Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
69.65.66.188
In Reply to: RE: Another First Reflection Trap (FRT) Adventure : Quasi-Ambiophonics posted by MG-bert on October 08, 2013 at 18:09:55
MG-bert, I read the whole thing a couple of times trying to relate to what I heard here when I "reduced the room". Other than being glad that your system performs so well, I am not sure I got enough details to compare to your un-EQ'd config. I do remember what went wrong vs my normal room config, though.
Here is what I remember. Please keep in mind that I use no equalizer or DSP. The nearest thing to it is the ability to raise & lower the tweeter at the PLLXO biamp interface (and this did not help me at all). In addition, I tuned the 1st/2nd order PLLXO points IN THE NORMAL ROOM...which is EQ of sorts.
1. Ordinarily, I have to tame bass somewhere in the 65-80 hz range in this room because the speaker on the right side sees a solid concrete wall. I have acoustic ways to do this. However, the square room overwhelemed my normal measures. The normally strong but acceptable peak now zoomed to offensive boominess.
2. After much work, I have the 100-250hz range real good, full and texture-rich. Well, the square room ALSO ruined this. However, since I could not measure that day, all I can say is that trombones, tubas, cellos and other instruments lost their proper heft, texture & presence. EXCEPT as they went higher up into the upper-bass/low-mids range. Somewhere there, a peak must have risen...quite strong and annoying.
3. In those days my system had already acquired most of its current slammy dynamics that can actually hit you perceivably and shake the sofa cushions at times. This went out the window. The forward impulse got lost.
4. The lower bass 40-60hz went AWOL...probably drowned by the peaks higher up. I don't use the subwoofer for music but suddenly I felt like it was needed badly. I turned it on just to see but turned it off right away...too messy & muddy at the setting it normally has.
5. Overall soundstage and soundfield, which normally enlarges the room and "erases the walls" was severely hampered, though not wiped out. I have heard some Maggies do worse when in over-damped rooms.
6. Imaging within the soundstage lost its compelling ability to "be looked at". Normally, it is not just solidity. One can also turn the head and look from side to side and the 3D elements stay put. Not so with the experimental 12x12 "room". To be fair, I've heard far worse from my own system in the very early days...and some friends thought it was great in those days...go figure!
7. The upper midrange and top-end did not suffer severly as far as "peakiness". I was not impressed by them but it may have been that I was a bit too fixated on what happened elsewhere in the lower range SQ.
8. The upper midrange and top-end did not lose much clarity either, I felt that it would have been easy to "re-tune" for the "room change".
9. The center imaging remained surprisingly solid, though much shallower.
My neighbor made a comment that stuck in my mind for being very true. He said that the speakers sounded much smaller.
So, you see. In reading about what you have accomplished so far in an even smaller space I can appreciate the effort it took. I think folks should take a look at your approach and adapt what may be needed for their places. I certainly would.
Follow Ups:
@JBen:
Sorry for taking so long to respond. Remind me never to ask you to do something - you'll spend hours and hours doing it! ;-) I really appreciate your feedback here, if for no other reason that it does validate the fact that making Maggies "sing" in a small, boxy room is a non-trivial exercise.
That said, I would dearly love to hear your setup someday. I still have not been able to achieve the really 3D pinpoint imaging you describe. Earlier, you gave us a guided tour through the first minute of the Eagles "Hotel California" from "Hell Freezes Over", and while I get pretty good depth, I don't get the whistle coming from the balcony over my head at one point like you described. On the other hand, I do get the occasional sense of instruments in front of the plane of the speakers, and since those are about 5 feet away, that is CLOSE! Also, I can localize the relative height of instruments.
One track which seems to be out of print now by a little known band called Mostly Autumn ("Shindig" from "Spirit of Autumn Past") has a jaunty synthesizer bass beat coming from my feet! Literally goes from left foot to right foot and back and forth. Then a fiddle comes in, a little above ear height and behind the plane of the speakers on the right, then a flute on the left forward of the speaker plane... you get the message. Lots of fun.
MG-bert
LOL! I do take my time testing some stuff. BTW, I did run "Hotel California" during that square room test. It was nothing like I am used to. It does remind me that, at the time, I though that perhaps I could have applied heavy damping to the "new wall" behind my seat. I have learned to respect what happens in the space behind my seat, for it helps those recordings that capture ambience and fuller soundfield. It also seems to help with dynamics a little. Come this Christmas, I know that the Christmas tree will bring a little more than a shade for the usual presents. It always helps overall SQ.
Incidentally, "Hotel California" was also at work last evening. I had just returned from a trip. Before leaving, I had begun to test a tweak that Old Guy 42 had encouraged me strongly to try. Initially, last week, it seemed really good. However, it takes a few rounds of something before I am convinced that I am not having "audio fantasies".
So, I ran a few hours of music after my trip (and a nap to recover). It was all good. The tweak may further allow me to enjoy most of the best that my system can only -- until now -- do during the coolest months in South Florida. These are the days when lower temps allow many folks to turn off their A/Cs...so there is less ambient & powerline noise. The tweak also seems to help my system at the worst of it all. I have a park close by. On evenings when they turn the many large floodlights on...I can tell without looking.
It will not help everyone but the tweak is simple and has been known for a while. I'll let OG42 tell about it, for I encouraging him to do so, and I've gotta run to help a friend with his system now.
@JBen:
You said:
"LOL! I do take my time testing some stuff. BTW, I did run "Hotel California" during that square room test. It was nothing like I am used to. It does remind me that, at the time, I though that perhaps I could have applied heavy damping to the "new wall" behind my seat. I have learned to respect what happens in the space behind my seat, for it helps those recordings that capture ambience and fuller soundfield. It also seems to help with dynamics a little. Come this Christmas, I know that the Christmas tree will bring a little more than a shade for the usual presents. It always helps overall SQ."
In the FWIW department, I have tried putting absorption on the wall behind the listening seat, and I have to rip it away. There is a huge difference between delayed reflections coming from behind and NO reflections coming from behind. Sounds totally unnatural. And, it's my theory that human evolution has conditioned our hearing to be able to deal with early reflections (less than 10 milliseconds from the initial impulse) coming from behind differently than those coming from the front or side. Think of seeing an acoustic guitarist in a fairly small club, and you sit along the rear wall. You'd just be aware that you're in the back, but the impact on sonics should be minimal.
Having said that, I would kill for a larger space to set up my MMGs, because I believe you when you say that the space behind you allows for a rich tapestry of later reflections to help solidify the reality of the performers in the room.
FRTs do help in my box, though!
And OldGuy42, what's your great idea? I'm all ears!
MG-bert
That, my friend, is a great thing to do and should serve you well. We all fail to "unplug them" enough from time to time and thus fail to tap some opportunities.OG42 and I are exchanging tweaks -- new and old -- these days; dusting off some known ones and even inventing others. By using some similar music to correlate observations we can better tell what's promising to share.
In any event, it serves me well, I have to say. There are a few tweaks out there that we all may have seen with interest but not really tried, for any number of reasons. Well, OG42 brought this simple one to the foreground and insisted that I try it. I am very glad that I did.
While "YMMV" does apply, it is so easy to try that it should be worth doing so. Cheap that I am, grabbed some bags of Radio Shack item #274-321 and shorted the plugs with a drop of solder...it worked like charm.
[As warned before by others: DO NOT SHORT RCA OUTPUTS ]
Edits: 10/14/13
Hey MG;
MG wrote..."And old guy 42, what's your great idea?"
This is definitely NOT my idea. I'm a no-tech old man that loves music.
I found this "idea" in the Tweaker's Asylum. (see link) The RCA shorting plugs are for analog INPUTS ONLY, as Jon's post states. I also used a 75 Ohm "terminating" RCA plug on the SPDIF output of my CDP, again, according to Jon. The "shorting RCA plugs" replaced the Cardas caps I have used since 2005.
A very nice improvement in imaging and detail on my old stuff. But, as you know, with these things, YMMV.
Also, again, a nice job with your FRTs!! If I have the good fortune to fall into a dedicated room, I will try your ideas, for sure.
Again, do NOT use a shorting RCA plug on an analog OUTPUT!!!
Take care....old guy
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: