Jump to content

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, HIFI said:

Ok.... I’m glad I have this clarification.

 

In all my years of audio the “sweet spot” has been a reference to the listening position.  What I listen to is not a spot.  It’s a grande illusion of width, height, depth, space.

 

 

 

I think the word "spot" is confusing.  At work we discuss enlarging the sweet spot all the time, trying to move things around in a room or a studio to get a larger sweet spot.  We were in studio yesterday where they had a TV  monitor centered between the speakers, severely affecting the image.  

 

The point of wider bandwidth with wider dispersion is a larger sweet spot.  Someday we'll get the entire living room to be the same.  

 

Brad 

Brad Lunde

www.LoneMountainAudio.com (High End Consumer Importer to the Trade) and www.TransAudioGroup.com (High End Pro Audio Importer to the Trade)

Brands we import to the US are ATC, Tube Tech, Drawmer, MUTEC, Bettermaker 

Brands from the US we distribute are A Designs, Auratone, Daking, LatchLake and Mojave   

 

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Lone Mountain Audio said:

 

I think the word "spot" is confusing.  At work we discuss enlarging the sweet spot all the time, trying to move things around in a room or a studio to get a larger sweet spot.  We were in studio yesterday where they had a TV  monitor centered between the speakers, severely affecting the image.  

 

The point of wider bandwidth with wider dispersion is a larger sweet spot.  Someday we'll get the entire living room to be the same.  

 

Brad 

Using your/industry definition of “sweet spot” .....

 

.... Entire living room?

 

Aren’t we just about there already?

 

I guess I can see, in the future, “trereo” further defining space among musicians in the recording.  Adding rear speakers creating an audible illusion of recording environment.

 

But until then I feel like we can fill our listening environment.  I have sat in enough Two Channel audio rooms where physical speakers vanish and a hologram of music and the sound of the original recorded room exists.  Some will argue but I think this can only be achieved by treating the listening environment first.

My System TWO SPEAKERS AND A CHAIR

Link to comment
26 minutes ago, STC said:

 

 

In a reflection free environment where do you think the sweet spot will be for wide dispersion speakers?

 

We generally tell people to create a triangle, using the same distances between the speakers as you are from each of them.  When things are right, with few room influences, you can move left to right and front to back within a few feet and it all sounds good.  When things are amazing its even larger.  When things are messed up you cannot move at all.  

 

As you make the triangle larger you may not make a larger sweet spot, you must listen to the results of every move of a speaker location.  Its always amazing to me when people place their speakers once and never touch them again.  We know that sometimes an inch can make all the difference when interacting with boundaries and furniture.  A good habit is to move everything around and experiment.  Also, another important idea is you cannot stand in front of your speakers and judge them.  Typically vertical dispersion is straight out from the speaker (parallel to the floor) and down 10 to 15 degrees.  You need to be below the tweeter to hear that.  You need to know the acoustic center of your speakers. 

 

So without boundaries, a general answer is (when set in a triangle), "As wide as the mutual full bandwidth dispersion of the two speakers HF devices" - as a maximum.  You can look up the dispersion of your speakers hopefully and draw it out on paper.  Sometimes, toeing in a speaker reduces the image size, makes a small er sweet spot.

 

Brad 

 

Brad 

Brad Lunde

www.LoneMountainAudio.com (High End Consumer Importer to the Trade) and www.TransAudioGroup.com (High End Pro Audio Importer to the Trade)

Brands we import to the US are ATC, Tube Tech, Drawmer, MUTEC, Bettermaker 

Brands from the US we distribute are A Designs, Auratone, Daking, LatchLake and Mojave   

 

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, HIFI said:

Using your/industry definition of “sweet spot” .....

 

.... Entire living room?

 

Aren’t we just about there already?

 

I guess I can see, in the future, “trereo” further defining space among musicians in the recording.  Adding rear speakers creating an audible illusion of recording environment.

 

But until then I feel like we can fill our listening environment.  I have sat in enough Two Channel audio rooms where physical speakers vanish and a hologram of music and the sound of the original recorded room exists.  Some will argue but I think this can only be achieved by treating the listening environment first.

 

Yes, if you deal with the room reflections and have wide dispersion devices you can get that hologram like image. 

Brad 

Brad Lunde

www.LoneMountainAudio.com (High End Consumer Importer to the Trade) and www.TransAudioGroup.com (High End Pro Audio Importer to the Trade)

Brands we import to the US are ATC, Tube Tech, Drawmer, MUTEC, Bettermaker 

Brands from the US we distribute are A Designs, Auratone, Daking, LatchLake and Mojave   

 

Link to comment

Oh and BTW< very few recordings are done with the entire band in one room and include an attempt at recording the entire space.  This is how it's done in live location recordings, but not studio.  In studio, its individual element tracking 98-99%.  Even live performances in the studio are often split up across rooms.  Hiromi for example, everyone plays at once to get the interaction going, but they are all wearing headphones hearing the "mix" because her piano is in a different room from the Simon's drums.  

 

The image in studio is created by the mixer though panning (a balance control type of adjustment) - like Alan Parsons did on Dark Side.  Except Alan figured out how to do front to back panning to get even larger illusions!

 

Brad  

Brad Lunde

www.LoneMountainAudio.com (High End Consumer Importer to the Trade) and www.TransAudioGroup.com (High End Pro Audio Importer to the Trade)

Brands we import to the US are ATC, Tube Tech, Drawmer, MUTEC, Bettermaker 

Brands from the US we distribute are A Designs, Auratone, Daking, LatchLake and Mojave   

 

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, Lone Mountain Audio said:

Oh and BTW< very few recordings are done with the entire band in the room and include an attempt at recording the entire space.  This is how it's done in live location recordings, but not studio.  In studio, its individual element tracking 98-99%.  Even live performances in the studio are often split up across rooms.  Hiromi for example, everyone plays at once to get the interaction going, but they are all wearing headphones hearing the "mix" because her piano is in a different room from the Simon's drums.  

 

The image in studio is created by the mixer though panning (a balance control type of adjustment) - like Alan Parsons did on Dark Side.  Except Alan figured out how to do front to back panning to get even larger illusions!

 

Brad  

And....because of all the mixing ... I favor many of the two mic and single mic single performance recordings where the recording engineers use placement of musicians as “some” gain control. 

 

BTW... I envy your job Brad.

 

soundliasion.com

Recommending a single mic single performance recording

 

FC6FCC11-71E8-4DD8-9B92-9DAB8385FAE8.jpeg

My System TWO SPEAKERS AND A CHAIR

Link to comment
On 6/12/2019 at 3:25 AM, STC said:

However, when you talk about mid and HF, we are talking about frequencies with short wave length. These frequencies  gone several cycles of 360 degrees and would reach much later than 1ms and adds envelopment or spaciousness.

 

They also reduce focus. A naked room is like a room full of mirrors:

 

 

N7zBJqk.gif

 

1267002759_phantomimages.thumb.png.aadd6e9a12f999e6210a140b36615169.png

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes

 

HQPlayer Desktop / Mac mini → Intona 7054 → RME ADI-2 DAC FS (DSD256)

Link to comment
7 hours ago, HIFI said:

But until then I feel like we can fill our listening environment.  I have sat in enough Two Channel audio rooms where physical speakers vanish and a hologram of music and the sound of the original recorded room exists.  Some will argue but I think this can only be achieved by treating the listening environment first.

 

The interesting thing here is that people generally agree what the goal is - but the disputes arise, because people have highly distinct, and strongly held, views on "what matters" for making it happen.

 

What's largely ignored is developing an understanding on "what's going on"; and this is something that I feel will help a lot more people enjoy a higher standard of listening pleasure.

 

Everything that I've experienced, and which has further developed through reading about aspects of human hearing has caused me to consider that the overriding criterion is to cajole the listening mind into considering one coherent source of sound to be dominant in the aural universe at that moment. At one extreme consider a family kitchen in the morning, with all the sounds of everyone preparing for the day - and a small radio is playing an orchestral piece, poorly, at low volume, in the corner ... and at the other, the same family is at the concert hall, in the front rows, listening to the very same piece being played live.  The two situations emphasis that something "that fills your world" is where your attention is drawn - and provided that it has high integrity as a sound source, will dominate.

 

It's how that integrity is achieved that really matters, and of course sound making by the "real thing" is inherently always going to do that best - reproduction will alway struggle to perfectly mimic the key qualities, even if it is only the sounds of people's activities in a kitchen.

