range drivers that used to be popular here, and not too long ago put them in some basic TL cabinets, and although I decided not to go forward with improving them, on at least one classical recording they were absolutely massive. It was church music and it was like i was in the cathedral. Crazy! Perhaps big is the way to go, but it seems to me that what you're looking for can be achieved in other ways.
We all know Jeff Bagby's reputation, and if i was putting $20 down on a bet, I'd say those speakers have a lot to give that you are not currently squeezing out of them. Great designer, great drivers, classic form factor. As already pointed out, you can always add a woofer, and it's possible Jeff's own write up on converting some of his other designs to three ways will work for you. There is also DSP.
The amp, on the other hand, was never really intended for the role you are using it in. Not to say its not good, because i dont know (i have a Denon AVR, but older, and its not very enjoyable, but I've learned not to generalize since I've been VERY wrong in the past), but considering the nature of the thing, its unlikely it was optimized for reproducing a large audio scene in a two channel music setup. If you buy used, you will likely be able to get your money back if you dont like what you buy.
If you succeed in finding something worthy, you will have a good platform for future experimentation, if you are so inclined. Which you probably are since you're here.
Regarding the big drivers for big image suggestion, I had some of those 4 inch radio shack/fostex full range drivers that used to be popular here, and not too long ago put them in some basic TL cabinets, and although I decided not to go forward with improving them, on at least one classical recording they were absolutely massive. It was church music and it was like i was in the cathedral. Crazy! Perhaps big is the way to go, but it seems to me that what you're looking for can be achieved in other ways.