Is it me, or do others like to listen...

[Caliente]

with their speaks toed in at a low angle?



I also enjoy sitting literally in the middle between the speakers - I suspect it is my 1970s upbringing when listening in 'stereo' was the ultimate musical pleasure

[Tel]

What does a low angle mean? Pointing at each other?

[bigdur]

Tel wrote:

What does a low angle mean? Pointing at each other?

It'd make no difference to you Tel, LVs don't do stereo imaging

[SergeAuckland]

I have my 'speakers pointing directly at the listening position. That makes them toed in by 30 degrees so that they form an equilateral triangle with the listening position.

I've tried the Brittan method of having the axes cross in front of the listener. It may broaden the stereo seat at the expense of precise imaging, but I always listen alone, and I prefer imaging.

Having the 'speakers firing parallel to the wallsso that I'm listening at 30 dgrees off-axis just seems to reduce the top and make the image very dependent on head position. Moving a few centimetres shifts the image, so It's not for me.

S.

[ob1]

bigdur wrote:

Tel wrote:

What does a low angle mean? Pointing at each other?

It'd make no difference to you Tel, LVs don't do stereo imaging

I think they do unless you drive them with Naim

[bigdur]

ob1 wrote:

bigdur wrote:

Tel wrote:

What does a low angle mean? Pointing at each other?

It'd make no difference to you Tel, LVs don't do stereo imaging

I think they do unless you drive them with Naim

[daz-b]

My Druids cross over about a foot or so in front of the listening position.

Think the amount of 'toe-in' required is very dependent on speaker type and the room.

[nipponhifi]

bigdur wrote:

ob1 wrote:

bigdur wrote:

Tel wrote:

What does a low angle mean? Pointing at each other?

It'd make no difference to you Tel, LVs don't do stereo imaging

I think they do unless you drive them with Naim

Actually, LV and Naim is quite an interesting combination... No, really!

Martin.

[Papa Lazarou]

bigdur wrote:

Tel wrote:

What does a low angle mean? Pointing at each other?

It'd make no difference to you Tel, LVs don't do stereo imaging

Neither do live musicians

[Emma Royd]

Tel wrote:

What does a low angle mean? Pointing at each other?

Upside down

[Hornucopia]

Tweeters have a narrow dispersion so some "pointing at you" aspect is needed. Either AT the head, or just in front or behind the head point.
Gallo tweeters have a much wider dispersion so straight-ahead speaker position is O.K.

Imaging is affected by the cross-over factors, the psych-acoustic effect. The ear is very sensitive to aberrations in phase, etc.






Or you COULD use single, full-range units to avoid this....

[tuga]

It depends on the speakers and the speaker-room interaction.

[SergeAuckland]

Hornucopia wrote:

Tweeters have a narrow dispersion so some "pointing at you" aspect is needed. Either AT the head, or just in front or behind the head point.
Gallo tweeters have a much wider dispersion so straight-ahead speaker position is O.K.

Imaging is affected by the cross-over factors, the psych-acoustic effect. The ear is very sensitive to aberrations in phase, etc.






Or you COULD use single, full-range units to avoid this....

The problem with full-range units is that the treble is beamed into a very narrow cone, much narrower than a dome tweeter's dispersion. This makes the problem worse, not better as you suggest.

I agree that imaging is a psycho-acoustic effect and affected by many factors in the listening room, but also by the difference in response of the two loudspeakers. All other things being equal (which they never are ) onepair with, say, 0.5dB pair matching to 15kHz will image better than a pair with, say, 3dB pair matching.

You also say that the ear and/or imaging (not sure which you meant)is very sensitive to aberrations in phase. My understanding is that the ear is almost completely insensitive to phase shift, so I would be interested to know how phase shifts affects this.

S.

[jonjin]

My understanding of phase shift is that we're sensitive to relative phase between drivers and not absolute phase. So in multi-way speakers, the cross-overs can induce phase differences between each driver. Each order induces 90 degrees phase shift, so 1st order 90 degrees, 2nd order 180 degrees etc etc. This is in addition to the phase response of the driver which differs with frequency. All in all, we can perceive relative differences and a poorly designed crossover is heard as muddled, poor transients and poor sound staging, all properties in the time domain. Quite interestingly the Duelund crossover is suppose to be phase matched with a 3rd order Linkwitz variant.

So single-driver speakers do eliminate one problem with speaker design... imho.

JJ

[mrwippy]

tuga wrote:

It depends on the speakers and the speaker-room interaction.

So true - to quote from the designer of my speakers;

"...sevenPi speakers are designed to provide constant directivity all the way through the audio band, at least down to the Schroeder frequency where room modes begin to dominate....This makes unsurpassed uniformity of the reverberent field, as perfect spectral balance as you could have..."

They sound quite nice too


Edit to add, as a corner horn, they are obviously angled in at a fixed45 degree's.

[YNWAN]

Hornucopia wrote:

Tweeters have a narrow dispersion so some "pointing at you" aspect is needed. Either AT the head, or just in front or behind the head point.
Gallo tweeters have a much wider dispersion so straight-ahead speaker position is O.K.


Or you COULD use single, full-range units to avoid this....

Except (in terms of narrow dispersion) that full range drive units do not avoid this. Full range drivers fall into two camps; those that are truly just a single driver and those that actually have a second driver mounted coaxially within the centre of the main driver. In the case of both types of driver, the stiffness and curvature of the coneare used to provide a decreasing radiating are as the frequency rises. The directional nature of high frequencies is not caused by the use of a separate drive unit but by the wavelength of those frequencies. The flare of the cone effectively provides a level of horn loading but such could be achieved independently is desired.

[tuga]

SergeAuckland wrote:

Hornucopia wrote:

Tweeters have a narrow dispersion so some "pointing at you" aspect is needed. Either AT the head, or just in front or behind the head point.
Gallo tweeters have a much wider dispersion so straight-ahead speaker position is O.K.

Imaging is affected by the cross-over factors, the psych-acoustic effect. The ear is very sensitive to aberrations in phase, etc.






Or you COULD use single, full-range units to avoid this....

The problem with full-range units is that the treble is beamed into a very narrow cone, much narrower than a dome tweeter's dispersion. This makes the problem worse, not better as you suggest.

I agree that imaging is a psycho-acoustic effect and affected by many factors in the listening room, but also by the difference in response of the two loudspeakers. All other things being equal (which they never are ) oneÂ*pair with, say, 0.5dB pair matching to 15kHz will image better than a pair with, say, 3dB pair matching.

You also say that the ear and/or imaging (not sure which you meant)Â*is very sensitive to aberrations in phase.Â* My understanding is that the ear is almost completely insensitive to phase shift, so I would be interested to know how phase shifts affects this.

S.

This is one of the so called benefits used to market single driver speakers (which are far from being full range)... Thank the reviewers for that.

[ultrawomble]

I have my speakers toed in, and I sit in the cone.

[YNWAN]

Those must be strong cones....

[nipponhifi]

tuga wrote:

...This is one of the so called benefits used to market single driver speakers (which are far from being full range)... Thank the reviewers for that.[/quote]



Being a fan and user of WIDE RANGE single drivers, I'm continually bemused by such devices being described as 'full range drivers'. No such device exists IMHO; you decide to have more HF at the expense of bass, more bass at the expense of HF, or somewhere in the middle. I like what the concept can produce, but it sure isn't FULL RANGE.

Martin.