Moving away from box speakers: Diesis Audio vs Avantgarde Acoustic?
- Thread starter abeidrov
- Start date
It’s interesting that you have your WA speakers in parallel configuration. I’ve never seen a WA installation not toe in. Is it deliberate and have your tried the traditional Wilson way?
No I have not. It was done by the Dealer. What is the traditional Wilson way. Can you explain. Thanks
The best I ever got my old Magico speakers to sound was when they were aimed straight ahead. I had never seen Magicos set up that way either. Sorry to be off topic. Back to thread....
By traditional I just mean positioning the speakers with significant toe-in and not straight ahead.
I preferred it. The problem is that it took me a lot longer to set it up properly because of room interactions, but with a lot of effort, the final result was much better. They ended up being closer together and sounding much more natural. I think the typical toe-in is a nice short cut and easier to get decent sound, but ultimately, I found it to be a compromise. Good luck.
i think it depends on the room size and to what degree the sidewalls influence the energy at the listening position. and nearfield or far field listening position. dynamic box speakers radiate quite a bit of off axis sound so if your walls are relatively close it's a matter of finding the right toe in/out balance and straight ahead might be best.
i have a large room, and sit in the near field. and i have huge bass towers outside/next to my main towers that eliminate near sidewall reflections. so i get opposite wall first reflections only. and since i sit in the nearfield i'm getting much more direct sound than a far field listening position. 115" tweeter to tweeter, 98" tweeter to ears. 21' wide room. front baffles 9.5' into the room, 29 foot long room. all drivers time aligned.
my tweeters are aimed at the tops of my shoulders.
i get a holodeck sort of 'full immersion' presentation.
is my situation typical? probably not. but all the same issues apply. it's a balancing act considering all the variables. in a normal sized room, rule of thirds or fifths, equilateral triangle listening position, consult your speaker designer for optimal tow-in angle to start and tune from there.
Last edited:
This should be easy to try and doesnt cost anything .
There is no one size fits all , all speakers are designed differently / radiate differently .
It is a measured fact that small differences in placement can alter the tonal balance quit significantly
Mike, I view near field, listening as a way to lessen the effects of the room, which in some circumstances may distract from engagement and the listening experience. I do not view near field, listening as a way to increase a listeners sense of immersion. Immersion happens when the system is carefully chosen and properly set up in a given room.
You have a beautiful large professionally designed room that you then worked on for 10 years to get right, so I imagine you do not have the challenges that most of us face with our rooms.
I found that aiming my speakers straight ahead after a lot of careful work produced a much more engaging and enveloping listening experience precisely because the room became more energized, but it was quite difficult to find the right balance between direct sound and reflected sound, much more challenging than the typical toed in triangle.
I agree it depends on the type of speaker, radiation patterns, off access response, and the room quality.
i also have 9.5' deep x 11' high x 21' wide free space behind my driver plane which greatly influences the sense of space and essentially moves my speakers back a bit. a smaller space behind the speakers might actually compress the sound relatively making the speaker sense closer even listening in the far field.
in essence that space allows the speakers to breathe.
so room size does change how we look at listening positions and our sense of what feels right and what is actually more immersive.
Similar threads