 

One solution is to manipulate how one hears the sounds that one wishes to appear dominant - and this is what most of the posts here are about; trying to ensure that you hear the speakers and only the speakers, even if what they produce is not of a particularly high integrity. By reducing one's awareness of any sounds that threaten to challenge the dominance of the direct sound of the speakers, the chances of sustaining a sense of integrity in the latter are improved.

 

Another solution is to improve the intrinsic integrity of the sound source one wants to focus on; that is, make the actual output of the speakers match far more closely what was recorded, more of the qualities of live sound are reproduced in a convincing way. If this can be achieved at volumes comparable to the 'real thing', so much the better. And the huge advantage of this approach is that the domination of the projection of a sound event by the reproduction chain doesn't depend upon spatial tricks in the listening, because the integrity of the sound production is always of adequate standard.

Link to comment
8 hours ago, Lone Mountain Audio said:

When things are right, with few room influences, you can move left to right and front to back within a few feet and it all sounds good.

 

Yes, it can sound good but the question is can the positional information reproduced accurately? That can only happen at the sweet spot.

 

Untitled.jpg.11aee79d293b1568486f8946134ebc79.jpg

 

Stereo relies on the intensity difference between the channels to create the phantom image. Although time difference information is encoded in the recording, it cannot be retrieved intact in stereo. For a phantom image to emerge at 0 degree of the listener, the signal from the left and right speaker must be identical, i.e., a = b. If you move to X,  in a perfect wide dispersion speaker, the signal d now has to travel a longer distance. When distance increases the level drops. When the distance increases, there will be a delay in the time of the signal arriving from the right speaker in the diagram. At the same time, c will be louder than a.

 

How can this be the same as the listener original position and at X which is the one and only  sweet spot although listening about 1 foot of centre may not sound drastically inferior with a wide dispersion speaker.

 

Sweet spot is when a = b.  My question to you how wide dispersion speaker can make c equals to d?

 

 

Link to comment
46 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

The interesting thing here is that people generally agree what the goal is - but the disputes arise, because people have highly distinct, and strongly held, views on "what matters" for making it happen.

 

What's largely ignored is developing an understanding on "what's going on"; and this is something that I feel will help a lot more people enjoy a higher standard of listening pleasure.

 

Everything that I've experienced, and which has further developed through reading about aspects of human hearing has caused me to consider that the overriding criterion is to cajole the listening mind into considering one coherent source of sound to be dominant in the aural universe at that moment. At one extreme consider a family kitchen in the morning, with all the sounds of everyone preparing for the day - and a small radio is playing an orchestral piece, poorly, at low volume, in the corner ... and at the other, the same family is at the concert hall, in the front rows, listening to the very same piece being played live.  The two situations emphasis that something "that fills your world" is where your attention is drawn - and provided that it has high integrity as a sound source, will dominate.

 

It's how that integrity is achieved that really matters, and of course sound making by the "real thing" is inherently always going to do that best - reproduction will alway struggle to perfectly mimic the key qualities, even if it is only the sounds of people's activities in a kitchen.

 

One solution is to manipulate how one hears the sounds that one wishes to appear dominant - and this is what most of the posts here are about; trying to ensure that you hear the speakers and only the speakers, even if what they produce is not of a particularly high integrity. By reducing one's awareness of any sounds that threaten to challenge the dominance of the direct sound of the speakers, the chances of sustaining a sense of integrity in the latter are improved.

 

Another solution is to improve the intrinsic integrity of the sound source one wants to focus on; that is, make the actual output of the speakers match far more closely what was recorded, more of the qualities of live sound are reproduced in a convincing way. If this can be achieved at volumes comparable to the 'real thing', so much the better. And the huge advantage of this approach is that the domination of the projection of a sound event by the reproduction chain doesn't depend upon spatial tricks in the listening, because the integrity of the sound production is always of adequate standard.

One time I had a dream I climbed a fence at the airport and stole a jet.  When I awoke the next morning I was arrested by the local police.  They couldn’t prove a thing so I was released.  I’m convinced I can fly.  

 

 

My System TWO SPEAKERS AND A CHAIR

Link to comment
39 minutes ago, HIFI said:

One time I had a dream I climbed a fence at the airport and stole a jet.  When I awoke the next morning I was arrested by the local police.  They couldn’t prove a thing so I was released.  I’m convinced I can fly.  

 

 

 

The silly thing is that you know what it's like "flying" - but you're convinced that it can only happen under special circumstances, that you've personally explored. That other people can "put on wings" in other ways just doesn't compute for you - your world is, how the world should be for everyone ...

Link to comment
33 minutes ago, STC said:

 

Yes, it can sound good but the question is can the positional information reproduced accurately? That can only happen at the sweet spot.

 

Untitled.jpg.11aee79d293b1568486f8946134ebc79.jpg

 

Stereo relies on the intensity difference between the channels to create the phantom image. Although time difference information is encoded in the recording, it cannot be retrieved intact in stereo. For a phantom image to emerge at 0 degree of the listener, the signal from the left and right speaker must be identical, i.e., a = b. If you move to X,  in a perfect wide dispersion speaker, the signal d now has to travel a longer distance. When distance increases the level drops. When the distance increases, there will be a delay in the time of the signal arriving from the right speaker in the diagram. At the same time, c will be louder than a.

 

How can this be the same as the listener original position and at X which is the one and only  sweet spot although listening about 1 foot of centre may not sound drastically inferior with a wide dispersion speaker.

 

Sweet spot is when a = b.  My question to you how wide dispersion speaker can make c equals to d?

 

 

Maybe the real question is “what is the greatest distance one could move off center before image, detail, and spatial information collapses.  I think if you had your beaming spot light speakers the answer could be zero lateral movement from listening position.  I know, from my experience, speakers that have a good level of linear off axis response the movement is greater than zero.  My experience also showed me that a room with a wider front wall can offer lateral movement greater than zero.  Maybe, maybe not, the combination of excellent off access linear response and wider frond wall would add up to something to really talk about.  Of course I am assuming a treated room with speakers well placed for any width front wall.

 

Is it possible that the lateral distance measured between listening spot and “X” is time related and therefore has more to do with width off front wall?  I’m thinking at some point of left or right movement the timing comes into play and we notice things collapsing. 

My System TWO SPEAKERS AND A CHAIR

Link to comment

Which is a very good question to ask. And the answer is, it depends on whether the integrity of what you hear is still sustained sufficiently for one's ear/brain to accept the 'reality' of the illusion which is being projected. Normal stereo quality is not adequate to provide more than the usual "sweet spot" type of distances; but taken to the 'right' level of SQ then no collapse of the spatial projection ever occurs, irrespective of one's position with respect to the speakers.

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, HIFI said:

Maybe the real question is “what is the greatest distance one could move off center before image, detail, and spatial information collapses.  I think if you had your beaming spot light speakers the answer could be zero lateral movement from listening position.

 

Maybe, the real question is "what is the greatest distance one could move off centre" without perceptible changes in the position. We are not extremely sensitive to difference of delay of less than 10microseconds (the audibility of the delay is frequency dependent and therefore it could be higher too) and difference in the intensity level. For some even close to 3dB difference would not shift the position. Wide dispersion helps to keep the c and d within the window of inability to distinguish the slight delay and level difference and therefore the sweet spot extends and of course when the reflection is taken into account, the averaging of frequency maintains a bigger sweet spot and it can indeed sound nice and preferable.

 

 

 

30 minutes ago, HIFI said:

 

 

Is it possible that the lateral distance measured between listening spot and “X” is time related and therefore has more to do with width off front wall?  I’m thinking at some point of left or right movement the timing comes into play and we notice things collapsing. 

 

I am clear with this question. With stereo timing is fixed because of head shadow. For every sound that comes of the speaker at 30 degrees, produces unwanted signal that is delayed by 250microseconds. But this is not entirely bad as it also can produce nice bass. 

Link to comment
Just now, STC said:

 

Maybe, the real question is "what is the greatest distance one could move off centre" without perceptible changes in the position.

 

IME what happens is that the mind completely unconsciously adjusts for the changes in level, and phase - and maintains a sense of where the sounds are coming from, that correlates with the perceived positioning when listening in the "correct, central" listening spot.

 

Treating the sounds that the brain is processing as meaningless tones, that have no significance apart from being vibrations in the air impinging on the physical parts of the ear is where one can be confused as to what matters - the human brain "knows" how elements of sound that it can relate to, emotionally, fit together to give higher meaning, and so a construct inside the head occurs.

Link to comment
31 minutes ago, fas42 said:

IME what happens is that the mind completely unconsciously adjusts for the changes in level, and phase - and maintains a sense of where the sounds are coming from, that correlates with the perceived positioning when listening in the "correct, central" listening spot.

 

I know that is possible and I have experienced it. You don’t need high fidelity or even a stereo for that. We are not discussion how the brain could be conditioned to enjoy  music. We are discussing how to make the sound production better by understanding how they work. 

 

 

Link to comment
Just now, STC said:

 

I know that is possible and I have experienced it. You don’t need high fidelity or even a stereo for that. We are not discussion how the brain could be conditioned to enjoy  music. We are discussing how to make the sound production better by understanding how they work. 

 

 

 

Conditioning is not part of what's going on. If I have a rig with SQ that is subpar, then no amount of my wanting it to sound better, or believing that I have have done everything that's necessary, makes the slightest bit of difference to what I perceive - all I have is a setup that sounds like a normal hifi, with no special qualities about it. And I've been there far too often, ;).

 

Unfortunately, 'extreme' high fidelity is the only solution, IME - brains can be tricked by that, and it's 100% reliable. Room and speaker manipulations help, but are nowhere near as universal a method.

Link to comment
8 hours ago, STC said:

 

We can always get perfect focus in an anechoic like room. Unfortunately, for music,  and even for normal conversation, the reflection is required for naturalness. 

 

You can't confuse normal conversation (production) with playback (re-production). If the cuses were captured by the recording reflection will just create confusion.

I have little experience with headphones but I imagine that the best ones will produce very little in the way of reflections. But I agree that an anechoic room would be overkill to the point of making things sound bad.

I've listened to both live unamplified and to reproduced music outdoors and it sounds weird.

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes

 

HQPlayer Desktop / Mac mini → Intona 7054 → RME ADI-2 DAC FS (DSD256)

Link to comment
1 hour ago, semente said:

You can't confuse normal conversation (production) with playback (re-production).

 

I treat playback as an original event itself and make them perform realistic enough. No recordings contain all the cues that you would receive in a live performance. I say this despite tons of reviews and interviews by recording engineer themselves who claim they make the best effort to capture the sound as they heard in the venue. 

 

 

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, STC said:

 

I treat playback as an original event itself and make them perform realistic enough. No recordings contain all the cues that you would receive in a live performance. I say this despite tons of reviews and interviews by recording engineer themselves who claim they make the best effort to capture the sound as they heard in the venue.

 

I was addressing Toole's wide-disperion design philosophy. Most domestic room are lightly treated if at all and in such cases wide dispersion is bad in my opinion and experience, more so in these tiny UK sitting rooms than in US king-sized lounges...

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes

 

HQPlayer Desktop / Mac mini → Intona 7054 → RME ADI-2 DAC FS (DSD256)

Link to comment
11 hours ago, semente said:

 

I was addressing Toole's wide-disperion design philosophy. Most domestic room are lightly treated if at all and in such cases wide dispersion is bad in my opinion and experience, more so in these tiny UK sitting rooms than in US king-sized lounges...

So I’m curious be cause I don’t know of any speaker manufacturer claiming there focused HF driver is for your benefit.  I haven’t researched though...either. I know of some claims by speaker manufacturers that the minimal vertical dispersion is for your benefit.  Without some quality of horizontal dispersion I am not sure a speaker pair has any decent chance to fill any room with original source detail.

 

I think it would be real easy to tame far left/right boundary reflection even if you had to address it close to the source.

 

Dont know if this is any help...just my brain in orbit

7C7EB6C1-D113-4542-89B0-DA471186D8B4.jpeg

My System TWO SPEAKERS AND A CHAIR

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, HIFI said:

So I’m curious be cause I don’t know of any speaker manufacturer claiming there focused HF driver is for your benefit.  I haven’t researched though...either. I know of some claims by speaker manufacturers that the minimal vertical dispersion is for your benefit.  Without some quality of horizontal dispersion I am not sure a speaker pair has any decent chance to fill any room with original source detail.

 

I think it would be real easy to tame far left/right boundary reflection even if you had to address it close to the source.

 

Dont know if this is any help...just my brain in orbit

7C7EB6C1-D113-4542-89B0-DA471186D8B4.jpeg

 

Are you familiar with Geddes' work?

 

You could have a go at the first "paper" called Directivity in Loudspeaker Systems

 

http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/papers.aspx

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes

 

HQPlayer Desktop / Mac mini → Intona 7054 → RME ADI-2 DAC FS (DSD256)

Link to comment

I have to say what an excellent conversation you guys have going.  There is a lot of important stuff being said.  Despite the misinformation on other threads online, this one has quite an intelligent discussion happening!  There is nothing more important than how you put speakers in a room and the basic idea of dispersion.  

 

I know Floyd Toole, he worked at JBL while I was there (but I was in JBL pro at the time).  Brilliant guy.   I now know Billy Woodman, who is also quite brilliant and reminds me of Floyd.  Billy espouses the same set of principles and ideas.  The only difference between the two is Floyd worked for Sidney who ran a public company that had to turn a profi and increase stock value; Billy works for himself and can do what does NOT make sense financially to closely follow his engineering goals.  

 

Wide dispersion can get you in trouble in tiny spaces.  In pro, we'd sort this out via room treatment, but of course at home this is more difficult unless you live alone!   The conundrum is purchasing a narrow dispersion speaker to over come terrible room reflections is buying a speaker with the inverse problem of your room.  You have bought a problem- one that helps you today but may not tomorrow.  This usually does not work out over time as the eventually you move or change furniture or room layout, etc.  So sticking with the best engineering practices is the only safe bet, mitigating the less positive things best you can.  

 

For example, you're in a glass room- wide dispersion speakers?    Seems like maybe you are asking for trouble, but you might decide yes, I'll install drapes to cover the sides walls, drawing them when you listen.   If cannot do drapes, I use overstuffed couches and chairs,  push furniture to the sides when you listen so they are between my speakers and the glass.  Or maybe I buy some 4 inch rockwool absorptive panels and when I listen I set them up and take them down after.  Keeping the level low would also help, to reduce the energy being reflected.  Obviously not everyone would do that and many would take speakers home to demo in the glass room and pronounce "the narrow dispersion speakers are far far better in my room".   By understanding the issues of dispersions and reflections you can make an informed choice and not be mis led by the problems of a space.  

 

"Near field monitoring" came about when engineers wanted their own speakers that they knew, in a room they didn't.  So reducing the triangle down to a very small one, staying on axis, effectively pushing the walls further away for your speakers and therefore reducing reflection energy really helped get a better result across different [studio] rooms.  A number of these mixers specifically did not monitor loud on top of that, and it's almost like isolating yourself to a degree from the room; the low level and very close speakers DO reduce the reflection energy.    So hearfeild is now how it's done.  Very few records if any records are mixed on the big monitors in the wall anymore.  Since most mix engineers are not "house engineers" anymore, working in different rooms all the time is normal.   Setting up that small triangle with wide dispersion speakers is the way of studio work now.

 

Brad 

Brad Lunde

www.LoneMountainAudio.com (High End Consumer Importer to the Trade) and www.TransAudioGroup.com (High End Pro Audio Importer to the Trade)

Brands we import to the US are ATC, Tube Tech, Drawmer, MUTEC, Bettermaker 

Brands from the US we distribute are A Designs, Auratone, Daking, LatchLake and Mojave   

 

Link to comment
48 minutes ago, HIFI said:

So I’m curious be cause I don’t know of any speaker manufacturer claiming there focused HF driver is for your benefit.  I haven’t researched though...either. I know of some claims by speaker manufacturers that the minimal vertical dispersion is for your benefit.  Without some quality of horizontal dispersion I am not sure a speaker pair has any decent chance to fill any room with original source detail.

 

I think it would be real easy to tame far left/right boundary reflection even if you had to address it close to the source.

 

Dont know if this is any help...just my brain in orbit

7C7EB6C1-D113-4542-89B0-DA471186D8B4.jpeg

Right on HI FI!  Some of the folks selling speakers don't even know what wide vs narrow dispersion is.  They are buying parts, they may not even know what the measurements in their cabinet are.  Its easy for us to check them though- just move on and off axis.  And if you see a speaker in a store or at a demo super close to a boundary with no treatment on it, you know they don't know.

 

Brad      

Brad Lunde

www.LoneMountainAudio.com (High End Consumer Importer to the Trade) and www.TransAudioGroup.com (High End Pro Audio Importer to the Trade)

Brands we import to the US are ATC, Tube Tech, Drawmer, MUTEC, Bettermaker 

Brands from the US we distribute are A Designs, Auratone, Daking, LatchLake and Mojave   

 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...