One of the eye-opening things about this hobby is the amount of dollars invested in cables and tweaks, but the audiophile who has never pursued any room effects or at the very minimum, correct speaker positioning. As such, let me tell my recent story on the subject.
KeithR's old room was a Rives L1 affair in an existing space- a very large 625sf room, albeit squarish that made it suck bass. I had bass traps, ceiling clouds, diffusors, and absorption panels/bookshelves- the whole 9 yards. Speaker setup was quite easy as it was marked on the acoustic plans. I sold my condo in April and moved to Marina del Rey to get an ocean view and change of pace- the new place is a rental so I can't go all out on room treatments. Its on the 6th (top) floor of a 200 unit apartment complex. The only thing I have put up is 3 GIK Art Panels on the back wall- which just happens to be at an angle (which is good!). My room looks a bit like a trapezoid (see bad iPhone photos prior to adjustment below).
I knew my sound stage was a bit flat and midrange less detailed than my prior room- just a quick FFT from my iPad revealed a nice, lower midrange suckout that confirmed the lack of "heft" on Johnny Cash's voice. My new room is also less than half the size (17x14')! To "treat" the room, I figured it best to hire someone- and not someone who just uses REW or even a dealer's "magic ears." The person I chose uses both computers and ear. It cost less than a typical set of audiophile RCAs. It was a substantial improvement.
After coming in, listening to some tunes, then pulling out his bag of tricks including test tones, mike, and computer- he went to work. Two hours later he had the R speaker asymmetrically pulled out 5" further than the L speaker, spent a lot of time on toe-in, and had EQ'd my active bass modules (Xover, Phase, PEQ, PEQ boost, etc.). We listened for awhile, I made some comments and he went back to make some final adjustments (tuning down bass due to top floor being one). He also discovered in the process that one of my speaker's tweeters is 1-2dbs off- we ended up reversing the speakers as that part of the room had more subdued HF energy. Most people don't know what they don't know (including me!). It's not solely about measurements- but which ones are correct to use in guiding placement. He explained that frequency response isn't all she wrote and that phase and other issues are often more important. In fact, some of my FR is less flat than in could be in light of those issues. He also didn't measure 0.25 inches at a time.
Results: much wider soundstage and more 3D sound. High frequencies are considerably more natural and less strident. Midrange clarity is on an entirely different plane and bass is more integrated- texture on voices for example are experienced, not heard. On the scale of improvements, I feel it right up there with amp selection. Most importantly, I found out where the problems in my room lie and how he went around those issues. For instance, I know my room + cavity has a base resonance at 35hz. It confirmed things I was hearing such as being able to locate my active woofer down low.
There are many setup methods out there- Wilson, Cardas, etc. In my asymmetric room, it was invaluable to figure out phase and maximize coherency. But in general, too many people just flop their speakers 8' apart, 1' from the wall, toe them in a few inches, and call it a day. I highly recommend bringing in a 3rd party professional (aka, not your audiophile buddy) to adjust your speakers and maximize your room/speaker relationship.
I personally think that in 2014 the use of computers really helps, especially in bass integration. After all, its not 1978. Question for forum users is do you believe in the more analytic methods or prefer the purist voicing/ear methodology?
KeithR's old room was a Rives L1 affair in an existing space- a very large 625sf room, albeit squarish that made it suck bass. I had bass traps, ceiling clouds, diffusors, and absorption panels/bookshelves- the whole 9 yards. Speaker setup was quite easy as it was marked on the acoustic plans. I sold my condo in April and moved to Marina del Rey to get an ocean view and change of pace- the new place is a rental so I can't go all out on room treatments. Its on the 6th (top) floor of a 200 unit apartment complex. The only thing I have put up is 3 GIK Art Panels on the back wall- which just happens to be at an angle (which is good!). My room looks a bit like a trapezoid (see bad iPhone photos prior to adjustment below).
I knew my sound stage was a bit flat and midrange less detailed than my prior room- just a quick FFT from my iPad revealed a nice, lower midrange suckout that confirmed the lack of "heft" on Johnny Cash's voice. My new room is also less than half the size (17x14')! To "treat" the room, I figured it best to hire someone- and not someone who just uses REW or even a dealer's "magic ears." The person I chose uses both computers and ear. It cost less than a typical set of audiophile RCAs. It was a substantial improvement.
After coming in, listening to some tunes, then pulling out his bag of tricks including test tones, mike, and computer- he went to work. Two hours later he had the R speaker asymmetrically pulled out 5" further than the L speaker, spent a lot of time on toe-in, and had EQ'd my active bass modules (Xover, Phase, PEQ, PEQ boost, etc.). We listened for awhile, I made some comments and he went back to make some final adjustments (tuning down bass due to top floor being one). He also discovered in the process that one of my speaker's tweeters is 1-2dbs off- we ended up reversing the speakers as that part of the room had more subdued HF energy. Most people don't know what they don't know (including me!). It's not solely about measurements- but which ones are correct to use in guiding placement. He explained that frequency response isn't all she wrote and that phase and other issues are often more important. In fact, some of my FR is less flat than in could be in light of those issues. He also didn't measure 0.25 inches at a time.
Results: much wider soundstage and more 3D sound. High frequencies are considerably more natural and less strident. Midrange clarity is on an entirely different plane and bass is more integrated- texture on voices for example are experienced, not heard. On the scale of improvements, I feel it right up there with amp selection. Most importantly, I found out where the problems in my room lie and how he went around those issues. For instance, I know my room + cavity has a base resonance at 35hz. It confirmed things I was hearing such as being able to locate my active woofer down low.
There are many setup methods out there- Wilson, Cardas, etc. In my asymmetric room, it was invaluable to figure out phase and maximize coherency. But in general, too many people just flop their speakers 8' apart, 1' from the wall, toe them in a few inches, and call it a day. I highly recommend bringing in a 3rd party professional (aka, not your audiophile buddy) to adjust your speakers and maximize your room/speaker relationship.
I personally think that in 2014 the use of computers really helps, especially in bass integration. After all, its not 1978. Question for forum users is do you believe in the more analytic methods or prefer the purist voicing/ear methodology?
Attachments
Last edited: