What are the best tweaks in your experience?

[Carlos269]

...I think "good" and "right" surely have a "for me" aspect to the concepts. When I had my (Magico) speakers set up professionally, I felt I owed it to the people to respect their experience and subsequent placement position. After all, that's what I paid them for.

I gave it a week. But I just couldn't stand it. I had an audio pal of 40+ shared years of listening come over, and together, we listened and moved things around to get what I/we felt was optimum.

It sounds excellent to me, which was my primary mission, after all. I suppose the stories out there are as various as the people and systems themselves. C'est la vie.

Precisely!

 

[Daverich4]

You are correct, some people do require assistance. Glad that you learned and acquired the basic tools and knowledge that allow you to now do the speaker set-up and placement on your own. We are all different, some of us don’t have a clue while others have a good understanding Of the subject matter. No harm, no foul, we are all at a different point in the learning curve, and we are all continuously learning as we go through our experiences with this hobby. We learn both from our experiences and from our mistakes.

I’m not ashamed to admit that I’m not one of those people that think they know everything there is to know about a subject. Learning about audio is one of the reasons I’m here.

 

[NC Lee]

My two best "tweaks" were installing acoustic panels at first reflection points and getting an OmniMic to measure my system's frequency response. (Yes, there's more to measurements than just frequency response, but that one measurement will reveal a lot about acoustic problems that should be addressed.)

Last month I hung a 10' x 7' rockwool 4" panel on the wall behind the speakers.
Easily my best spent $ in audio.

 

[NC Lee]

Elliot, you obviously missed the point of my post and took offense to the misinterpretation; so let me break it down for you:

I will not repeat what I have already stated many times on this and other forums but in summary the matter of “sound quality” is a very complex and personal one for a number of technical reasons

To begin the speaker/room interaction is not isolated to the speaker and the room; it is a convolution of the source material spectral content, upstream equipment transfer functions, and the speakers’ frequency response and polar radiation pattern. This is why engineered rooms do not live up to expectations as there is no room-Acoustics one-size fits all.

Second we all have an individual head-related transfer function (HRTF) which means that what we hear is not exactly the same under the same conditions. Add to this the Fletcher-Munson contours for the human ear and pretty soon you realize that something as simple turning the volume knob up or down will affect the excitations not only of the room but also of your ears.

When I asked how do you and the other set-up man certify your set-up, I ask because I am curious to see how the execution and target goal is defined. If the only criteria is that it “sound good”, my next questions is to whom? And what will happen when there is a change of component in the system? Will the set-up expert need to come back after every change?

I know that some are guided by measurements but measurements alone do not provide all the insight necessary as microphones do not hear sound like our ears. Our auditory system is more complex than a diaphragm generating an electrical signal. To take full advantage of measurements you require the accompanying knowledge of Psychoacoustics to correctly interpret and make good use of the measurements. The response of a calibrated microphone captures raw sound the issue is not with the capture of the telemetry but with the interpretation of the graphical data as it relates to “sound quality”.

Next let’s talk about room correction, this is a dynamic way to solve acoustic issues and while it is a valid approach, it overlooks the fact that the human brain is the world’s best room correction device ever invented, able to arbitrate complex room interactions that the software developers have yet even began to implement. If you listen in a near-field arrangement and listen to the on-axis direct sound field, your brain corrects for reflections and other room anomalies, short of rattles and other course sound irregularities. The ears-brain cognitive function should not be underestimated and underutilized.

Others mentioned eliminating or attenuating, through absorbers, diffusers, or diffraction, the point of first reflection, which is interesting to me as how is this exact location determined by these individuals as it is a function of frequency and varies depending on the wavelengths. Furthermore not all first reflections are unwanted; for instance, first reflections which follow the direct sound between ~ 5 and 15ms contribute to a feeling of intimacy.

And to Lee, your answer is wrong, it is not “experience” one wants in a competent person, the correct answer is “knowledge”.

At times I do feel like a man playing among kids on this forum but someone has to keep the ignorant, the equipment peddlers, and the big yellow bus chasers honest.

", you obviously missed the point of my post and took offense to the misinterpretation; so let me break it down for you:"
Your condescension causes me not to read your post, or like you, so there's a tip to better reach people with your wisdom.

 

[NC Lee]

I often wonder who some enthusiastic "treakers" can find huge sums to spend on plinths, racks, cables, mains purifiers, even fuses and other overpriced gizmos to supplement relatively basic equipment. Why don't they spend all the cash they can find to buy these things on better kit in the first place?

Most already have.

 

[Carlos269]

", you obviously missed the point of my post and took offense to the misinterpretation; so let me break it down for you:"
Your condescension causes me not to read your post, or like you, so there's a tip to better reach people with your wisdom.

Please hit ignore and don’t read my posts. Nobody brings more to the table!; so do yourself a favor and ignore me please, I don’t need or want to share my knowledge with you.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

In fact and with my personal experience I don't understand why more people will not hire someone to do this for them especially if they dont have experience or don't know how to do it. It is the MOST underrated, not talked about and understood part of audio and IMO the most important part of getting an audio system to sound good. Tryng to put a "gizmo" in a system to fix whats wrong makes absolutely no sense to me.

In fact and with my personal experience I don't understand why more people will not hire someone to do this for them especially if they dont have experience or don't know how to do it. It is the MOST underrated, not talked about and understood part of audio and IMO the most important part of getting an audio system to sound good. Tryng to put a "gizmo" in a system to fix whats wrong makes absolutely no sense to me.

Stupid! Pay someone to tell you it sounds good...LOL

 

[Lee]

On the other hand there isn't as much learning/experience on your part when you hire someone else to do the experimenting for you.

Sure there is…I helped Jim Smith with everything and he taught me much about the process and audio as he did the various parts of the setup.

 

[Willgolf]

A thread that went from favorite tweaks to speaker placement. My speaker builder set up my original speakers which had to go relatively close to the back wall - 7". I then had two separate audio companies come to my house and spent hours moving my speakers to find the sweet spot. After all of their work, I hated the sound and moved them back to my original spot..
Favorite Tweaks - QSA fuses and a Silver jitter plug.

 

[Tangram]

I don’t consider correct speaker placement or room treatments “tweaks.” They are fundamental aspects of system setup. To me, a tweak is an add-on - your system will work just fine without it but may work better with it. Usually it’s different, not better, but that’s for another thread.

I’ve tried a few tweaks and, in some cases, I can’t hear a difference and in others the sound wasn’t as good. On my TW Acustic Raven One I’ve tried numerous record weights but none can be discerned by me in a blind A/B test so I don’t use one. I tried a highly-regarded platter mat that muddied the bass so I don’t use a mat. I have IsoAcoustics Orea footers under a slab of hardwood that my turntable sits on but I’m pretty sure they don’t make a difference. Look good though! My table sits in a separate room from my speakers, directly on concrete

The only tweak I use is velcro straps to suspend interconnects and keep them away from power cords and power supplies. Even though I have a tubed phono preamp/line stage, I’m very happy with the low noise levels of my system.

As you can tell, I am skeptical of most tweaks. The record weight test was a real eye opener. Most of these tweaks need to be assessed with blind A/B tests.

Many audiophiles add tweak on top of tweak on top of tweak because, let’s face it, they are something to spend money on. But why not go the other way and remove tweaks instead? My goal is the simplest system that gives me sound I can live with.

 

[DasguteOhr]

air suspension with slate my best tweak brought more than cartridges five times as expensive. i was skeptical at the beginning too, now five friends of mine are using the same concept, your own ears can be wrong, many ears can't. you need about 105kg mass on the 3 air springs, the slate ensures that the transparency is better.
i tested different materials over several months, slate is the material that has the least influence on the tonality.

 

[Scott Naylor]

air suspension with slate my best tweak brought more than cartridges five times as expensive. i was skeptical at the beginning too, now five friends of mine are using the same concept, your own ears can be wrong, many ears can't. you need about 105kg mass on the 3 air springs, the slate ensures that the transparency is better.
i tested different materials over several months, slate is the material that has the least influence on the tonality.
View attachment 106631

Slate is a best-kept secret for audio equipment support. Fair play to ya' mate!

Oh, forgot to add a fave tweak - absolute polarity switch. Can’t do digital without it, imho. Not sure it qualifies or is a “fundamental” a la ideal speaker setup? Hmmm.

 

[tima]

Just looking at this thread now ... lots of perspectives from different angles. These two seemingly at odds with one another I found interesting:

I often wonder who some enthusiastic "treakers" can find huge sums to spend on plinths, racks, cables, mains purifiers, even fuses and other overpriced gizmos to supplement relatively basic equipment. Why don't they spend all the cash they can find to buy these things on better kit in the first place?

In my 4+ decades of experience as an audiophile I have found that a well tweaked high value system can outperform one with "better kit" absent any tweaks. Addressing power purity, mechanical vibration mitigation, and room acoustics allows you to hear what your system is doing as opposed to what the room is doing - regardless of the cost/quality of your components. Addressing these three issues insures that as you move to better components the improvements they bring will not be masked by noise.

Spending money on better primary gear vs 'a well tweaked high value system'. Perhaps there is no 'right' way and one's viewpoint likely the result of experience. Seems like what counts as 'a tweak' is all over the map -- typical language issue. Tweak as a thing (noun) or as an activity (verb).

Cellcbern talks about what I call audio infrastructure: electricity, vibration, acoustics. These seem like basics to me. They may be called tweaks because so many come to addressing these after they've plopped a bunch of gear in their room. Perhaps if we knew then what we know now we'd pay attention to infrastructure as a starting point rather than as 'fix'.

In general I don't think of speaker positioning as a tweak. Like infrastructure I consider it a fundamental. But if we use 'tweak' by one of its dictionary definitions, namely 'a minor adjustment', speaker and listening seat positioning can end up as making minor adjustments, often over a period of time. I'm doing some of that now with my M9500s. At the 'audiophile level' isn't it a necessary activity? Are necessary activities tweaks? For example, keeping my records clean is a necessary activity, not a tweak. I don't think of a rack as a tweak. Getting the gear off the carpet is necessary.

…I helped Jim Smith with everything and he taught me much about the process and audio as he did the various parts of the setup.

We might call this tweaking oneself ! Learning, or at least paying attention to a hired expert is a positive.

The OP is more focused on tweaks as things:

Was wondering what tweaks or devices you have inm your system that have made a sound quality difference for you? I am curious more along the lines of accessories like footers, grounding devices, various noise reduction devices, special racks, sound filters, room treatments, power distributors, etc.

Over the past few years I'm more engaged in getting rid of those sorts of tweaks than acquiring them. It is probably heresy to most -- but there it is. Stillpoint Ultra 5s under my Alexias and other footers - gone. Noise reduction wires - gone. Thirteen acoustic panels in my room - twelve are gone. Power distributor/conditioner - gone. My de-tweaking allows musical energy (vitality, vivacity) robbed by those tweaks to return to my room. Still rolling tubes after all these years; I suppose thats a tweak.

 

[Lee]

Just looking at this thread now ... lots of perspectives from different angles. These two seemingly at odds with one another I found interesting:





Spending money on better primary gear vs 'a well tweaked high value system'. Perhaps there is no 'right' way and one's viewpoint likely the result of experience. Seems like what counts as 'a tweak' is all over the map -- typical language issue. Tweak as a thing (noun) or as an activity (verb).

Cellcbern talks about what I call audio infrastructure: electricity, vibration, acoustics. These seem like basics to me. They may be called tweaks because so many come to addressing these after they've plopped a bunch of gear in their room. Perhaps if we knew then what we know now we'd pay attention to infrastructure as a starting point rather than as 'fix'.

In general I don't think of speaker positioning as a tweak. Like infrastructure I consider it a fundamental. But if we use 'tweak' by one of its dictionary definitions, namely 'a minor adjustment', speaker and listening seat positioning can end up as making minor adjustments, often over a period of time. I'm doing some of that now with my M9500s. At the 'audiophile level' isn't it a necessary activity? Are necessary activities tweaks? For example, keeping my records clean is a necessary activity, not a tweak. I don't think of a rack as a tweak. Getting the gear off the carpet is necessary.



We might call this tweaking oneself ! Learning, or at least paying attention to a hired expert is a positive.

The OP is more focused on tweaks as things:


Over the past few years I'm more engaged in getting rid of those sorts of tweaks than acquiring them. It is probably heresy to most -- but there it is. Stillpoint Ultra 5s under my Alexias and other footers - gone. Noise reduction wires - gone. Thirteen acoustic panels in my room - twelve are gone. Power distributor/conditioner - gone. My de-tweaking allows musical energy (vitality, vivacity) robbed by those tweaks to return to my room. Still rolling tubes after all these years; I suppose thats a tweak.

My interest here is discovering tweaks that don’t rob the sound of musical energy. One accessory that surprised me was adding an ethernet switch. Greatly improved clarity and musical involvement!

 

[Cellcbern]

Just looking at this thread now ... lots of perspectives from different angles. These two seemingly at odds with one another I found interesting:





Spending money on better primary gear vs 'a well tweaked high value system'. Perhaps there is no 'right' way and one's viewpoint likely the result of experience. Seems like what counts as 'a tweak' is all over the map -- typical language issue. Tweak as a thing (noun) or as an activity (verb).

Cellcbern talks about what I call audio infrastructure: electricity, vibration, acoustics. These seem like basics to me. They may be called tweaks because so many come to addressing these after they've plopped a bunch of gear in their room. Perhaps if we knew then what we know now we'd pay attention to infrastructure as a starting point rather than as 'fix'.

In general I don't think of speaker positioning as a tweak. Like infrastructure I consider it a fundamental. But if we use 'tweak' by one of its dictionary definitions, namely 'a minor adjustment', speaker and listening seat positioning can end up as making minor adjustments, often over a period of time. I'm doing some of that now with my M9500s. At the 'audiophile level' isn't it a necessary activity? Are necessary activities tweaks? For example, keeping my records clean is a necessary activity, not a tweak. I don't think of a rack as a tweak. Getting the gear off the carpet is necessary.



We might call this tweaking oneself ! Learning, or at least paying attention to a hired expert is a positive.

The OP is more focused on tweaks as things:


Over the past few years I'm more engaged in getting rid of those sorts of tweaks than acquiring them. It is probably heresy to most -- but there it is. Stillpoint Ultra 5s under my Alexias and other footers - gone. Noise reduction wires - gone. Thirteen acoustic panels in my room - twelve are gone. Power distributor/conditioner - gone. My de-tweaking allows musical energy (vitality, vivacity) robbed by those tweaks to return to my room. Still rolling tubes after all these years; I suppose thats a tweak.

In my 40+ years of experience as an audiophile I have tried a lot of tweaks and have promptly sold or given away any, whether electrical, mechanical, or acoustical, that "robbed musical energy/vitality/vivacity". The ones I've kept have all enhanced those qualities, which I have periodically confirmed by removing them all and A-B-A testing them before putting them back. Component changes can change the impact of tweaks. Beyond that I don't see how removal of tweaks can improve a system's sound unless they were poorly chosen and/or deployed in the first place. I have for example never encountered a case where someone claimed to improve the sound by removing room treatments where, upon seeing photos of said treatments deployed they weren't poor choices and/or improperly placed.

