I'm trying to establish the "ideal" relationship between my speakers and the listening position. My dealer has set my Alexx V's about 7'-5" apart tweeter to tweeter. I have an isosceles triangle where my seating position distance is 10'4" ear to tweeter distance. The tweeters are about 4'6" from my front wall and the room is 16'w x 26'd with an open back wall. This seems too far back if one sees the equilateral triangle as the ideal. I have moved closer but it has little impact on the SQ. What are folks thoughts on this subject. Obsess about the math or just go with the ears?
The equilateral triangle listening position. Is it really the ideal?
- Thread starter ScottK
- Start date
Alway listen to the little man in your head... He's the one tickling you inner ear with a feather...
God made the ear to hear... Man made Mathematics.. Chose one....
God made the ear to hear... Man made Mathematics.. Chose one....
i sit in the nearfield. 115" tweeter to tweeter, 98" tweeter to ear. my listening position is almost dead center in my room; 6" behind actual dead center. so the fronts of my speakers are 9' 6" into my 29' long room. so nearfield, equilateral, or far-field are all just part of the picture. where you end up in relationship to the whole room is also important. and is your room long and wide, or maybe either short or narrow? these are all factors. are there windows? furniture? other factors?
think of your listening position as an aspect of the sound field you want to perceive. are you desiring to view the soundstage as 'over there' mostly? at arms length? or do you want a more neutral relationship where the recording dictates the relationship? where when an holographic sound field is present on the recording, that is what you get. that when a 'reach out a touch it' aspect is on the recording, that is what is delivered to your ears.
toe-in/toe out and distance between the speakers are also variables which will possibly determine how close you sit.
and it's important to find a spot where the music is physical. that you feel the energy. do you get that in the far field position? maybe you can listen at lower volumes in a more near field spot? your preferences can vary and how your system feels matters and at what volume?
when you sit closer you get more direct sound, and less of the room. yet too close and you might not get a cohesive picture. or maybe the speakers might seem to assault you with too much energy. in my experience this turned out to be an issue of room tuning, and not anything caused by the speaker itself. once i tuned the room to remove reflective hash i was able to be comfortable in the near field. and visitors to my room also prefer my near field sweet spot once they adjust their comfort zone to the visuals of being 8-9 feet away from -4- 7 foot tall 600 pound towers.
many times listening comfort has to do with habits; what are you use to doing? change is hard. but we do need to open our ears and minds to possibilities of what we might find with another approach.
think of your listening position as an aspect of the sound field you want to perceive. are you desiring to view the soundstage as 'over there' mostly? at arms length? or do you want a more neutral relationship where the recording dictates the relationship? where when an holographic sound field is present on the recording, that is what you get. that when a 'reach out a touch it' aspect is on the recording, that is what is delivered to your ears.
toe-in/toe out and distance between the speakers are also variables which will possibly determine how close you sit.
and it's important to find a spot where the music is physical. that you feel the energy. do you get that in the far field position? maybe you can listen at lower volumes in a more near field spot? your preferences can vary and how your system feels matters and at what volume?
when you sit closer you get more direct sound, and less of the room. yet too close and you might not get a cohesive picture. or maybe the speakers might seem to assault you with too much energy. in my experience this turned out to be an issue of room tuning, and not anything caused by the speaker itself. once i tuned the room to remove reflective hash i was able to be comfortable in the near field. and visitors to my room also prefer my near field sweet spot once they adjust their comfort zone to the visuals of being 8-9 feet away from -4- 7 foot tall 600 pound towers.
many times listening comfort has to do with habits; what are you use to doing? change is hard. but we do need to open our ears and minds to possibilities of what we might find with another approach.
Last edited:
Thanks Mike great discussion! All that you say rings true. The other insight might be that there is not just one ideal location but several with different listening objectives. I subscribe to that point of view.
Last edited:
Set up is not about the math. There is no single formula that will work in every room or situation ( if there is one at all is another story).
The placement of the speaker in the room including the distances from the rear and side walls makes a lot of difference and that is done stricktly by listening. The place that you sit also can make big changes and moving your chair foward and back should allow you to hear differences as well.
Many systems end up with tirangles but they are not only one type. I also perfer listening closer than far away and with the best recordings one can easily get lost in the music. I do like sitting closer at concerts as well!
Enjoy and don't be afraid to move around or move your speakers around just do it in an orderly organized careful fashion and listen.
The placement of the speaker in the room including the distances from the rear and side walls makes a lot of difference and that is done stricktly by listening. The place that you sit also can make big changes and moving your chair foward and back should allow you to hear differences as well.
Many systems end up with tirangles but they are not only one type. I also perfer listening closer than far away and with the best recordings one can easily get lost in the music. I do like sitting closer at concerts as well!
Enjoy and don't be afraid to move around or move your speakers around just do it in an orderly organized careful fashion and listen.
Last edited:
Great advice Elliot having both Maggie’s and irs v
Closer has advantages for one better low level details I feel
Closer has advantages for one better low level details I feel
Hello,
your speakers are about 72% of you listening distance. This is highly likely too close together. I am surprised as I quite often see wilson speakers pretty far apart.
did the dealer do the WASP setup technique and find the zone of neutrality?
Measurements can and will offer an insight or a basis of what will be.
That said, the ear will bring it to another level. In some instances? Well beyond what you ever thought possible. Many of you know this.
Tom
That said, the ear will bring it to another level. In some instances? Well beyond what you ever thought possible. Many of you know this.
Tom
Leonardo da vinci was a clever guy. He set a number with the "golden cut 1:1.618" that really work good in architecture and photography. it works here too 1 is the speaker distance from one another and 1.618 is the listening distance. Yes, I was amazed at how often it worked so well. I have no idea whether this will stand up to a university review.
P.S
Humans are visually aware that something looks harmonious good and perhaps also have a good influences in the sound
P.S
Humans are visually aware that something looks harmonious good and perhaps also have a good influences in the sound
Last edited:
Yes he said he did. When I set up my older pair of Wilson Alexia 1 they were a foot wider apart. One of the reasons I'm asking the question.
interesting.
my room designer, who teaches acoustics and builds mastering studios and has been and is a music producer, was not a fan of the golden ratio as a basis for room design. his opinion was that small room acoustics are not so simple/simplistic. he thought that certainly the golden ratio might accidently work at some particular scale, but how rooms work acoustically was very complicated and ratios did not scale effectively. build variabilities are too much part of how things work.
he also felt that however a room was built, there was a tuning that would be needed once it was a real space.
i don't have the experience in a wide array of room projects to really know. i'm happy how mine turned out is all i can say about it. and if you build your room with the golden ratio or set up your speakers that way who am i to tell you it's not right. it could be perfect. whether that's actually related to the universality of the golden ratio is the question.
something feeling right equaling it being right is certainly possible. but also maybe not.
Last edited:
Totally agree Mike. I too used to listen in the rear of their room until several speaker manufacturers encouraged me to sit near field and like you I am just inside the triangle. It has opened an entirely new and better window for my listening experience. In fact my position has no relation to any of the algorithms provided in the Wilson set up manual. Bottom line is trust your ears. The Wilson algorithms are but a starting point. Tweeter to tweeter is 10 feet and distance to from tweeter to ear is 8 feet
No real opinion but as an aside, mine happens to be very near the golden ratio but was unintentional and a result of an open room layout 17x35x12 and aethetics for 'living' as well as listening. I've moved my chair and speakers to test alternatives but this is 'best' and really is superlative sound -IMO
BTW I am using large Wilsons...I think the reference to the Golden Mean for building is interesting for visual harmony and some structural design elements, balance, etc.; however, it doesn't address the composition/materials of the walls and structures, what's behind them, etc. which is germane to an audio discussion.
I expect instances where "Golden" dimensions could work out fine, but I suspect the opposite is also true. The use of the dimensions alone in building an audio room is an oversimplification, IMO. Good place to start? Maybe so. Gotta start somewhere.
I expect instances where "Golden" dimensions could work out fine, but I suspect the opposite is also true. The use of the dimensions alone in building an audio room is an oversimplification, IMO. Good place to start? Maybe so. Gotta start somewhere.
You should definitely try moving them another foot apart. No harm in trying.
I didn't mean the room and its characteristics, but rather the placement of the speakers. For example, my speakers are 2.3 m apart × 1.6180 = 3.70 m listening distance to the speakers. Try applying this formula to your speakers. speakers angled directly towards your ears.
Last edited:
...yes, sir. I was making a general statement re: "golden section" and rooms. Cheers, @DasguteOhr
Different rooms of the same dimensions can have a nigh and day difference in acoustics - IMO no one will be able to help you with in such conditions. At best I would risk to tell you to follow Jim Smith advice on this matter of ratios - he is an experienced set up person with Wilsons and the probability of success will be slightly higher!
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |