Doctor's Orders-Part Two-The New Listening Room Of Steve Williams

[Bobvin]

Considering Jim Smith would anchor first the seating position then set speakers—which is somewhat conflicting with the Wilson method which typically has speakers a little bit deeper into corners than many would expect, whats best?

I have had several visitors to my room want to monkey with my speaker position to increase depth of soundstage, but as they sit (done by a very skilled setup guy starting with WASP) I seem to get the best of pace, rhythm, timing, and dynamics even though soundstage does sometimes seem a wee bit shallow compared to having the speakers out into the room. Moving speakers seems a bit risky as for every gain there may be losses, e.g. more depth may be traded for less slam.

The one guy who most wanted to move my speakers about had been hearing them when I had multiple people in the room, with rear curtains somewhat opened. When there were just a couple of us in the room, with curtains in the rear drawn across stairs and hallway, (as it is for most listening) he said he felt the soundstage grew in depth and he was less inclined to monkey-about.

All said, I’m willing to see what I hear moving forward a bit. I know my ratio is currently >1.

 

[sbnx]

My thoughts on the Wilson method...Most people don't have the room to really pull the speakers out from the front wall more than a couple feet and the listening position is fairly well fixed due to domestic considerations (e.g. their system is in a living room with sofas, chairs, TV etc). WASP is a good way to find the right spot given those constraints. If you have full flexibility of where to sit and where the speakers go then pulling them out is best(IMO). The listening position is hugely important. I attached a photo where I measured a friends room. You can see what happened when we simply moved the listening position back 16". The bass was much smoother and then suddenly we had bass impact and dynamics. The huge trough between 110-150Hz is all filled in and the peak at 160Hz was tamped down. Then we could pull the speakers out further from the front wall giving real soundstage depth and also add bass extension below 50Hz.

 

[steve williams]

My thoughts on the Wilson method...Most people don't have the room to really pull the speakers out from the front wall more than a couple feet and the listening position is fairly well fixed due to domestic considerations (e.g. their system is in a living room with sofas, chairs, TV etc). WASP is a good way to find the right spot given those constraints. If you have full flexibility of where to sit and where the speakers go then pulling them out is best(IMO). The listening position is hugely important. I attached a photo where I measured a friends room. You can see what happened when we simply moved the listening position back 16". The bass was much smoother and then suddenly we had bass impact and dynamics. The huge trough between 110-150Hz is all filled in and the peak at 160Hz was tamped down. Then we could pull the speakers out further from the front wall giving real soundstage depth and also add bass extension below 50Hz.

the Wilson X2 and XLF are front ported for this very reason that they can be moved close to the front wall without overloading the bottom end

 

[steve williams]

as a followup to my question yesterday about the need to do a slight toe out of the speaker to conform to Wilson set up where I should only be able to slightly see the inner wall of both speakers as the new sitting position allows me to see virtually the entire inner wall of each speaker.

This morning I was talking to LeifS who as we know designs the speakers for VSA. It was really watching Leif listen when he sat in my chair. He was on the edger of the chair and leaning far forward. I discussed the issue of toe in with him and Leif advised against changing the toe in because he said sitting forward the music was far better using the existing toe in and accordingly his advice was to leave it alone.

 

[PeterA]

your premise does not have a simple answer.

the problem is that most audiophile listening rooms are not listenable in the near-field. the reflective energy drives you back. so even though most dynamic cone audiophile speakers will sound optimally listened to in the near-field, few rooms are tuned sufficiently to allow for it. and then there is the accumulated far-field listening habits for many are hard to break. which can be viewed as preference. some just are not comfortable with the immersive aspects of near-field. or just proximity of speakers.

your room has lots of designed in treatment that controls reflections. and since 5 years ago so does mine. so we two are free to move as close as we want.

for me personally i feel like if i could treat any room appropriately, that i would prefer to listen in the near field.

obviously some driver technology is not near-field friendly, so i'm not talking about those speakers.

Mike, This is an interesting post. I always thought that the closer one sits to a pair of speakers, especially ones that are toed-in, the more direct sound he hears and the less reflected sound. You seem to be claiming the opposite when you write, "the problem is that most audiophile listening rooms are not listenable in the near-field. the reflective energy drives you back."

I experimented with precisely this in my own listening room. By removing the acoustic treatments from the room and repositioning the speakers with zero toe in, I altered the amount of direct sound relative to reflected sound, all the while not changing the distance between listener and speakers.

I think this issue is much more complicated than you make it sound in your post.

Regarding how "near-field" is defined, I have heard systems in larger rooms where the speakers are 10-12 feet apart and the listener is also that distance away. For argument's sake, lets say they formed an 11' equilateral triangle. I never thought I was listening in the "near-field". You and the Cardas definition would seem to argue otherwise.

 

[steve williams]

Mike, This is an interesting post. I always thought that the closer one sits to a pair of speakers, especially ones that are toed-in, the more direct sound he hears and the less reflected sound. You seem to be claiming the opposite when you write, "the problem is that most audiophile listening rooms are not listenable in the near-field. the reflective energy drives you back."

I tend to agree

It was my understanding that the Cardas method was devised specifically for small rooms that have reflection issues

 

[ddk]

your premise does not have a simple answer.

the problem is that most audiophile listening rooms are not listenable in the near-field. the reflective energy drives you back.

so even though most dynamic cone audiophile speakers will sound optimally listened to in the near-field, few rooms are tuned sufficiently to allow for it. and then there is the accumulated far-field listening habits for many are hard to break. which can be viewed as preference. some just are not comfortable with the immersive aspects of near-field. or just proximity of speakers.

I'm sorry Mike but this is totally incorrect, you move near field to avoid the effects of the room boundary and in a small space with large speakers you'll naturally end up. This isn't a secret formula or anything invented by Cardas, it's part of basic speaker setup. Where do you get this idea about dynamic speakers sounding optimal near field, optimal position of the speakers and listening seat are room dependent not speaker technology. You can do the same with any type of speaker.

your room has lots of designed in treatment that controls reflections. and since 5 years ago so does mine. so we two are free to move as close as we want.

for me personally i feel like if i could treat any room appropriately, that i would prefer to listen in the near field.

obviously some driver technology is not near-field friendly, so i'm not talking about those speakers.

Steve only has some heavy curtains dampening the room and maybe dampening materials in the walls and floors, the room is too dead, the move forward is to mitigate the negative effects of his curtains and whatever's in the walls. In all these years I've never heard of anyone treating a large room to act like a small room for near field listening, how do you even do that?
Which driver technology isn't near-field or in this case small room setup friendly?

david

 

[ddk]

I tend to agree

It was my understanding that the Cardas method was devised specifically for small rooms that have reflection issues

It's not his method Steve nor devised by Cardas, what you see in that diagram is basic speakers setup going back decades. Sound reproduction is close to hundred years old the basics and the math was established by some very intelligent engineers back when they invented this stuff, in 2020 we're only applying their genius not discovering or inventing anything new.

david

 

[Holli82]

as a followup to my question yesterday about the need to do a slight toe out of the speaker to conform to Wilson set up where I should only be able to slightly see the inner wall of both speakers as the new sitting position allows me to see virtually the entire inner wall of each speaker.

This morning I was talking to LeifS who as we know designs the speakers for VSA. It was really watching Leif listen when he sat in my chair. He was on the edger of the chair and leaning far forward. I discussed the issue of toe in with him and Leif advised against changing the toe in because he said sitting forward the music was far better using the existing toe in and accordingly his advice was to leave it alone.

Leif is amazing with speaker placement. I don't know if JackD is lurking, but I think his experience is similar to mine. After living with my speakers for a couple of months, Leif came by after everything was well broken in. A couple of adjustments in my speaker positioning by Leif resulted in a dramatic improvement in sound. You guys know the drill. Get all of your reference music back out....stay up all night, blah blah blah

Steve, wishing you many happy hours of listening.

 

[marty]

My thoughts on the Wilson method...Most people don't have the room to really pull the speakers out from the front wall more than a couple feet and the listening position is fairly well fixed due to domestic considerations (e.g. their system is in a living room with sofas, chairs, TV etc). WASP is a good way to find the right spot given those constraints. If you have full flexibility of where to sit and where the speakers go then pulling them out is best(IMO). The listening position is hugely important. I attached a photo where I measured a friends room. You can see what happened when we simply moved the listening position back 16". The bass was much smoother and then suddenly we had bass impact and dynamics. The huge trough between 110-150Hz is all filled in and the peak at 160Hz was tamped down. Then we could pull the speakers out further from the front wall giving real soundstage depth and also add bass extension below 50Hz.

Well I'll be damned. Somebody is actually talking about frequency response with data to show it as a function of position. Congratulations!

 

[treitz3]

Gentlemen, one of the best, if not the best sound stage and imaging I have ever heard in my time on this Earth was on a porch in the mountains that was only about 7 feet deep with a backdrop of a valley going down about a mile. The side reflections were nothing but a 2' outtake of a stone chimney about 12' away on the left side. Other than that? Trees.

We were 4-5 feet away from the speakers.

That was the closest I have ever come to "live" when it came to sound stage, presence, spacial locationality cues and a palpable perceived realism I have EVER experienced. Here is the kicker....it wasn't a multi-million dollar system. Just some tubes, an LP player and decent speakers. Sumiko setup, the Cardas triangle, other attempts? Laughable at best in comparison.

Just sayin'

Tom

 

[Folsom]

Tom, I've long since said even some fairly cheap OB speakers outside that are pro-driver-ish in nature can be shockingly good, good in ways you don't get inside anywhere.

 

[steve williams]

well my 8 year quest for a new listening chair finally came to an end today with the delivery of my new chair from Roche-Bobois in New York.

Sitting in it provides everything for which I have been seeking. It has a straight, firm low profile back which keeps my back straight and comfortable while the top of the chair back sits well below my shoulders. Further the seat cushion misquote firm and most unlikely to sag with time

My experiment with near field listening continues today dividends as I get used to the new sitting position which is about2 1/2 feet further forward. From the photos included here you will notice an AC outlet on the floor. The previous sitting position was 8" behind that AC outlet. Each dark horizontal line on the carpet is 4" apart from the one behind and in front.

I will have more to say about this new sitting position. To date I have yet to change speaker position in the room nor have I changed the toe in which I used for the original sitting position further backing the room.I have however adjusted the upper modules on the speaker to reflect a sitting distance of 8 1/2 to 9 feet from the speaker. Having said this I must admit it sounds damn good. I think ultimately the speakers might need to be moved 3" on each side towards the center of the room and a very slight change in toe in but right now I am enjoying what i hear

 

[steve williams]

 

[steve williams]

 

[steve williams]

 

[steve williams]

 

[steve williams]

 

[steve williams]

 

[ddk]

Very nice Steve, looks great in the room too!

david