So, listened to an LX Mini correctly placed in a room and the soundstage depth was huge compared to my existing DIY transmission lines in the same position.
I understand the basics as to why the LX Mini (and other dipoles I assume) and cardioid speakers (such as Kii Three) with controlled directivity will provide a good depth of soundstage. BUT...
I only have a small room, so wouldn't in-wall speakers be technically superior to an LX Mini or Kii three because there would be no reflections from behind the speaker? Assuming all other factors remained the same (as per this article)
Do I need to keep researching freestanding speakers such as the LX Mini / Kii Three, or is in-wall the solution?
Discuss/Flame as appropriate
I understand the basics as to why the LX Mini (and other dipoles I assume) and cardioid speakers (such as Kii Three) with controlled directivity will provide a good depth of soundstage. BUT...
I only have a small room, so wouldn't in-wall speakers be technically superior to an LX Mini or Kii three because there would be no reflections from behind the speaker? Assuming all other factors remained the same (as per this article)
Do I need to keep researching freestanding speakers such as the LX Mini / Kii Three, or is in-wall the solution?
Discuss/Flame as appropriate
Hi,
controlled directivity AND inwall!
In wall speakers solve issues in the low end (there is no backwave to mess the low end), improve the headroom or max spl for the low frequency (depend the way you look at it, you can expect up to +6db shelving from around 200hz), make the diffraction issues more or less vanishing (depend on implementation). There is even much more benefits to be in wall if the room is on the small side and could help to deal with early reflection too.
It could be implemented using a waveguide a la seos and you'll have a constant directivity inwall.But you may not play with toe in... Except if you go with some corner position (a la Pi speaker) and make the cabinet to integrate into the corner.
That being said there is a difference related to Early Reflection and the projected 'image' the system will render:
some like the feeling of 'enveloppement' that Early reflection can bring, other prefer the pinpoint imaging the lack of them or the tentative to make them to be as unobstrusive as possible bring.
I'm on the second camp and ideally prefer an RFZ (and this is not a theorical point of view as i already heard multiple application of RFZ as well as inwall installation in studios).
controlled directivity AND inwall!
In wall speakers solve issues in the low end (there is no backwave to mess the low end), improve the headroom or max spl for the low frequency (depend the way you look at it, you can expect up to +6db shelving from around 200hz), make the diffraction issues more or less vanishing (depend on implementation). There is even much more benefits to be in wall if the room is on the small side and could help to deal with early reflection too.
It could be implemented using a waveguide a la seos and you'll have a constant directivity inwall.But you may not play with toe in... Except if you go with some corner position (a la Pi speaker) and make the cabinet to integrate into the corner.
That being said there is a difference related to Early Reflection and the projected 'image' the system will render:
some like the feeling of 'enveloppement' that Early reflection can bring, other prefer the pinpoint imaging the lack of them or the tentative to make them to be as unobstrusive as possible bring.
I'm on the second camp and ideally prefer an RFZ (and this is not a theorical point of view as i already heard multiple application of RFZ as well as inwall installation in studios).
Thanks Krivium - this is what I was thinking too. Constant directivity inwall might be great for my small room.
Of course plenty of reviews of Linkwitz designs, but I haven't found reference to anyone saying that the soundstage from in wall speakers has good depth... anyone out there?
I have tried other speakers, such as Audio Note AN-J in corner placement, and soundstage depth did not approach that of the Linkwitz LX Mini. I guess I could always go and find a place to demo some in-wall speakers and post my findings here.
Of course plenty of reviews of Linkwitz designs, but I haven't found reference to anyone saying that the soundstage from in wall speakers has good depth... anyone out there?
I have tried other speakers, such as Audio Note AN-J in corner placement, and soundstage depth did not approach that of the Linkwitz LX Mini. I guess I could always go and find a place to demo some in-wall speakers and post my findings here.
You may be in the first camp i described: 'soundstage depth' may be interpreted diferently.
I do enjoy listening to what is recorded in the media. Soundstage depth is dependent on the recorded material, not of what the room where it is played bring (positive or negative).
About corner placement not all system accept this without correction as you probably already know. You'll enhance low end in doing such thing and this may mess the whole frequency range and so rendering of image including 'soundstage'.
Was this compensated when you listened to this?
There is some interesting paper from W. Payrham about his own implementatio and philosophy about that.
They are located at Pispeaker site maybe this could be an interesting read for you.
Well most big recording studio do use MAIN inwall monitor for good reasons.
Reason not nescessarely related to soundstage but if you consider that diffraction can mess things then maybe...
There is difference between domestic and studio situation but soundstage won't suffer from inwall mounting i can guaranty you.
Controlled Image Design: The management of stereophonic image quality - BBC R&D
Last edited:
I must give a second opinion here!
LX mini is omni in bass and sort of dipole above xo, cardioid in-between. The depth of soundstage is very much based on the omni/dipole radiation - specially backwards to create lots of late reflections that are responsible of the "deep soundstage". To be really good radiation pattern and power response must be harmonous, which is the difficult task.
Purely monopole (inwall) or sort of omni (cardioid) have totally different radiation pattern and thus give different reflections and sound image in a room. Which is better, depends on the listener and perhaps on the music - classical is typically happiest with dipoles and omnis.
LX mini is omni in bass and sort of dipole above xo, cardioid in-between. The depth of soundstage is very much based on the omni/dipole radiation - specially backwards to create lots of late reflections that are responsible of the "deep soundstage". To be really good radiation pattern and power response must be harmonous, which is the difficult task.
Purely monopole (inwall) or sort of omni (cardioid) have totally different radiation pattern and thus give different reflections and sound image in a room. Which is better, depends on the listener and perhaps on the music - classical is typically happiest with dipoles and omnis.
Thanks Juhazi - you're comments also make sense. I had wondered if the late reflections from the LX Mini where contributing to the "deep soundstage".
Would other dipoles provide similar depth of soundstage? I include the AINO Gradient in this question.
I think I need to demo some in-wall speakers.
p.s. we did not spend a great deal of time optimizing the AN-J for soundstage, however the LX mini had the same time spend on setup - we just followed the basic rules - and the soundstage was large in all directions, but it was depth of soundstage that I have never experienced before.
Would other dipoles provide similar depth of soundstage? I include the AINO Gradient in this question.
I think I need to demo some in-wall speakers.
p.s. we did not spend a great deal of time optimizing the AN-J for soundstage, however the LX mini had the same time spend on setup - we just followed the basic rules - and the soundstage was large in all directions, but it was depth of soundstage that I have never experienced before.
Ok you should define what depth mean to you.
In the link i gave about CID acoustic there is an evaluation done by engineers and this is interesting in that it define what subjective terms means to the evaluation.
This relate to what i think about being "depth" in a system rendering.
Juahzi comment does make sense because we both say same things! Just we have different personnal preference in what we like.
I do consider that relying in Early Reflection to introduce a sense of space is an artifact in the playback chain. As the use of an eq for a loudness kind of effect could be.
However i do understand this is something one may prefer for his own personal preference.
In the link i gave about CID acoustic there is an evaluation done by engineers and this is interesting in that it define what subjective terms means to the evaluation.
This relate to what i think about being "depth" in a system rendering.
Juahzi comment does make sense because we both say same things! Just we have different personnal preference in what we like.
I do consider that relying in Early Reflection to introduce a sense of space is an artifact in the playback chain. As the use of an eq for a loudness kind of effect could be.
However i do understand this is something one may prefer for his own personal preference.
Last edited:
I agree with Juhazi, I think the late reflections are what make the depth illusion with a dipole. If you can get those late reflections to come from behind you (one way is controlled directivity waveguides angled to direct a large part of the energy past you and off the wall behind you) you can get a pretty good illusion that way, too, which also seems to move your listening position into the apparent depth (rather than it all being in front of as if you're just listening through a doorway).
Just that reflections from the back wall both help the illusion of depth and the illusion that you're in the same room the music is being played in (not like you're on the stage, but not outside an open door either). Hearing is pretty well adapted to hearing direction and sensing the area around you, good evolutionary reasons for developing that (as opposed to audiophile darling parameters such as small phase response, whatever cable lifters are supposed to do, etc.).
That's what I thought you meant, I've not heard it suggested before. I have dipoles, arranged as Linkwitz suggests, he says ideally there should be no reflection from the back wall. He describes the imagery from dipoles as being three dimensional and being on a plain with and behind the speakers, this is what I find with my set up
This is all very helpful...
I started looking up “late reflections” and found the following:
“Lateral or reflections from our side walls, contribute more than any other room surface to image shifting and spaciousness or “air”. Just a single, primary reflection from one side wall can cause these two things to move around and compress.”
sound reflections Archives – Page 3 of 5 – Acoustic Fields
Late reflection = Reflected energy that occurs a greater distance away from the source than an early reflection. Sometimes referred to as “slap-back” or echo.
