thank you Ron. your feedback means a lot to me.
I hope your completing your speaker selection does not prevent you from the visit to my room that we have talked about. you know you would be most welcome.
Seattle report: Mike's System, Bruce B, Jazdoc, EA MM7, NVS, Darts, etc
- Thread starter bonzo75
- Start date
thank you Ron. your feedback means a lot to me.
I hope your completing your speaker selection does not prevent you from the visit to my room that we have talked about. you know you would be most welcome.
it seems to me that the Evolution Acoustics MM7's are never given their due.
maybe it's because I'm the only MM7 owner who posts. maybe it's because the other 'uber' speakers are from sexier companies that have wider groups of customers. maybe it's because they have not been at audio shows, never been at Munich, or Hong Kong. who knows?
even with this write-up, they get mentioned but then marginalized that somehow I've overcome something. can't be the MM7's.
I'm here to say that is baloney. the MM7's are a tool that makes all things audio possible, and have multiple significant advantages over 'most' uber speakers, and at least one advantage over almost all 'uber' speakers. maybe their equal exists......but the MM7's are as capable as any other speaker out there. A N Y.
what's an 'uber' speaker?.....let's say over $175k that aspires to full range large room music reproduction.
to me the big thing that sets them apart is the combination of an easy amp load, naturalness and tonal density, ultra detail and texture, absolute seamless coherence through the deep and mid bass, complete extension and headroom both top and bottom octaves and their twin tower room adaptability. remove any of those clear attributes and the speaker is significantly diminished. yet most of the competition lacks at least one of those areas.
and......and with all their multiple advantages......they can be made to sound like a planar or 2 way with total coherence. close your eyes and you would have no idea there are 3000 pounds and 7 foot tall of 4 tower excellence less than 10 feet from you. there is no discontinuity from one driver type to another. seamless, coherent, musical, full bodied, capable of making solid state sound like tubes. they go from 10hz to 50khz without even breathing hard and can work in any room easily.
ok.....I feel much better now that I've got that off my chest. you can go back to ignoring the MM7's now. (maybe if the price was doubled to $400k they would get more pub......)
now I suppose I have to write up one of these posts about my dart 458 mono blocks that never get any love either. I am sympathetic that it is difficult to actually recommend a $160k set of amplifiers to anyone. but hey....these are 'that' good I got to tell you.
it is true the 458's do show up at shows from time to time and are not always matched favorably.....but in the right situations they have no limits.
it seems these 2 products just kick major ass but are like giant trees in the forest that just rule the world in obscurity.
I know, I know.....sympathy is between sh*t and syphilis in the dictionary......if....I want any that is the only place i'll get it.
maybe it's because I'm the only MM7 owner who posts. maybe it's because the other 'uber' speakers are from sexier companies that have wider groups of customers. maybe it's because they have not been at audio shows, never been at Munich, or Hong Kong. who knows?
even with this write-up, they get mentioned but then marginalized that somehow I've overcome something. can't be the MM7's.
I'm here to say that is baloney. the MM7's are a tool that makes all things audio possible, and have multiple significant advantages over 'most' uber speakers, and at least one advantage over almost all 'uber' speakers. maybe their equal exists......but the MM7's are as capable as any other speaker out there. A N Y.
what's an 'uber' speaker?.....let's say over $175k that aspires to full range large room music reproduction.
to me the big thing that sets them apart is the combination of an easy amp load, naturalness and tonal density, ultra detail and texture, absolute seamless coherence through the deep and mid bass, complete extension and headroom both top and bottom octaves and their twin tower room adaptability. remove any of those clear attributes and the speaker is significantly diminished. yet most of the competition lacks at least one of those areas.
and......and with all their multiple advantages......they can be made to sound like a planar or 2 way with total coherence. close your eyes and you would have no idea there are 3000 pounds and 7 foot tall of 4 tower excellence less than 10 feet from you. there is no discontinuity from one driver type to another. seamless, coherent, musical, full bodied, capable of making solid state sound like tubes. they go from 10hz to 50khz without even breathing hard and can work in any room easily.
ok.....I feel much better now that I've got that off my chest. you can go back to ignoring the MM7's now. (maybe if the price was doubled to $400k they would get more pub......)
now I suppose I have to write up one of these posts about my dart 458 mono blocks that never get any love either. I am sympathetic that it is difficult to actually recommend a $160k set of amplifiers to anyone. but hey....these are 'that' good I got to tell you.
it is true the 458's do show up at shows from time to time and are not always matched favorably.....but in the right situations they have no limits.
it seems these 2 products just kick major ass but are like giant trees in the forest that just rule the world in obscurity.
I know, I know.....sympathy is between sh*t and syphilis in the dictionary......if....I want any that is the only place i'll get it.
Last edited:
I don't have a blog to post anything... but I was there just before Ked.
I've mentioned elsewhere to some degree. But I'll vote for what Ked has said, other than switching between cartridges (we didn't do that).
Mike has the most complete setup I've ever heard, by a long ways, as it leaves less to desire than anything else I've experienced. He showed me the way he's tuned the room up, like with getting rid of the 30hz suck, and treating small high frequency reflections off of the surfaces. That's on top of the room that was designed with intention. It's undeniable that the cumulative effect is the best soundstage I've sat in front of, and most visitors will ever get to. And when I say soundstage, I say it in the way Ked has talked about, where every little thing is very distinct in it's place. It is not just a direction in which you hear it if the recording tells otherwise. For example we listened to one of my copies of The 4th & 5th Brandenburgs (TMG) and it was very evident of all the players standing next to each other, specified you might say. At the same time you can hear when something is very deep, far away, it's incredible and hauntingly cool in some recordings.
To try and compare to other things, and look past the cohesive amazing setup;
Do I think Spectral's would sound faster? No, not in his barn anyway. First I want to mention the Dartzeel's play complete notes, where as Spectrals tend to have a little sharper attack and decay but in the middle you're left with a somewhat empty note. That might change with the factor that leads me to believe that the speed would not be faster, systems based around the Equitech balanced transformer. I've heard Spectrals and the Dartzeel on them, and by zero means do I believe the Spectrals sound faster. The noise level was low, but trying to recreate some of what I heard (a multiple places) I think Equitech's have a minor issue with storing energy that holds back the peak speed, soften things a little, and some (and/or hence) timbre. It's a little unpredictable what different equipment may be like in response to their use, for various reasons. This is directly in line with characteristics you see in other transformers (well, I do) when designing gear.
The GG sounded better than I expected. At shows I've never liked it. It doesn't do PCM as well as some other DAC's I've heard. And I'm not sure that climbing up the DSD numerical values added enough for me to really get excited about (some just sound soft to me). But overall it didn't sell you short on anything. It has a great soundstage, it has dynamics, it has some timbre, on and on. It would be neat to hear the upgraded version, since it was already very good. For the sake of convenience I don't believe Mike is selling himself short on his system when he likes to listen to digital during his own sessions. While the vinyl is better, without a doubt you get to enjoy the splendor of his room with digital within a difference that is negligible if you just want to sit and hear music. There's times where I don't feel like flipping discs, so I greatly understand.
While the Dartzeel's seem to do things many - and I do mean many - amps cannot, they are not perfect either. I think they reflect the experience very much so, because they don't stand out in any particular direction so they're actually a great choice for many people considering how odd some other amps out there sound. The price tag is high, and to be honest I think it's fair that when you're looking at them you can consider anything at any price range as competition because there's no true reason why something significantly more or significantly less can't be considered "better" to whom is listening. I don't believe price is entirely relative to performance once you get up into a range where the designer wasn't making sacrifices for budget concerns.
Those big 458's certainly take little effort with the music that's thrown at them. When I was there the highest wattage that read on them I believe was 27 watts, and not on a bass line (could have been as low as 24w). What I didn't notice them doing was dynamics. Now you might be thinking I just went off the deep end there... but consider that I refer to dynamics in the sense of the word, not just how loud something can get. For me good dynamics gives you a very visceral representation of the volume changes and solidity to the sounds. We're talking volume in voice, drums, everything. For example in a singers voice the vibrato hinted, it was there, which is more than countless amps can say, but it wasn't great. So overall they weren't doing that at the level I prefer. And the image's solidity were more recording dependent than I'm use to, leaning much farther towards the soft side. Don't get me wrong, the 458's can blister your ears if they need to, and drop huge thunder on you, but just big power isn't dynamics for me. I feel as though there may be some more potential behind them, and do actually feel they're a very good choice for many people's taste but not mine personally.
