|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
198.161.238.18
Ever since someone here mentioned conventional speakers gives a presentation where the singer is 3 feet tall, I've noticed that more in my listening room. I have Proac Tablettes on Lovan stands and the sound is great but I seem to be focusing more on the height of the singer. So how do I fix this? What can I do with my setup to give a more life like presentation?
Follow Ups:
I have Cremona Auditors, the drive units used to be 31 (W) and 36 (T) inches from the ground. I've placed them on four stacked patio stones which has brought the units to 38.5 and 43.5 inches.
The soundstage is now taller and deeper. Staging is more 'clear' now as well.
There are measurable differences: the 50-60 hz range is less peaky - I had a 20 db range between 53 hz and 59 hz; it's now only an 8 db difference. I would think this is because the woofer was sitting close to the 1/4 point of the ceiling height and now its at the 1/3 point.
When the primary singer is with other vocalists such as a choir do the speakers limit both (and the musicians) to the same 3 foot tall presentation? Does the presentation vary from recording to recording?
Robert C. Lang
which is inherent in the physical nature of the speakers. It matters not what media and pieces are being played - solo instrument, choral with soloist, etc. Everything is abbreviated vertically with a lower/shorter speaker. Or maybe I should say "lowered" vertically, and abbreviated in terms of the soundstage presented as being driven into the ground, as I have described elsewhere in this thread. As some have said, when smaller speakers are placed on stands, there is some amelioration of the effect. I have used several $10-15K speakers which are lower than 4' displaying such characteristics. It is a fairly inevitable consequence of the size of the speaker.
I should clarify that I'm not saying the soundstage stops at three feet; as all drivers are wont to do, it does propagate upward and outward. It is, however, physically and perceptually emanating from a lower elevation. This is what my mind discerns, and it prefers to hear the locus of the voice or instrument emanate from higher up, about 4-5'. That sounds more natural to me, more "life" sized.
I don't consider this a "problem" to overcome with my listening. My ears are simply telling me information about the characteristics of the system and the sound it reproduces. It's simply a description of smallish floor standers and monitors not being able to overcome the paucity of scale which is easily achievable by larger floor standers. To some this is negligible, while to me it is not.
It is also not an issue of set up. I have worked with smaller and larger speakers of the same brand and found consistently the "proper" height of the M/T strongly influences the perception of being life sized to my mind. Over the years I worked up from shorter floor standing speakers to larger ones, and I find the extra elevation very pleasant. I will not say "never", but I do not see myself returning to a shorter speaker soon, as this would reintroduce the issue of the "shorter performer". BTW, I find this to be consistent regardless of the technology of the speaker, dynamic, planar, etc. I have worked with or owned a variety of planars ranging from the smaller Magnepan MMG to the larger ESL I just finished reviewing recently. The same principle of scale of the speaker holds with them. Similarly, in hearing High Efficiency speaker/SET systems, the height of the driver is critical to my ear. The taller offerings are more appealing in general to my ears.
I still enjoy shorter speakers tremendously, but find it a drawback inherent in the nature of the beast, and a characteristic which needs be consciously ignored. I would not rate a speaker poorly for that characteristic, as speakers are built for different price points and objectives, like cars. However, we all have our preferences.
I had the same problem. I changed amplifiers (from Monarchy Audio M24 preamp and Stello M200 mono amps) to Anthem Integrated 225 and the center of the soundstage is now a couple of feet above my speakers. There are more variables because I also changed speaker cables and interconnects, but I believe the amplifier change is the key.
address the "tightness" of the soundstage, and influence the relative spatial relationship of the performers on stage. However, I have not found any amp which can "elevate" the soundstage entirely, as though "lifting" the entire set of performers. In other words, the height deficit cannot be overcome entirely by other electronics. No matter what amp/cdp, etc. I use, a shorter speaker will still display the "3 foot tall performer" effect. Swap out a taller speaker with the new amp and wala, drastically more life sized presentation.
I am not familiar with your speakers. But that was a problem I had with Klipsch Heresy's. While they sounded fast and dynamic, the instruments sounded about the size of the horns they were comming from. Bookshelf speakers also tend to sound small, but not always.
I finally decided to have wood plantation shutters installed in the family room to cover the arched windows on the front wall. The most obvious change I hear is the sound field is now as high as the speakers whereas before it was below the arched windows. The angle of the picture doesn't show it, but both the tweeter and midrange speakers are above the bottom of the windows. I’m using side wall absorber panels to control first reflections and bass traps tighten bass. I’m leaving a very slight opening in the shutters which are probably also acting as some sort of acoustic panel. High frequencies sound smoother and both the top and midrange sound fuller and better articulated since the shutters were installed. Apparently some of the midrange and tweeter output was being lost through the uncovered arched windows. While my listening room is by far the weakest link in my audio system, careful attention to electrical conditioning, vibration control, system setup, and room acoustics, has significantly improved system playback.
Len
nt
I've recently changed listening chairs.
I used to listen reclining on a copy of the Le Corbusier chaisse. That put my head back at a severe angle so the direct sound from the speakers was reaching the ears as if it were coming from a location somewhat forward of me but on the floor if I were standing upright—think of sound approaching your ears from a point level with your mouth. Singers often seemed to be "short" to me but some instruments like trumpets could sound as if they were extremely highly placed.
I've recently swapped to a normal armchair and my head is now upright when listening. My ears are just below the level of the tweeters so the direct sound is now approaching the ears from a point at the same height or just above the ears and almost horizontally. The height of the image of singers has lifted and I haven't noticed the extreme height on some instruments that I used to but that's not to say I won't find that on some discs since the chair swap is very recent.
So perhaps the vertical angle at which the sound strikes the ear is important. If your head is tilted back while listening, try listening with the head more erect and see if that changes things.
David Aiken
The "all in your head" aspect of headphone listening can be annoying for some people, but after a while you can imagine the sound as being almost any size you like. With "3 foot tall speaker sound" the confines of the soundstage can be, if anything, harder to ignore or get used to.
Seems to me your question should be, How do I increase the depth of my soundstage. A forward/flat presentation will make your performers appear 3 feet tall. Add depth to the soundstage and you have a more realistic presentation - more a mid hall seat than a front row seat.
I think, too, that the recording plays a strong role.
I have some recordings that create a VERY front row seat and a HUGE SS image - like I'm a mouse sitting and listening beneath the piano. Why is there a piano on my ceiling? The drummer is off to the side and appears to be a relatively normal size. But that piano - crazy huge.
of a larger floor standing speaker. I have lamented the shrinkage of the performers and diminished soundstage (to my ears) for years.
I understand the influence of budget, design parameters, spatial considerations in setting up rigs, etc. However, for me to perceive the music as closer to "real" I seem to gravitate toward dynamic speakers taller than 4.5' and planars close to 6'.
If I err, I would rather err on the side of too large a presentation than too small. No live event that I have attended has sounded like the performers are three feet tall, that the source of the sound is one meter high. For me, that is a "deal breaker" in terms of authenticity in reproduction. I believe this is one reason why many of the most outstanding (and of course, wretchedly expensive) speaker systems are huge. Full range, and full scale. I do not care to compromise on either.
YEMV (Your Ears May Vary). :)
It's never clear to me in these discussions of soundstage height whether people are referring to
(a) the vertical location of the center of the soundstage
or
(b) the vertical size of the soundstage (distance top to bottom).
To me, (a) is unimportant but (b) is fairly important. Also, (a) seems to be primarily a function of tweeter height, while (b) is primarily a function of the distance between the speakers and to some extent speaker type.
I've never heard big, tall speakers produce as expansive a soundstage as a good pair of mini-monitors in a treated room, and that includes the vertical dimension. However, mini-monitors tend to render that soundstage closer to the floor. A tradeoff I guess.
but I would disagree with you about the comparison to mini monitors and larger three way ( or more ) speakers. It is possible for large speakers to generate quite an impressive soundstage and this includes standard, conventional dynamic driver designs. The key for the soundstaging you are seeking is the proper time and phase alignment. Not any speakers have adequate attention paid to those factors. Those which do, have quite an impressive soundstage, regardless of their driver configuration and size.
Two way systems have less issues simply because they have fewer drivers and fewer interactive effects. Even among those, however soundstage height can vary significantly.
I prefer a soundstage which vertically presents a singer at about normal standing height: five or 6 feet high. That seems to be most natural and pleasant to my tastes. Aligning the respective drivers in the system by time and phase has been an important part of achieving that goal. Time alignment can be done by making spacers or on a smaller speaker simply tilting a flat baffle slightly backwards to achieve the same vertical plane (with other caveats, of course).
I find the vast majority of speaker designs have noticeable timing issues which affect the soundstaging. When considering the ideal transducer is a point source, the typical layout has many compromises. You have to pick your poison, so to speak and work to eliminate those issues.
Stu
Stu,
That intuitively makes sense. However, I've experienced some counter-examples. For example, the Quad 989 + Plinius system I heard at a local dealer produced a very small soundstage. The imaging was pinpoint, but the width was constrained to between the speakers and the height and depth were almost non-existant. I've also heard Thiels which had microscopic pinpoint imaging but a small-average stage. The larger Martin Logans (Statement, Prodigy, Summit) seem to produce good soundstage depth, but the width and height are just good - not exceptional. I haven't heard any other electrostats though, GMA speakers, or other time-aligned designs.
I currently have Dynaudio C2s with Simaudio P5/W5 LE amplification and an APL SACD player. This combo, in a large room, produces a very wide soundstage with about as much height as I've heard (by height I mean b. in my previous post). But my previous speakers, Focus Audio 688 monitors, threw the deepest soundstage and most three-dimensional, palpable images I've ever heard. Totem Model 1 were quite good too.
Dave
but I have experience with the Totems you mention. The woofer is out of polarity with the tweeter. Many mini's employ this technique, and in increasing numbers after the Proac Super tablettes were so highly praised By HP in TAS. Having a tweeter in correct polarity ( in respect to the music) gives pinpoint imaging, but the inverted woofer seems to impart a huge , but very diffuse soundstage. For most listeners, this is translated a having great lateral imaging, but I personally find the discontinuities involved as you pass through the frequency response irritating and not very realistic. Of course YMMV.
Ditto for the Martin Logan hybrids you mention. At least in the earlier models, the dynamic woofers were inverted in polarity to the panels. This smears the transition points and seems to blend in the woofer better with the faster electrostatic panels (I've owned Aerius, Sequels, and the next larger model). It doesn't help much that the woofers are mounted on a plane behind the panels themselves.
I've had very limited experience with the Thiels, but did work on a pair of 7.1's. One issue which really screws up the woofer is that molded lip on the outboard edges of the basket of the driver. It creates and traps a large amount of diffraction and reflective energy, muddying the bass propagation. Smoothing over that decorative lip, certainly aids the bass dispersion significantly.
A similar issue lies with the M L woofers, in my opinion. In the older designs, with the perforated metal grill, a casual examination reveals that it actually traps a lot of the bass energy behind the grill , particularly at the edges and thus limits the dispersion of the woofer. However, the dispersion fo the electrostatic panel is limited as the sound propagated moves directly out tangent to the surface of the clear panel. Thus the acoustic center of the electrostatic speaker is pretty much the middle of the vertical height of the panel and as you are well aware electrostatics are usually very sensitive to placement. Martin Logans respond well, in my experience with careful tilting of the the speaker system so the acoustic center is aimed at the listener's ears.
In using a pair of time and phase aligned speakers ( Vandersteens(, the image is pretty much limited to being located between the speakers, but I can spread my speakers extremely far apart with no hole in the middle. I have them placed almost 14 feet apart, but I am listening only about 10 feet away. Sound stage is huge and tall.
With a recording with great depth, the three dimensional quality is available in spades. For a manufactured soundstage, try the Bob and Ray Throw a Stereo Spectacular, and the original uncut Phantom of the Opera.
One listener complained that Elvis sounded like his mouth was four feet in diameter, although the system sounds quite fine for massed choir. I attribute that to the microphone position in respect to the singer. If you have the mike a foot away from the mouth what perspective does it give to the vocal presentation?
In my experience, most complaints of small soundstaging was due to polarity issues. Of course, certain speaker designs with offset tweeters throw a bilateral soundstage centered on a line which runs through the centers of the tweeters and the woofers. If the tweeters are inboard, they tend to through the soundstage lower between the centers of the the pair. If the tweeters are placed outboard, they throw a very high soundstage but the imaging will be high in the middle and slowly arc lower as you move outboard.
All this , of course assumes that you have some control over the polarity of your entire system. And of course, YMMV.
Stu
I had in mind A. I have not found monitors in general or speakers lower to the floor which can authentically have the comportment accomplishing B as well as larger floor standing speakers (which, typically have A., the elevated M/T).
If the speaker tilt back adds height to the image, but the treble is no longer loud enough, toe in the speakers to aim the tweeters in the direction of your ears (with tilt back, the tweeters will still be aimed higher than your ears).
You could also find a lower seat or sit on the floor or add sound absorbing material to the early reflection point on your ceiling.
.
.
.
