My observation is that since the image is good over a large area, the sound level from each speaker reaching the ears is more important than the distance. It would seem then to depend upon the recording and mix, ie the methods used for individual sound object placements, level and/or time/phase, how well it would work.
But aren't you comparing two point sources (musicians) with an illusion created by two speakers sharing both signals in unequal measure? So the musicians stay where they are, but a stereo image moves with the dominance of the closer speaker, as you move around?
As above, the sound level varies with distance from the speaker, in the usual stereo set-up.
Timing of what?
If you are referring to the timing of each speaker with each other so that you hear them as just one...........
It might be pretty hard to find a listening spot where that occurs. How do you know when you find it?
If you are referring to the timing of each speaker with each other so that you hear them as just one...........
It might be pretty hard to find a listening spot where that occurs. How do you know when you find it?
Timing of interaural time difference. The sweetspot can be very small, it depends on the recording if any/much image position is affected.
Good luck finding that small sweetspot.
How do you know when you find it?
What is your reference?
How do you know when you find it?
What is your reference?
Last edited:
Regards timing, it's when you are equidistant to the speakers. I also find varying the distance, whilst remaining equidistant, changes the imaging perception but that's probably more due to off axis response and reflections although I listen nearfield anyway so the direct sound takes presidence. There is a point where things seem to "click" into place, a combination of factors where the sound is balanced.