This to me means that controlled directivity speakers are the answer to depth of soundstage, controlling reflections from side walls in the time domain is also useful.
So on this basis controlled directivity in-wall driver should ‘in theory’ be able to deliver the same soundstage as a dipole or other controlled directivity loudspeaker (provided the drivers used in the in-wall application are time aligned, good impulse response)
Very tempting to start designing this now
I started looking up “late reflections” and found the following:
“Lateral or reflections from our side walls, contribute more than any other room surface to image shifting and spaciousness or “air”. Just a single, primary reflection from one side wall can cause these two things to move around and compress.”
sound reflections Archives – Page 3 of 5 – Acoustic Fields
Late reflection = Reflected energy that occurs a greater distance away from the source than an early reflection. Sometimes referred to as “slap-back” or echo.
This to me means that controlled directivity speakers are the answer to depth of soundstage, controlling reflections from side walls in the time domain is also useful.
So on this basis controlled directivity in-wall driver should ‘in theory’ be able to deliver the same soundstage as a dipole or other controlled directivity loudspeaker (provided the drivers used in the in-wall application are time aligned, good impulse response)
Very tempting to start designing this now
Last edited:
Late reflection to me is equal to reverberation and this is not as desirable as you seems to think for stereophony reproduction.
If slap back or echo occurs it may well screw up everything: that is the 'raison d etre' of skyline diffusor to kill such things as you ll usually see above mixing position in studios..
In LEDE you try to minimize most ER (by means of absorption or angling of walls, or both) in an attempt to create an RFZ around the listening position. The live end (back wall) is designed in such a way that it diffuse most of the sound send to it AND make the reflection coming from it to arrive -20db and around 20ms latter than direct sound (at LP). It rely on Haas effect to help our brain discerning the direct signal from reverberation.
This is difficult to achieve in a typical domestic room because of volume of absorption needed for front wall and need of around 3,5m distance from listening position to back wall.
This is not an 'old' principle in polarized room it is still used this day. It is just that instead to rely on absorption new design will use angled wall and try to limit absorption material (this kind of room is not confortable long term and highly absorbent front room make conversation and such sometime painful because of lack of reflection). Other theory does exist but most of them rely on Haas effect and more or less the same target (first reflection arriving around 20ms at -20db). An example is Jeanjouan's room design where he prefer progressive acoustic treatment rather than highly polarised room.
Strecthneck before spending lot of time and money in such a thing you should try to hear an (well implemented) inwall solution first.
I suspect it may not please you.
Sorry to repeat but you should read the BBC report about CID i linked. There is a great amount of information in there about stereophony, how we hear it, and other interesting things related to your case.
If slap back or echo occurs it may well screw up everything: that is the 'raison d etre' of skyline diffusor to kill such things as you ll usually see above mixing position in studios..
In LEDE you try to minimize most ER (by means of absorption or angling of walls, or both) in an attempt to create an RFZ around the listening position. The live end (back wall) is designed in such a way that it diffuse most of the sound send to it AND make the reflection coming from it to arrive -20db and around 20ms latter than direct sound (at LP). It rely on Haas effect to help our brain discerning the direct signal from reverberation.
This is difficult to achieve in a typical domestic room because of volume of absorption needed for front wall and need of around 3,5m distance from listening position to back wall.
This is not an 'old' principle in polarized room it is still used this day. It is just that instead to rely on absorption new design will use angled wall and try to limit absorption material (this kind of room is not confortable long term and highly absorbent front room make conversation and such sometime painful because of lack of reflection). Other theory does exist but most of them rely on Haas effect and more or less the same target (first reflection arriving around 20ms at -20db). An example is Jeanjouan's room design where he prefer progressive acoustic treatment rather than highly polarised room.
Strecthneck before spending lot of time and money in such a thing you should try to hear an (well implemented) inwall solution first.
I suspect it may not please you.
Sorry to repeat but you should read the BBC report about CID i linked. There is a great amount of information in there about stereophony, how we hear it, and other interesting things related to your case.
Last edited:
Dipole pattern makes it work - we direct the strongest amplitude to be reflected twice! First the front wall, then the side wall and only after that the listener's golden ears. Allmighty Dr. Linkwitz tells us how - AS_creation
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.