All of that tells me something, being able to read so much between everything, I think the MM7's are an amazing speaker. The Accuton integration is easily the best I've heard because, well, you don't hear Accutons, you hear music. They portray whatever is thrown at them with absolute grace. Their design isn't just for looks, I believe the anti-defraction shape helps a lot in such an immaculate room like Mike's. They probably don't have much for rivals out there. Off the top of my head there's nothing I've heard. I haven't heard Apogee's anywhere notable, and haven't heard VSA's new Ultra line but can say for example the VR-55 using similar Accuton drivers isn't nearly as well integrated. (this isn't a problem of having less drivers, which obviously drops the price a lot, but more about crossover etc). If there is one thing I'm curious about it's the tweeter, I'd like to see if it can do bright when a recording wants to be bright (this might be complicated and hard to accomplish, for example due to power, and not limitations of a tweeter). I'm not sure I'd want the sub towers for the really deep bass. I think I prefer a swarm style, and resonations from the turntable where weird at times. I could feel the record playing on certain albums, at a below hearing threshold, and it's not a sensation I would keep if given the choice. Overall the MM7's are super easy to drive and absolutely amazing, beautiful speakers. I've certainly become convinced Evolution Acoustics is a contender with anything else out there, and certainly could be the winner. In Mike's room I think they best every last component he owns, as silly and negligible as that is as a thought.
Now I got to say it too, Mike is such a fantastic host! If you've got an invitation pursue it, you'll have a lot of fun. Mike is absolutely pro at finding albums in the dark, and bringing cut after cut of great music. I took photos of several albums with my phone so I could get them later. He went a bit out of his way the first night for me, as he just got in from a flight, and I do so appreciate it as an experience cemented in my mind.
I've mentioned elsewhere to some degree. But I'll vote for what Ked has said, other than switching between cartridges (we didn't do that).
Mike has the most complete setup I've ever heard, by a long ways, as it leaves less to desire than anything else I've experienced. He showed me the way he's tuned the room up, like with getting rid of the 30hz suck, and treating small high frequency reflections off of the surfaces. That's on top of the room that was designed with intention. It's undeniable that the cumulative effect is the best soundstage I've sat in front of, and most visitors will ever get to. And when I say soundstage, I say it in the way Ked has talked about, where every little thing is very distinct in it's place. It is not just a direction in which you hear it if the recording tells otherwise. For example we listened to one of my copies of The 4th & 5th Brandenburgs (TMG) and it was very evident of all the players standing next to each other, specified you might say. At the same time you can hear when something is very deep, far away, it's incredible and hauntingly cool in some recordings.
To try and compare to other things, and look past the cohesive amazing setup;
Do I think Spectral's would sound faster? No, not in his barn anyway. First I want to mention the Dartzeel's play complete notes, where as Spectrals tend to have a little sharper attack and decay but in the middle you're left with a somewhat empty note. That might change with the factor that leads me to believe that the speed would not be faster, systems based around the Equitech balanced transformer. I've heard Spectrals and the Dartzeel on them, and by zero means do I believe the Spectrals sound faster. The noise level was low, but trying to recreate some of what I heard (a multiple places) I think Equitech's have a minor issue with storing energy that holds back the peak speed, soften things a little, and some (and/or hence) timbre. It's a little unpredictable what different equipment may be like in response to their use, for various reasons. This is directly in line with characteristics you see in other transformers (well, I do) when designing gear.
The GG sounded better than I expected. At shows I've never liked it. It doesn't do PCM as well as some other DAC's I've heard. And I'm not sure that climbing up the DSD numerical values added enough for me to really get excited about (some just sound soft to me). But overall it didn't sell you short on anything. It has a great soundstage, it has dynamics, it has some timbre, on and on. It would be neat to hear the upgraded version, since it was already very good. For the sake of convenience I don't believe Mike is selling himself short on his system when he likes to listen to digital during his own sessions. While the vinyl is better, without a doubt you get to enjoy the splendor of his room with digital within a difference that is negligible if you just want to sit and hear music. There's times where I don't feel like flipping discs, so I greatly understand.
While the Dartzeel's seem to do things many - and I do mean many - amps cannot, they are not perfect either. I think they reflect the experience very much so, because they don't stand out in any particular direction so they're actually a great choice for many people considering how odd some other amps out there sound. The price tag is high, and to be honest I think it's fair that when you're looking at them you can consider anything at any price range as competition because there's no true reason why something significantly more or significantly less can't be considered "better" to whom is listening. I don't believe price is entirely relative to performance once you get up into a range where the designer wasn't making sacrifices for budget concerns.
Those big 458's certainly take little effort with the music that's thrown at them. When I was there the highest wattage that read on them I believe was 27 watts, and not on a bass line (could have been as low as 24w). What I didn't notice them doing was dynamics. Now you might be thinking I just went off the deep end there... but consider that I refer to dynamics in the sense of the word, not just how loud something can get. For me good dynamics gives you a very visceral representation of the volume changes and solidity to the sounds. We're talking volume in voice, drums, everything. For example in a singers voice the vibrato hinted, it was there, which is more than countless amps can say, but it wasn't great. So overall they weren't doing that at the level I prefer. And the image's solidity were more recording dependent than I'm use to, leaning much farther towards the soft side. Don't get me wrong, the 458's can blister your ears if they need to, and drop huge thunder on you, but just big power isn't dynamics for me. I feel as though there may be some more potential behind them, and do actually feel they're a very good choice for many people's taste but not mine personally.
All of that tells me something, being able to read so much between everything, I think the MM7's are an amazing speaker. The Accuton integration is easily the best I've heard because, well, you don't hear Accutons, you hear music. They portray whatever is thrown at them with absolute grace. Their design isn't just for looks, I believe the anti-defraction shape helps a lot in such an immaculate room like Mike's. They probably don't have much for rivals out there. Off the top of my head there's nothing I've heard. I haven't heard Apogee's anywhere notable, and haven't heard VSA's new Ultra line but can say for example the VR-55 using similar Accuton drivers isn't nearly as well integrated. (this isn't a problem of having less drivers, which obviously drops the price a lot, but more about crossover etc). If there is one thing I'm curious about it's the tweeter, I'd like to see if it can do bright when a recording wants to be bright (this might be complicated and hard to accomplish, for example due to power, and not limitations of a tweeter). I'm not sure I'd want the sub towers for the really deep bass. I think I prefer a swarm style, and resonations from the turntable where weird at times. I could feel the record playing on certain albums, at a below hearing threshold, and it's not a sensation I would keep if given the choice. Overall the MM7's are super easy to drive and absolutely amazing, beautiful speakers. I've certainly become convinced Evolution Acoustics is a contender with anything else out there, and certainly could be the winner. In Mike's room I think they best every last component he owns, as silly and negligible as that is as a thought.
Now I got to say it too, Mike is such a fantastic host! If you've got an invitation pursue it, you'll have a lot of fun. Mike is absolutely pro at finding albums in the dark, and bringing cut after cut of great music. I took photos of several albums with my phone so I could get them later. He went a bit out of his way the first night for me, as he just got in from a flight, and I do so appreciate it as an experience cemented in my mind.
Perfect post, Mike!
It's the nature of the hobby and the business, I guess... Some brands will be marginalized, while others "hog" the attention.
Just today I had a person come into the store, and audiophile of many years, and he could not believe how the Evolutions are not more widely known, given the performance AND their price. He did a cursory search and found next to no reviews, and very few forum posts. Most of the stuff is actually show reports (usually top 3 on those too).
Personal taste always comes into play, but I've always found the Evolutions to be speakers that are very easy to like, as they can cater to a wide variety of tastes, as they do so many things well...
Oh, and you gotta tell us more about those 458s
cheers,
alex
It's the nature of the hobby and the business, I guess... Some brands will be marginalized, while others "hog" the attention.
Just today I had a person come into the store, and audiophile of many years, and he could not believe how the Evolutions are not more widely known, given the performance AND their price. He did a cursory search and found next to no reviews, and very few forum posts. Most of the stuff is actually show reports (usually top 3 on those too).
Personal taste always comes into play, but I've always found the Evolutions to be speakers that are very easy to like, as they can cater to a wide variety of tastes, as they do so many things well...
Oh, and you gotta tell us more about those 458s
cheers,
alex
Thanks Folsom, well written.
I was asked by members what I think of Equitech and Darts. I mentioned I have no basis for comparison so unfair to comment. A/Bing electronics is for me the best way to go.
Regarding the GG, you heard it in a private set up, with not their best tubes and upsampled in not the ideal way. I have never hear dit sounding good at shows either. It does PCM better than other dacs I compared it to in private set ups. I haven't compared it to Nagra and Aries Cerat
I was asked by members what I think of Equitech and Darts. I mentioned I have no basis for comparison so unfair to comment. A/Bing electronics is for me the best way to go.
Regarding the GG, you heard it in a private set up, with not their best tubes and upsampled in not the ideal way. I have never hear dit sounding good at shows either. It does PCM better than other dacs I compared it to in private set ups. I haven't compared it to Nagra and Aries Cerat
Great write up Ked
I'm not as interested in Mike's components as I am in his room
I know you always felt my old room hamstrung my system potential, what do you feel the reverse situation w Mike's room is bringing to the party, and where the major differences are?