 

[Kingrex]

I feel this speaker talk is geting to much importance in respect to the whole of tweaks. Following basic guidelines of speaker setup and spending some time dialing them in is foundational. But speaker placement does 0 to correct for bad power, incorrect cartridge setup, jitter in digital, smear from vibrations. Speaker setup for the most part makes a better sound stage, flatter bass response and a type of clarity. Nothing more. It doesn't correct any issue associated with everything else attached to the speaker. If you only focused on speaker placment and nothing else, I assume your stereo would be close to unlistenable.

Tweaking speaker setup as in paying a pro to setup your speakers has just elevated speaker placement to an expensive tweak. labor $1850, airfare $1200, car rental $400, hotel $400, travel day $500. Thats a $4000 tweak. That could buy a Torus RM20, new cartridge, variety of cables, platforms, footers, ground box, LPS for streaming, subwoofer etc etc. Any number of items that bring their own level of improvement beyond what tweaking a speaker brings.

 

[Al M.]

I feel this speaker talk is geting to much importance in respect to the whole of tweaks. Following basic guidelines of speaker setup and spending some time dialing them in is foundational. But speaker placement does 0 to correct for bad power, incorrect cartridge setup, jitter in digital, smear from vibrations. Speaker setup for the most part makes a better sound stage, flatter bass response and a type of clarity. Nothing more. It doesn't correct any issue associated with everything else attached to the speaker. If you only focused on speaker placment and nothing else, I assume your stereo would be close to unlistenable.

Tweaking speaker setup as in paying a pro to setup your speakers has just elevated speaker placement to an expensive tweak. labor $1850, airfare $1200, car rental $400, hotel $400, travel day $500. Thats a $4000 tweak. That could buy a Torus RM20, new cartridge, variety of cables, platforms, footers, ground box, LPS for streaming, subwoofer etc etc. Any number of items that bring their own level of improvement beyond what tweaking a speaker brings.

Your post is too dismissive, imo. Yes, speaker set-up on its own doesn't solve anything if all the other things you mention are problems. Yet just fixing those things still leaves the major issue of speaker set-up, which needs to be solved properly as well. It doesn't magically go away.

In terms of importance, it's not either/or. It's both/and.

 

[jbrrp1]

OK, back to actual physical items that improve your experience of audio in your system: I find that an Indica-inflected hybrid almost always brings the magic (I'm with Snoop Dogg on Blue Dream). When this tweak is implemented correctly and the planets align, nothing else seems to compare, IME. Some downsides to note are that it doesn't sustain and requires somewhat frequent re-application, and also that one can overdue that aspect of the tweak, too. But when it's right.....

 

[Lagonda]

I feel this speaker talk is geting to much importance in respect to the whole of tweaks. Following basic guidelines of speaker setup and spending some time dialing them in is foundational. But speaker placement does 0 to correct for bad power, incorrect cartridge setup, jitter in digital, smear from vibrations. Speaker setup for the most part makes a better sound stage, flatter bass response and a type of clarity. Nothing more. It doesn't correct any issue associated with everything else attached to the speaker. If you only focused on speaker placment and nothing else, I assume your stereo would be close to unlistenable.

Tweaking speaker setup as in paying a pro to setup your speakers has just elevated speaker placement to an expensive tweak. labor $1850, airfare $1200, car rental $400, hotel $400, travel day $500. Thats a $4000 tweak. That could buy a Torus RM20, new cartridge, variety of cables, platforms, footers, ground box, LPS for streaming, subwoofer etc etc. Any number of items that bring their own level of improvement beyond what tweaking a speaker brings.

Or you could just have a phone consultation with Dr. Jay, he will set you on the right path ! By the way, what did you pay for that ?

 

[jbrrp1]

Oh, it's an incredible bargain by normal consumer standards, let alone our nutty world: $35 for ~3.5 grams that works for ~40 applications, IME.