RG...Banned from Critics Forum for daring to ask why high-end reviewers get no hearing or listening skills tests before being hired to review audio gear & pointing out negative points in reviews get reversed by "Happy Face" conclusions
1. Get at least the tweeters above ear level. Height imaging cues in the recording seem to come out better this way.
2. Do what you can (speakers with more directivity, diffusion or absorption on the side walls and ceiling, or just a healthier distance from the side walls) to reduce early reflections that will be confused with recorded floor bounce. Only sit far enough from the speakers for the drivers to integrate (could be 6-7') so that the room reflections are relatively lower in level and getting less confused with what's on the recoring.
3. Buy recordings using a stereo pair a healthy distance from the performers.
...instant realism!
Actually, I owned Maggie 2.6/Rs for several years, and they presented an image no taller than the typical stand-mount or floorstanding speaker, to my ears.
-Bob
.
nt
nt
"We ask our artists to be true. Actually, we demand that our artists be true. When poets, storytellers, & singers lie to us for money, our culture is diseased & in decline."
-Robert Fripp
The 8” woofer integrates perfectly with the mid panel. I can detect no crossover or phase issues. Keep in mind that the woofer is crossed over at 180 Hz.
These speakers replaced a pair of Thiel CS2 2’s….
Cheers.
This phenomenon is due, I think, to distortion products and frequency-imbalanced reflected sound energy that is drawing your attention to the speaker locations -- IOW, your brain is not buying the fraud that your system is trying to perpetrate. Are you using a lot of sidewall absorption? Are your speakers too small for the size of your room or the listening levels you require? Are you using a tube amp close to clipping or transformer saturation?
I'm using the Primacoustic London set. There are two panels on each side wall for side reflections.
The listening room is very small. I'm using Proac Tablette Reference 8 Signature speakers with slight toe-in. Speakers are about 6 feet apart and I'm sitting about 6 feet away. Amp is an Ayre AX-7e integrated. Most of my listening is at low levels (night listening as that is pretty much the only time when I can listen to the music).
Since you have treated the sidewall reflections, you might be hearing a proportionately greater influence from the floor and ceiling reflections. Have you tried any ceiling absorption?
What are your room dimensions?
Try tilting your speakers backwards as far as you can without leaving them unstable or tipping them over. This may raise the soundstage height a little, but you probably won't get a 6 foot tall soundstage presentation without buying 6 foot tall speakers. You can try 40" (or taller) speaker stands but the downside to that is the speakers may sound tonally thin as you lose bass reinforcement provided by the floor boundary.
Edits: 08/12/09
I have a pair of LS3/5As sitting on old wooden garden chairs in my summer cottage, much lower than stands, and the sound stage fills the back wall. My ceilings are low: about 7 feet.
"Live free or die"
buy some Vandersteens
"Man is the only animal that blushes - or needs to" Mark Twain
nt
Try taller stands.
Wirewizard, unhelpful and completely useless comments are not welcomed.
Taller speakers have taller images and soundstages...since you use standmount sized speakers the only logical suggestion to increase the image/soundstage height of your speakers is with taller stands...listen to a pair of Maggies...they are tall speakers and they have lifesize images and huge soundstages.
would be to angle the speakers backward a bit on the stands. The Super Tablettes have theroi woofers inverted in polarity to the tweeter, so I would also try to invert the speaker wires and see if the polarity nversion is not making itself heard.
Stu
Wirewizard's suggestion makes sense to me.
The easiest way to increase the apparent height of sound images is to raise the sound source, and taller stands are cheaper than taller speakers.
You could also listen from a lower chair.
Duke
Me being a dealer makes you leery?? It gets worse... I'm a manufacturer too.
"The easiest way to increase the apparent height of sound images is to raise the sound source, and taller stands are cheaper than taller speakers."
Sometimes it really IS that simple. My Dahlquist DQ-10s came (used) with the little hardwood feet, which put the mid/hi driver array maybe 24" off the floor. After many months of listening to the munchkin philharmonic, I installed some 12" hardwood furniture legs (about the same height as the Dahlquist after-market stands), bringing the array up to ear level. Everything immmediately sounded more plausibly life sized.
Interestingly, these speakers (at least in my room) resolve variations of soundstage height WITHIN a recording very poorly, though they do width and depth just fine. I've listened to the "up and over" track on the Chesky test CD on many different systems, in the same and different environments, and they all handle it differently. Small monitors with low-order crossovers seem to do it the best.
Conventional speakers give a presentation where the singer is 6 feet tall.
Now go and listen to your system and report back.
Sorry, couldn't resist, but it does sound like your mind playing tricks on you. Did you notice this type of presentation before you read the comment?
No, never noticed until I read the comments about it.
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: