Slippery enclosures, hard to photograph with my phone...
Painted with roller to get the orange peal in satin black. They're still a bit too glossy for me. But for now they'll do.
Edit: it's silk gloss, I guess I want Satin. I toned down the arrays gloss but that was a strong 2K boat paint. These were painted
with the cheapest paint I could find.
Nice Audi R10 launch ramps!
Can't wait to hear how your Haas Kicker works out. If you can dial in a large studio listening space or vaulted family room virtually that is way cool.
Just had a trial run with 4 speakers connected, the 2 line arrays and the mini ambient speakers. Everything runs but I can't set it up due to not having the house to myself.
I've got a preliminary test setup ready to go in JRiver:
The left side shows mid/side processing as discussed earlier in this thread. The use of an S-curve to get better balance between voices in the center and those that are panned hard left or right.
The other side is setup for (L-R) signal to the left ambient channel and (R-L) to the right. With the possibility to insert a bit of mid/center channel information to both. All separately adjustable in time, volume and band pass.
Damping materials in the ambient enclosures is tested with an impedance test:
Free air impedance of the Scan Speak 10F compared with the 10F in the dagger/nail enclosure.
Can't wait to fire it all up. Again I need to have some patience. I need the house to myself for at least a couple of hours to set it all up properly. Probably not going to happen this week.
Meanwhile I posted this graph on another thread:
It's a comparison of my favoured house curve and the one from Mitch (mitchba on here).
Funny how we ended up with a graph this close, both taken at the listening position. Different rooms, different speakers but similar treatment in the room, concentrating on bringing down the first reflections in level. Both also using FIR correction of the signal, Acourate for Mitch, the free DRC for me.
I've got a preliminary test setup ready to go in JRiver:
The left side shows mid/side processing as discussed earlier in this thread. The use of an S-curve to get better balance between voices in the center and those that are panned hard left or right.
The other side is setup for (L-R) signal to the left ambient channel and (R-L) to the right. With the possibility to insert a bit of mid/center channel information to both. All separately adjustable in time, volume and band pass.
Damping materials in the ambient enclosures is tested with an impedance test:
Free air impedance of the Scan Speak 10F compared with the 10F in the dagger/nail enclosure.
Can't wait to fire it all up. Again I need to have some patience. I need the house to myself for at least a couple of hours to set it all up properly. Probably not going to happen this week.
Meanwhile I posted this graph on another thread:
It's a comparison of my favoured house curve and the one from Mitch (mitchba on here).
Funny how we ended up with a graph this close, both taken at the listening position. Different rooms, different speakers but similar treatment in the room, concentrating on bringing down the first reflections in level. Both also using FIR correction of the signal, Acourate for Mitch, the free DRC for me.
Last edited:
Wait a minute...
let me get this right.. here's your processing chain in JRiver for Main L / R towers?
Input Signal - Output Format - Volume Leveling - Adaptative Volume - Effects - Mid/SideEQ - EQ - PEQ - Convolution - PEQ2 - Mid/SideEQ2 - EQ2 - Mid/SideEQ3 - Output Signal.
Right???? 
Not exactly a believer of the "Pure music" movement, are you? Ha ha!
let me get this right.. here's your processing chain in JRiver for Main L / R towers?
Input Signal - Output Format - Volume Leveling - Adaptative Volume - Effects - Mid/SideEQ - EQ - PEQ - Convolution - PEQ2 - Mid/SideEQ2 - EQ2 - Mid/SideEQ3 - Output Signal.
Right????
Not exactly a believer of the "Pure music" movement, are you? Ha ha!
Shall I walk you trough it? lol....
Output format: set to determine the output to what my DAC accepts as input signal.
Volume Levelling: set to account for the dynamic range present in songs, need to have the library of music analysed for that. The overall volume may be reduced, Enable "Adaptive volume" to take that into account.
Adaptive Volume: See above, set to the first radio button for "Peak Level Normalise". I hate to have to adjust volume for each song. This somewhat works to solve that.
Effects: Used as explained before, giving boost to side channels, will be off during ambient tests. This remains a secret ingredient that JRivers makers won't disclose. A test in REW sees it boosts the side channel (from a mid/side view) while leaving my impulse intact.
MSED: Inserted to reduce the above effect at will by boosting the mid channel if needed.
Equaliser: If I feel the need to divert from my room curve I do it here first. Usually no more than ~ 0-2 dB cuts, if any.
Parametric Equaliser: Used to re-route the ambient channels (copy Left and Right to Side Left and Side Right). Followed by PEQ cuts and boosts to get the line array within the proper range for DRC-FIR processing. Usually called pré EQ by me.
Convolution: Filter result from DRC-FIR used to linearize the frequency response as seen in the published graphs. Needs the Pré EQ to work.
Parametric Equaliser 2: Some shifting in bass frequencies to overcome room modes and prevent excessive boost to the bass in Left or Right speaker. For instance a cut at 30 Hz in the right channel and a similar boost in the left channel because it needs way less boost to get the same amount of SPL. All monitored in a REW measurement session playing Left separate, Right separate and both channels at once.
Metaplugin: Shifting of some frequencies in Mid/Side processing and the above ambient channel setup.
I believe in simplicity lol. These tools are there for a reason right? All effects checked with measuring tools although the "Effects" part from JRiver remains a bit of a mystery. I can mimic it somewhat with MSED but not fully. The way I aimed my speakers now it actually does less than when I had less toe in. I don't expect to be needing it with the ambient channels running. It has always bothered me that I don't know exactly what it's doing. But with less toe in it helps the stage and makes a noticeable difference. I suspect it is largely a mid/side shuffler (as admitted) but perhaps with a lower volume tail delayed in time? I had it on and off many times but for now I prefer it to be on, with a slight tweak to reduce the effect with MSED.
I have to say, to me the above chain is simple and clear. With a clear view on what part does what. During a REW measurement the volume levelling (2x) will be off of coarse as that would mess up the results. MSED, Metaplugin and Effects will be off as well. But I have actually checked them all to see if it messes up the impulse I worked so hard on to get.
Output format: set to determine the output to what my DAC accepts as input signal.
Volume Levelling: set to account for the dynamic range present in songs, need to have the library of music analysed for that. The overall volume may be reduced, Enable "Adaptive volume" to take that into account.
Adaptive Volume: See above, set to the first radio button for "Peak Level Normalise". I hate to have to adjust volume for each song. This somewhat works to solve that.
Effects: Used as explained before, giving boost to side channels, will be off during ambient tests. This remains a secret ingredient that JRivers makers won't disclose. A test in REW sees it boosts the side channel (from a mid/side view) while leaving my impulse intact.
MSED: Inserted to reduce the above effect at will by boosting the mid channel if needed.
Equaliser: If I feel the need to divert from my room curve I do it here first. Usually no more than ~ 0-2 dB cuts, if any.
Parametric Equaliser: Used to re-route the ambient channels (copy Left and Right to Side Left and Side Right). Followed by PEQ cuts and boosts to get the line array within the proper range for DRC-FIR processing. Usually called pré EQ by me.
Convolution: Filter result from DRC-FIR used to linearize the frequency response as seen in the published graphs. Needs the Pré EQ to work.
Parametric Equaliser 2: Some shifting in bass frequencies to overcome room modes and prevent excessive boost to the bass in Left or Right speaker. For instance a cut at 30 Hz in the right channel and a similar boost in the left channel because it needs way less boost to get the same amount of SPL. All monitored in a REW measurement session playing Left separate, Right separate and both channels at once.
Metaplugin: Shifting of some frequencies in Mid/Side processing and the above ambient channel setup.
I believe in simplicity lol. These tools are there for a reason right? All effects checked with measuring tools although the "Effects" part from JRiver remains a bit of a mystery. I can mimic it somewhat with MSED but not fully. The way I aimed my speakers now it actually does less than when I had less toe in. I don't expect to be needing it with the ambient channels running. It has always bothered me that I don't know exactly what it's doing. But with less toe in it helps the stage and makes a noticeable difference. I suspect it is largely a mid/side shuffler (as admitted) but perhaps with a lower volume tail delayed in time? I had it on and off many times but for now I prefer it to be on, with a slight tweak to reduce the effect with MSED.
I have to say, to me the above chain is simple and clear
. With a clear view on what part does what. During a REW measurement the volume levelling (2x) will be off of coarse as that would mess up the results. MSED, Metaplugin and Effects will be off as well. But I have actually checked them all to see if it messes up the impulse I worked so hard on to get.
Last edited:
Hi wesayso,
I am becomming more interested in line arrays - I have tried most other kinds of speakers, but not yet dipped my toe in LA building!
I am aware a large advantage of LAs is the controlled vertical directivity - reducing ceiling/floor reflections, but was wondering what kind of horizontal dispersion/power response you get with the 3.5 inch full range (apologies if I have missed a polar plot - it is a long thread!).
I was wondering if the LA also controls the horizontal polars too, or whether large horns are really required for this?
Thanks
I am becomming more interested in line arrays - I have tried most other kinds of speakers, but not yet dipped my toe in LA building!
I am aware a large advantage of LAs is the controlled vertical directivity - reducing ceiling/floor reflections, but was wondering what kind of horizontal dispersion/power response you get with the 3.5 inch full range (apologies if I have missed a polar plot - it is a long thread!).
I was wondering if the LA also controls the horizontal polars too, or whether large horns are really required for this?
Thanks
J, Griffin White paper on LA, Fig 1 and 2.
http://www.audioroundtable.com/misc/nflawp.pdf
As a previous owner of line arrays with 16 drivers each, I can attest the wide soundstage LAs provide. Amazing for big ensembles, and outstanding for movies.
http://www.audioroundtable.com/misc/nflawp.pdf
As a previous owner of line arrays with 16 drivers each, I can attest the wide soundstage LAs provide. Amazing for big ensembles, and outstanding for movies.
I can't help you there bushmeister, my room won't allow to make proper polar plots of these huge towers. You'd learn more about my specific room than the speakers I'm afraid.
The off axis response will be quite similar to the off axis response of a single driver if I remember my sources right. One reason for me to pick the TC9 driver.
What I did do is measure my area of interest, the family couch, to see how it does at all listening seats. I should redo that test though as it was done prior to adding extra damping panels.
My view as to why I used line arrays:
- no crossovers, coherency throughout the entire range
- ability to get a phase linear system
- small floor space needed
- high efficiency in a large part of the frequency spectrum
- placement near walls possible, with care taken at first reflection points
There are of coarse also disadvantages
- comb filtering
- more off axis energy than horn systems, way less directional
Just a few pointers. They ticked most of my boxes but I'm sure not everyone has the same goals.
There are quite a few other line array builders here, one of them might be able to do polar measurements. It's not going to be me though. I simply don't have the available space. My interest was in off axis response covering angles from about 30 degree off axis where the TC9 does reasonable. I'd say it's pretty good at 15 degree, which covers my listening seats. Some room improvement/control will be necessary to get the best results but the advantage is no real floor and ceiling reflections to deal with. Plus if I read my plots right a very even bass response over much of the room.
Edit: I did use that short waveguide front baffle for a reason. Sadly the plots for an example of the change in off axis response for a single driver are no longer online. It wasn't a big change/improvement, but enough for me to go ahead with it. Every little bit helps.
The off axis response will be quite similar to the off axis response of a single driver if I remember my sources right. One reason for me to pick the TC9 driver.
What I did do is measure my area of interest, the family couch, to see how it does at all listening seats. I should redo that test though as it was done prior to adding extra damping panels.
My view as to why I used line arrays:
- no crossovers, coherency throughout the entire range
- ability to get a phase linear system
- small floor space needed
- high efficiency in a large part of the frequency spectrum
- placement near walls possible, with care taken at first reflection points
There are of coarse also disadvantages
- comb filtering
- more off axis energy than horn systems, way less directional
Just a few pointers. They ticked most of my boxes but I'm sure not everyone has the same goals.
There are quite a few other line array builders here, one of them might be able to do polar measurements. It's not going to be me though. I simply don't have the available space. My interest was in off axis response covering angles from about 30 degree off axis where the TC9 does reasonable. I'd say it's pretty good at 15 degree, which covers my listening seats. Some room improvement/control will be necessary to get the best results but the advantage is no real floor and ceiling reflections to deal with. Plus if I read my plots right a very even bass response over much of the room.
Edit: I did use that short waveguide front baffle for a reason. Sadly the plots for an example of the change in off axis response for a single driver are no longer online. It wasn't a big change/improvement, but enough for me to go ahead with it. Every little bit helps
.
Last edited:
Thanks wesayso - exactly what I was looking for!
I have very wide dispersion speakers at present with very smooth polars - all drivers crossed prior to beaming. They are also designed to be near wall placed and have overkill x-max with active crossovers and high power pro-amps.
