Are rooms more important than systems?

[rdale]

To widen the soundstage you will need to allow for side-wall eraly reflections (achieved by removing the acoustic panels).

Well, no actually. Note that the panels I have on my side walls are not pure absorbers as they have scatter plates. Absolutely nothing would be improved by removing them.

 

[tackleberry]

Well, no actually. Note that the panels I have on my side walls are not pure absorbers as they have scatter plates. Absolutely nothing would be improved by removing them.

Do you leave the chairs where they are? Do you get a good soundstage?

 

[rdale]

Do you leave the chairs where they are? Do you get a good soundstage?

I leave the chairs where they are. Yes I would say I’ve got my Klipsches to image pretty well, better than the stock ones after the various mods I’ve done. I’ve got quite a low powered amp at 5 watts per channel, and a more powerful PrimaLuna Evo 100 integrated amp I’ve got on order may have more oomph and image better driving them.

 

[mac72]

I run Dirac from my pc (which runs as a DSP plug-in through J:River). That is the very start of my chain, which then runs into a DAC (via a USB interface) and then preamp from there.

I have stuck with this version of Dirac as it means I have full flexibility of everything down the chain rather than being restricted to an amp/DAC which incorporates Dirac (albeit there are quite a few using it these days, so the choice is much better).

I have managed to improve bass response by pulling my Spendor A7’s further out from the wall, but to sufficiently reduce the boom, they are too far into the room for practical purposes (i.e. three young children!).

I have considered replacing the speakers with either infinite baffle or front-ported speakers to allow them to be closer to the wall, but this is exactly the point I mean about constantly throwing money at a non-ideal room.

Currently, Dirac in the bass is the best compromise I have found without spending thousands more on new speakers.

I also really love my A7’s and have been stubbornly reluctant to replace them for another speaker. I have always felt they deserve to be tweaked to their full potential, but admit new speakers is probably where I'm headed.

But I'm getting a bit tired of just throwing money at it.

Is there a way to split signal at later stage , run DAC with whatever source you feeding it with to I assume you’re using preamplifier and if you have two sets of outputs to an amplifier - run one Rand L to MiniDSP with DSP then another amplifier feeding just woofers ?
This way mids and highs wouldn’t be processed by DSP at all and you could correct bass response I know it means more money but there is cheap XTZ amplifier unclassified at £300 and MiniDSP another couple hundred , if doesn’t wok you could sell it on easily . I could probably lend you MiniDSP for a week or two to save few quid .

 

[tackleberry]

I’m sure you’ll enjoy your new purchase

 

[StingRay]

Carpet vs wood or ceramic cuts down on echo.

Yes l lived next door to someone who changed from carpet to laminate, it was a lot more noisy, with a few people in there chatting it was a right racket. Sounds are bounced around all over the room, having panels on the wall may stop some of it but you still have reflection problems. High frequencies are the biggest problem apart from bass. Studios are usually full treated and use room equalisation, they are not like living rooms. Anyway I would want them in my room and I don’t feel it needs it now, when I first moved here it was a bit echoey but not now. My side walls have a window and the other side which is 4m away patio doors, so it’s not possible to fit first reflection panels there anyway. If I added any panels it would probably sound dead.

 

[hiesteem]

Hello, I was a chef for 30 years. I often changed jobs and lived in many different apartments. I always paid attention to the rooms in the apartments and looked for a home for my system. I was always satisfied, I never had an apartment where I was dissatisfied.

Yes couldn't agree more. No bass traps required whilst savouring my homemade curry, and listening to the dead playing live at Fillmore East.
Somehow the system takes on a different flavour...........

 

[rdale]

Yes l lived next door to someone who changed from carpet to laminate, it was a lot more noisy, with a few people in there chatting it was a right racket. Sounds are bounced around all over the room, having panels on the wall may stop some of it but you still have reflection problems. High frequencies are the biggest problem apart from bass.

In my other larger listening room I’ve got eight 120 x 120 cm panels suspended from the ceiling. They were installed by a company that specializes in acoustic treatment for offices to make speech clearer.

 

[HollyJohnsen]

Yes couldn't agree more. No bass traps required whilst savouring my homemade curry, and listening to the dead playing live at Fillmore East.
Somehow the system takes on a different flavour...........

Even now it sings beautifully....

 

[hiesteem]

Even now it sings beautifully....

Beautiful room. The first thing that I notice is the hifi integrates with the furnishings. Perhaps you should go into business designing lifestyle rooms

 

[HollyJohnsen]

Beautiful room. The first thing that I notice is the hifi integrates with the furnishings. Perhaps you should go into business designing lifestyle rooms

Thank you for the beautiful words

 

[hiesteem]

Thank you for the beautiful words

You're welcome, and welcome to the Wam.

 

[hearhere]

I run Dirac from my pc (which runs as a DSP plug-in through J:River). That is the very start of my chain, which then runs into a DAC (via a USB interface) and then preamp from there.

I have stuck with this version of Dirac as it means I have full flexibility of everything down the chain rather than being restricted to an amp/DAC which incorporates Dirac (albeit there are quite a few using it these days, so the choice is much better).

Really you should avoid using a PC for any signal handling, although fine for control.

Dirac is a very powerful PROCESSOR and as long as the full frequency range is sent into Dirac (in a PC or NAD or similar), the ENTIRE FREQUENCY RANGE passes through this processor. Even though the top end may not be adjusted (because you have the sub-500 Hz version or by choice) you can't avoid the fact that these precious higher frequencies have endured the processor and a certain sparkle in the end result will be noticeably lost if sent to good quality speakers.

The only way to avoid this unnecessary top end processing is to crossover BEFORE amplification, where you use 2 amps - one for the bass with Dirac or equivalent and the other for pure unprocessed top end - ie effectively an active system.

 

[tuga]

Really you should avoid using a PC for any signal handling, although fine for control.

Why? All music nowadays is produced in a PC (or a Mac).

 

[mac72]

The only way to avoid this unnecessary top end processing is to crossover BEFORE amplification, where you use 2 amps - one for the bass with Dirac or equivalent and the other for pure unprocessed top end - ie effectively an active

I would avoid active crossover as is not needed , as per my earlier post split signal after preamplifier and do DSP on the woofer then feed an amplifier, signal going to mid/high coming from another amplifier .

 

[mac72]

XTZ amplifier I mentioned has gain adjustment so could be matched to the main amplifier as long as 150W/8ohm or 300W/4ohm is enough , more fine gain adjustment done on MiniDSP
Above applies only in case if speakers could be biamped/biwired

 

[DUVET]

In answer to the OP . Yes

 

[hearhere]

I would avoid active crossover as is not needed , as per my earlier post split signal after preamplifier and do DSP on the woofer then feed an amplifier, signal going to mid/high coming from another amplifier .

Yes that would work too - bi-amping with the bass amp only having Dirac

 

[hearhere]

Why? All music nowadays is produced in a PC (or a Mac).

Not the music I listen to. It is produced by very fancy mixing desks. All these things and some of the innards of hi-fi equipment contain elements of computer technology, but all-purpose non-audio-specific PCs are not designed with audiophile power supplies, nor do they have cases designed to keep out unwanted interference. They are certainly not "audiophile" quality. If you use such compromised equipment, you may not even notice the loss of high frequency "tingle factor" that good equipment with good speakers should offer.

 

[tuga]

Not the music I listen to. It is produced by very fancy mixing desks. All these things and some of the innards of hi-fi equipment contain elements of computer technology, but all-purpose non-audio-specific PCs are not designed with audiophile power supplies, nor do they have cases designed to keep out unwanted interference. They are certainly not "audiophile" quality. If you use such compromised equipment, you may not even notice the loss of high frequency "tingle factor" that good equipment with good speakers should offer.

Sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about.
As far as I know BIS, Channel Classics, Pentatone, 2L all use regular DAWs or laptops and their recordings sound purrfect.