I ask this because I have a much better blank canvas for making strides in this area
I'm not as interested in Mike's components as I am in his room
I know you always felt my old room hamstrung my system potential, what do you feel the reverse situation w Mike's room is bringing to the party, and where the major differences are?
I ask this because I have a much better blank canvas for making strides in this area
Marc, I have never heard the Zus outside your room, so I don’t know to what extent it was your room and gear. Yes your room was causing many problems. I don’t think any of us here buying a ready built room can compete with American audiophiles where building a custom designed house is quite common. Even my sister there has a 5 br house for 200k that she planned herself – unfortunately she is not the audiophile in the family. Btw, as trivia, to the best of her knowledge I have never visited the US for many years, because if I am known to visit the US for hifi systems rather than to meet her and some cousins, my family will disown me.
Knowing you the best you can do is keep emotions out of your decisions. Match the amp to the speakers – there are a lot of good SS amps around.
I haven’t heard EA MM3 and 2 yet in a normal system, but given the space you have, you have the seating arrangement possible, though not the exact room, that Mike can manage.
If you find the room a constraint, horns are directive. I have heard horns sounding consistent in many rooms once they have space, which you have. Look at Trios
The WE 16A still does something none of these systems do. If there was anything that Mike needs to do, then instead of further improving his current system, he can add a WE 16A on the opposite or side wall to get totally different sound.
Interesting
I was at a recent GIK seminar where they a-b'd a simple single micd acoustic guitar recording, first w no room treatments, second w a full suite of GIKs
The opinion at the seminar was divided, half preferring the drier more direct sound, the other half incl me and Barry/Blue58 disliking the lack of decay and cues in the sound
The guitar player really preferred the GIKd version
I'm wondering if I really am for heroically treated neutral rooms
I was at a recent GIK seminar where they a-b'd a simple single micd acoustic guitar recording, first w no room treatments, second w a full suite of GIKs
The opinion at the seminar was divided, half preferring the drier more direct sound, the other half incl me and Barry/Blue58 disliking the lack of decay and cues in the sound
The guitar player really preferred the GIKd version
I'm wondering if I really am for heroically treated neutral rooms
I had GIKs when I had Martin Logans, I took them off and preferred not to have them.
You are comparing the wrong things. I have been in 3 fully done SMT rooms, a Rives room, Steve's highly planned and treated room.
But Marty's and Mike's have both size and treatment, and these are not necessarily GIKs. Mike's is led zep recording engineer plus his 5 hours a day times 12 years of hard work.
Marty's room has won awards in Texas as best media room and been transported to NJ.
Having all of size and planning and treatment is just a different level.
Mike,
Thanks for reporting on your system and wonderful room - we always learn when reading about it, and as you say information and reports about the MM7's are scarce.
Ked reported,
"Room is 21*29*11, with drop dead ceiling hight at 9’6?
Tweeters are 109? apart, and 71.5? from each wall, and the front of the tweeter is 9 ft from the wall behind
Mike has marked a number of spots to verify the center of the listening position so that respective ear to respective tweeter is 7’11”, and ears to front wall are 15 ft, and to back wall are 14 ft. "
IMHO most listeners would be worried about listening so close - call it speaker claustrophobia - but I suffer from it
. I have an old house and got used to large spaces, I do not feel comfortable listening at distances closer than 11-13 feet. Did you ever try your speakers in more "typical" distances, closer to the walls?
Thank you for your standing invitation. Selecting the speaker definitely does not reduce my interest in visiting you!
Mike,
Thanks for reporting on your system and wonderful room - we always learn when reading about it, and as you say information and reports about the MM7's are scarce.
Ked reported,
"Room is 21*29*11, with drop dead ceiling hight at 9’6?
Tweeters are 109? apart, and 71.5? from each wall, and the front of the tweeter is 9 ft from the wall behind
Mike has marked a number of spots to verify the center of the listening position so that respective ear to respective tweeter is 7’11”, and ears to front wall are 15 ft, and to back wall are 14 ft. "
IMHO most listeners would be worried about listening so close - call it speaker claustrophobia - but I suffer from it
remember, the bass towers (which are massive) are between the main towers and the walls. so that 71.5" between the tweeter and wall is filled with a 7 foot tall 750 pound bass tower.
and having those bass towers on the same listening radius is important for perfect phase and time alignment for the ideal wave launch and ultimate involvement. perceived perfect speaker coherence in a true full range system is not an accident.and sure, when I have friends over I always sit in the 2nd row sofa, as do others. it's 11'-12' feet back. it's a great seat. but there is a better seat.
the reason we sit back is our comfort zone visually, but really we are use to a room pushing us back by how it interacts with the speaker. all the agressive reflections make the music confused and hard when the SPL's increase when we are closer. so it's the combination of the visual and our learned hearing comfort zone.
but what if you completely eliminated the room reflection issue? I mean completely. when I did that, even with monster towers so close, the sighted comfort zone part was easy to adapt to. like Bonzo said, the second day those visuals were no longer an issue. I normally see it take about 90 minutes for a person to relax, take a deep breath, and just allow the speakers to caress them. like getting in the shower every morning, that first half second is startling, then it's ahhhhhhhh.
resistance is futile......just allow yourself to be absorbed by the entity.....
sitting in the far field you are then hearing the room as much as the speaker......this is a learned thing.....and can be un-learned if/when sufficiently motivated. we go to such degrees of effort.....then we stop short of what it takes to go all the way. and these type things cost nothing....zero....nada. it's just our minds holding us back. and I'm 65 years old.....so don't be telling me you are too old to learn......
if one's set-up/system/signal path is not sorted out enough to get up close then there is work to do......but that is another topic.
one more thing; I do feel strongly that the ribbon tweeter-ceramic mid-range combo on all the Evolution Acoustics speakers is particularly smooth and listenable and allows for comfortable and natural near field listening. if you are having trouble getting comfortable close up there could be reasons for that you cannot change.
Last edited:
Marty has a room to try that seating arrangement. He normally sits far out – his pipedreams were 9 ft apart, 7 ft from the front wall, 14 from the listener, in a 35*25 room.
It will be interesting to see what differences he perceives by pulling his mystery speaker and his chair closer. Heck, he can even try positioning across the room instead of having them downward firing.
It will be interesting to see what differences he perceives by pulling his mystery speaker and his chair closer. Heck, he can even try positioning across the room instead of having them downward firing.
Folsom,
thank you for all the kind words.
but regarding your comments on my dart 458's I have to mention that you came to my room with an (understandable and fully disclosed) agenda. you've spent years working on your own amplifier which I allowed you to insert into my system and listen to. i'll refrain from commenting on my perception of your amplifier, but you had your own prism of viewpoints on my darts verses your amps which honestly I did not agree with (to be fair I would need more time to fully grasp), so I need to mention that for full disclosure on this specific issue. I fully get that that amplifier is your baby and it's so personal. but for the reader this is important to point out.
I very much enjoyed your visit and spending time with you and look forward to our future relationship. so please understand my only intent is to deal with this one issue. I certainly wish you the best with your amplifier project.
Mike, I'm never going to approach yr level of fidelity, but I have a stab at a more neutral space with newly constructed chapel loft space, 40x18x9 (max apex), 720 sq ft/5000 cub ft, total blank canvas for future acoustic treatments (currently incorporating good quality acoustic insulation as part of the loft conversion), all new Oyaide dedicated lines from my 8kVA balanced transformer
It will be fascinating if I wrangle the acoustic reflections enough to go from my previous 12' listening distance to more like yrs
It will be fascinating if I wrangle the acoustic reflections enough to go from my previous 12' listening distance to more like yrs
best wishes with finding the magic in your new space. near field is not a universal solution, but also needs to be considered and not dismissed for the wrong reasons. so have fun with the investigations, don't be afraid to conquer your comfort zones, and find the best spot for you.
Mike, from Ked's measurements you seem to be sitting in the midline of the room
At a recent GIK seminar, apparently a major no no is to choose to sit midway btwn front and back walls
You appear to be breaking a cardinal rule
You're such a rebel LOL!
At a recent GIK seminar, apparently a major no no is to choose to sit midway btwn front and back walls
You appear to be breaking a cardinal rule
You're such a rebel LOL!
seems to work pretty good.
my ears are 15 feet off the forward wall, and 14 feet off the rear wall.....along the exact front to back center line. and my room is exactly symmetric side to side.
really......there are so many variables, almost infinite variables when you start talking about density of walls and ceilings and such that......you cannot with certainty say what will work ahead of time.......guides are just that.....guides. rules of thirds, or fifths, or golden ratio.....or any of that......these are starting points. and small room acoustics really don't scale well. they are just concepts to try.
if you found the best spot and then had some physicist come in and study it and tell you why this one spot was best i'll bet they could not do it. they would simply compile more and more data and would just burn out on trying to prove cause and effect.
if it sounds best then it's best.