Therefore, I am mainly interested in the dispersion characteristics rather than efficiency/placement. Vertical dispersion isn't a massive issue for me due to high treated ceilings and thick carpet/soft furnishings in the room mitigating floor/ceiling bounce.
You are absolutely right about speakers being a constant selection of compromises and it being about what 'ticks the most boxes'. I think I am going to have to look more at horns etc to explore this controlled directivity more.
Thanks again.
I have very wide dispersion speakers at present with very smooth polars - all drivers crossed prior to beaming. They are also designed to be near wall placed and have overkill x-max with active crossovers and high power pro-amps.
Therefore, I am mainly interested in the dispersion characteristics rather than efficiency/placement. Vertical dispersion isn't a massive issue for me due to high treated ceilings and thick carpet/soft furnishings in the room mitigating floor/ceiling bounce.
You are absolutely right about speakers being a constant selection of compromises and it being about what 'ticks the most boxes'. I think I am going to have to look more at horns etc to explore this controlled directivity more.
Thanks again.
If I didn't have any limitations on space, before I started with this project I probably would have turned to horns myself (*). Though that doesn't mean I regret going with these arrays. They just do a lot of things right. I'll continue to see if I can raise the bar on the performance of my arrays in my room and learn a few things in the process.
Room interaction does play a mayor role in our perception and in that regard horns do make a lot of sense. A horn loaded array?
(*) I would have had an extremely difficult time convincing my girl though, she thinks they are ugly. I've never thought that, to me they are very interesting, especially because I've heard them do wonderful things. I like the synergy concept, but also the big horns with drivers playing a big part of the spectrum like in the Beyond the Ariel concept.
Room interaction does play a mayor role in our perception and in that regard horns do make a lot of sense. A horn loaded array?
(*) I would have had an extremely difficult time convincing my girl though, she thinks they are ugly. I've never thought that, to me they are very interesting, especially because I've heard them do wonderful things. I like the synergy concept, but also the big horns with drivers playing a big part of the spectrum like in the Beyond the Ariel concept.
Last edited:
Heh, just now noticed this. I'm glad you liked it, it's magical album indeed and best when listened with a big speakers like your line arrays that can portray the vast space, atmosphere and the size of the soundfield on the album.
I am impressed with that project and the jigs you had set up to make the project easier to do. It's too bad we don't live closer, I've got a shop full of cabinet shop equipment like a heavy duty shaper and sliding table scoring saw. I'm looking at CNC routers which would make this a snap.
I'm lost at your bench testing though.
Nice effing job.
I'm lost at your bench testing though.
Nice effing job.
The start of my ambient project, what can I say about it...
Even though I had a nice pair of class D amps available on loan, I figured I needed something simple with a volume dial. So after a quick scout on the second hand market I found an amp from the same series my trusty old Pioneer belonged to. So here's a family shot:
The new addition is a 60 watt Pioneer A-447. A bit more slim looking than my old A-757 Mark II and a lot lighter as well.
I have it placed nearby for now to be able to adjust the volume from the listening position. They are fed by an add-on card for the Asus Xonar Essence ST making it 7.1 capable. The 10F's in their new enclosures are placed between my couch and back wall. First I just hooked everything up and played with orientation of the back speakers. I tried them firing up, towards each other and aimed to the sides, spread wide. That last configuration had my preference.
The mains Amp is hooked up as usual to the Musical Fidelity M1 DAC fed trough the optical out on the Asus ST.
After fooling around it was time to get a view of what was going on so I did a REW measurement session. I viewed the above mentioned orientations of the ambient speakers to see what it did when measured. For that I turned off the mains and viewed the impulse.
Pointed up there was a big nasty reflection from the ceiling coming a few ms after the initial impulse. The impulse itself was pretty clean for being directly against the wall.
With the Ambient speakers pointed toward each other I had the cleanest impulse. With FIR filtering I could even get a single spike at the measurement mic.
Pointing both Ambient speakers out resulted in a very disturbed impulse. Mostly existing of a series of reflections. This setup had my preference in the earlier listening test and now I could see why. It resembled what I intended to imitate, a somewhat diffused reflection coming from the sides/behind.
So after figuring out the orientation it's time to see if I could shape their response. I measured them separately to get an impulse of both and ran that trough DRC with a curve similar to the mains, but with a rolled off low end.
I had to adjust the timing of the impulse responses as with both sides the hottest peak wasn't the first. To show how rough the impulse looks here's the impulse of both speakers playing, measured at the listening position:
Good job right? messing up the signal of 2 perfectly working Scan Speak 10F 8424G's. I'm quite happy though with this result. This is after FIR correction by the way. I ran a largely minimum phase FR correction of 4 cycles length.
The corresponding SPL graph:
Not bad for a bunch of reflections. I had to tame it a bit with 3 added PEQ's. It's harder to control reflections than you would think.
Both channels are SPL matched and pretty much follow the same curve after a little PEQ work.
The frequency response of both the mains in comparison:
All graph's with 1/6 oct smoothing.
So what does the combined impulse look like?
Here you clearly see the wacky response past 20 ms from the Ambient channels. Don't mind the bigger than usual wiggles after the main pulse. I did not redo the mains impulse correction with DRC so there's bound to be some disturbance for both mains not being exactly centred/lined up at the mic position. It's close enough though for this round of tests.
Earlier I showed the ETC of a single channel. Heres the ETC as measured for both speakers at once:
Nice big single spike with almost all reflections in the first 20 ms below 20 dB.
The spike at ~6.3 ms is the back wall behind the listening position. The one at ~20 ms is probably a bounce around the room, it's only present in the right channel measurements.
Now here's the new ETC with the Haas Kicker:
Now you can see the reflection free (well almost) first 20 ms and the new termination of the Ambient channels followed by a smooth decline into the noise floor.
Another way to look at it would be the spectrogram:
Mains playing only
vs
Mains and ambient channels
You can see the response of the ambient channels is messy, as planned, not a specular reflection but actually a series of reflections. Hopefully diffused enough to help de-correlate them from the main signal.
In my testing the ambient signal gets an additional low pass, somewhere above 3500 Hz. (currently at 7 kHz) But I figured it would be easier to change a couple of digital filter setting within JRiver than making new FR targets for DRC each time I want to try another slope or frequency.
I'm gonna hit Submit Reply now before I accidently lose this post.
Even though I had a nice pair of class D amps available on loan, I figured I needed something simple with a volume dial. So after a quick scout on the second hand market I found an amp from the same series my trusty old Pioneer belonged to. So here's a family shot:
The new addition is a 60 watt Pioneer A-447. A bit more slim looking than my old A-757 Mark II and a lot lighter as well
.I have it placed nearby for now to be able to adjust the volume from the listening position. They are fed by an add-on card for the Asus Xonar Essence ST making it 7.1 capable. The 10F's in their new enclosures are placed between my couch and back wall. First I just hooked everything up and played with orientation of the back speakers. I tried them firing up, towards each other and aimed to the sides, spread wide. That last configuration had my preference.
The mains Amp is hooked up as usual to the Musical Fidelity M1 DAC fed trough the optical out on the Asus ST.
After fooling around it was time to get a view of what was going on so I did a REW measurement session. I viewed the above mentioned orientations of the ambient speakers to see what it did when measured. For that I turned off the mains and viewed the impulse.
Pointed up there was a big nasty reflection from the ceiling coming a few ms after the initial impulse. The impulse itself was pretty clean for being directly against the wall.
With the Ambient speakers pointed toward each other I had the cleanest impulse. With FIR filtering I could even get a single spike at the measurement mic.
Pointing both Ambient speakers out resulted in a very disturbed impulse. Mostly existing of a series of reflections. This setup had my preference in the earlier listening test and now I could see why. It resembled what I intended to imitate, a somewhat diffused reflection coming from the sides/behind.
So after figuring out the orientation it's time to see if I could shape their response. I measured them separately to get an impulse of both and ran that trough DRC with a curve similar to the mains, but with a rolled off low end.
I had to adjust the timing of the impulse responses as with both sides the hottest peak wasn't the first. To show how rough the impulse looks here's the impulse of both speakers playing, measured at the listening position:
Good job right? messing up the signal of 2 perfectly working Scan Speak 10F 8424G's
. I'm quite happy though with this result. This is after FIR correction by the way. I ran a largely minimum phase FR correction of 4 cycles length. The corresponding SPL graph:
Not bad for a bunch of reflections
. I had to tame it a bit with 3 added PEQ's. It's harder to control reflections than you would think.Both channels are SPL matched and pretty much follow the same curve after a little PEQ work.
The frequency response of both the mains in comparison:
All graph's with 1/6 oct smoothing.
So what does the combined impulse look like?
Here you clearly see the wacky response past 20 ms from the Ambient channels. Don't mind the bigger than usual wiggles after the main pulse. I did not redo the mains impulse correction with DRC so there's bound to be some disturbance for both mains not being exactly centred/lined up at the mic position. It's close enough though for this round of tests.
Earlier I showed the ETC of a single channel. Heres the ETC as measured for both speakers at once:
Nice big single spike with almost all reflections in the first 20 ms below 20 dB.
The spike at ~6.3 ms is the back wall behind the listening position. The one at ~20 ms is probably a bounce around the room, it's only present in the right channel measurements.
Now here's the new ETC with the Haas Kicker:
Now you can see the reflection free (well almost) first 20 ms and the new termination of the Ambient channels followed by a smooth decline into the noise floor.
Another way to look at it would be the spectrogram:
Mains playing only
vs
Mains and ambient channels
You can see the response of the ambient channels is messy, as planned, not a specular reflection but actually a series of reflections. Hopefully diffused enough to help de-correlate them from the main signal.
In my testing the ambient signal gets an additional low pass, somewhere above 3500 Hz. (currently at 7 kHz) But I figured it would be easier to change a couple of digital filter setting within JRiver than making new FR targets for DRC each time I want to try another slope or frequency.
I'm gonna hit Submit Reply now before I accidently lose this post
.
Last edited:
Lol, no I don't have it yet, you can't even see much of them but I might try to take a shot at it tomorrow.
So how does it sound? I have to back in time a bit before I go into that. When I finished the arrays, I first tamed them with IIR EQ, followed the suggestions REW gave and edited that a bit to rid myself of high Q cuts and boosts and just put it JRiver's PEQ section.
I'll never forget how lively the arrays sounded. The balance wasn't exactly right but the sheer power of them intimidated a lot!
Fast forward to the mods done later on: adding damping to the room, correcting the frequency response with DRC-FIR I lost a bit of that powerful impact.
The ambient speakers do just that, bring back the high energy feel like I had then, being immersed in sound like at a live show. Much more engaging. A lot like Linkwitz described his experience with ambient speakers: Surround stereo system
Now that I have some room treatment done and nice and balanced playing mains these ambient speakers give back the feel of excitement, but this time mimicking a bigger space. As Linkwitz mentioned: the walls seem to disappear. That wasn't true for the first experience with IIR EQ-ed arrays in an untreated room. But this more controlled setup gives a huge, believable stage. It's no longer looking at the image trough a window, you're more there. I flipped the ambient on and off many times. Pretty crazy but it's true that without it everything sounds more flat.
I was hoping to experience huge depth, but that didn't happen. Don't get me wrong, there is more depth with the ambience on, but I've had a similar feel of depth before with just the arrays.
It definitely is a step forward for me. Though I probably will be busy for a while to try and optimise it further. This is set up pretty quick and dirty but it has proven it's worth to me.
Now I know why this used to be done in studio's but has not been used (as far as I know) for a while. The ISD gap termination works very well to lessen the focus on the room. But I think it might also make the music more pleasing, covering up some of it maybe?
I tried many different types of music I had on hand. It just works to focus you on the song. But without ambient on you might hear better details of warts and faults. Be it the recording, the room or the speakers. Or a combination of them all. As this is intended as a pleasing setup and not a mastering suite it is a valuable addition. And I can simply turn it off at will. I doubt that will happen often once I have dialled everything in.
Plus the ambient channels can double as surround speakers for movie playback. I have yet to set that up but it will be simpler I guess.
To make it clear: The above impression is based on my first tests with the ambient channels delayed 20 ms behind the mains, I can't say exactly how much they are attenuated, I dial that in while listening, further the signal is band passed from ~200 Hz to 7 kHz and fed with (L-R) signal for the left and (R-L) for the right.
All of it highly subjective of coarse. I have to say: what a fun experience! Making it clear the sound is only going to be as good as your room allows. I'm pretty happy with what I managed to get in this pretty normal and still fully functional living room.
One more thing, the combined response at the listening position (mains and ambient) with the ambient channels overlaid:
Viewed with REW's Psychoacoustic smoothing one could say I finally have a flat frequency response at the listening position
Last edited: