Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [regsaudioforum] M40 soft support

Expand Messages
  • nedmast2@aol.com
    I appreciate the detailed description of your listening set-up (with the M40s) that you ve given, Tom. I m still in the process of finding the configuration
    Message 1 of 42 , Sep 3, 2006
      I appreciate the detailed description of your listening set-up (with the M40s) that you've given, Tom.  I'm still in the process of finding the configuration that works 'best', so having your measurements will be a help to me.  Achieving the 90 degree separation will not be a problem, nor will sitting at the proper height and at a 4 to 5 foot distance (will try from 4 to 6 feet).  I am compromising on the distance behind each speaker, and am therefore using eq to bring down some LF peaks.
       
      I understand why the 90 degree angle is important for Blumlein recordings, but why so important for all the other types (which, after all, is almost all)? Just curious; whatever sounds most natural is what I'll use.   
       
      Thanks for your helpful suggestions -
       
      Ned
    • Barnet Feingold
      Mr. Mallin, Your answer makes it clear that stand height has effects beyond those that might be mitigated by eliminating first-order (or first- and
      Message 42 of 42 , Sep 6, 2006
        Mr. Mallin,

        Your answer makes it clear that stand height has effects beyond those that
        might be mitigated by eliminating first-order (or first- and second-order)
        reflections. I briefly wondered whether 22" or higher stands were really
        necessary. That's no longer a question.

        Many thanks!

        B.



        >From: "Tom Mallin" <tmallin@...>
        >Reply-To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
        >To: <regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com>
        >Subject: RE: [regsaudioforum] Re: M40 soft support(dogs and children)
        >Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 09:38:24 -0500
        >
        >My statements about the importance of the higher stand height grow out
        >of experience where the amount of absorbing foam in the room was held
        >constant. I was/am using three-inch-thick Sonex at all first and second
        >reflection points except for the floor reflection, where I used two
        >layers of the three-inch Sonex, for six inches total. Everything else
        >about the set up remained as constant as possible other than stand and
        >listening height.
        >
        >I also re-equalized the speakers for equivalently flat response. As I
        >mentioned, however, there was little frequency response difference
        >caused by the change in stand height.
        >
        > >>> barnet.feingold@... 09/06/06 06:49AM >>>
        >An impertinent question just occurred to me: Is it possible that most
        >of the
        >"magic" attributed to M40 stand heights of 22" or higher can be
        >achieved by
        >absorbtion of first-order reflections? While no reasonable amount of
        >absorbent material can eliminate comb filtering or other multipath
        >(right
        >word?) effects below 100 Hz., four inches of foam appears to do a
        >pretty
        >good job down to that frequency.
        >
        >What are your thoughts on this, gentlemen?
        >
        >B.
        >
        >
        >
        > >From: "Barnet Feingold" <barnet.feingold@...>
        > >Reply-To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
        > >To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
        > >Subject: RE: [regsaudioforum] Re: M40 soft support(dogs and children)
        > >Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 17:40:45 -0400
        > >
        > >I've found that, at least with my current speakers (roughly similar
        >to
        > >M30s), comb filtering effects associated with floor bounce can be
        >mitigated
        > >by acoustically absorbent ottomans placed close to the floor's
        >"mirror
        > >point." Although I have a thick oriential carpet over wall to wall
        >rugs,
        > >the
        > >difference the ottomans make is dramatic -- even larger than the
        > >difference
        > >made by acoustical foam at the "mirror point" on my (relatively high)
        > >ceiling. Of course, big hunks of acoustical foam on the floor would
        >work as
        > >well, but ottomans have the advantage of domestic acceptability, and
        >you
        > >can
        > >rest your feet on them.
        > >
        > >Barney
        > >
        > >
        > > >From: "regtas43" <regonaudio@...>
        > > >Reply-To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
        > > >To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
        > > >Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: M40 soft support(dogs and children)
        > > >Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 19:58:18 -0000
        > > >
        > > >I agree, safety first for sure.
        > > >
        > > >Interestingly, the Dobie dogs, who live in the daytime in the audio
        > > >room, have always understood from the start that speakers were not
        >to
        > > >be touched. Even when they were puppies and were doing things like
        > > >eating through doors(literally), they never so much as looked at
        >any
        > > >of the audio equipment with a destructive eye and they never bumped
        > > >into anything audio either.
        > > >
        > > >But children,however well intentioned, cannot be relied upon to be
        >as
        > > >graceful as dogs. Comes to that ,I myself cannot be relied upon to
        >be
        > > >that graceful either--I am more likely to knock things over than
        >the
        > > >Dobie girls!
        > > >
        > > > So I think you are absolutely right--unless you just put the tilt
        >on
        > > >while you were there listening only. A speaker that large could
        >hurt
        > > >a child badly if it fell the wrong way. Far better safe than
        >not,most
        > > >surely.
        > > >
        > > >REG
        > > >
        > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "rzangpo2" <RZangpo2@...>
        > > >wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > > The paperback book trick might work, but in my case there is
        >foot
        > > > > traffic going around the speakers - including a very active
        > > > > 7-year-old. I don't think I'll try tilting them any time soon.
        > > > >
        > > > > Ron Stiskin
        > > > > New York
        > > > >
        > > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "regtas43" <regonaudio@>
        > > >wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Well, if you have a little space in front you can prop the
        > > >speakers
        > > > > > up with a paper back book behind--careful though.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > About the ceiling question: Absolutely right. The speaker does
        > > >not
        > > > > > know floor from ceiling! But we are speaking of midrange
        >here(the
        > > > > > treble is easy to soak up with a couple of pieces of foam) and
        > > >with
        > > > > > the tweeter 48" high the mid range is still closer to the
        >floor
        > > >than
        > > > > > the ceiling--though not much.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > This is all very much a matter of experimenting. It is also a
        > > >good
        > > > > > reason to have a high ceiling!
        > > > > > Good luck.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > REG
        > > > > >
        > > > > > PS One of the things to realize is that the speaker itself if
        > > >quite
        > > > > > flat but the floor bounce ,while it creates a comb filter with
        > > >ups
        > > > > > and downs, on the whole adds to the apparent mids and lows in
        > > > > > practice.
        > > > > > So the speaker can be a little dull sounding if you have too
        >much
        > > > > > floor. Of course this is better for most purposes than having
        >the
        > > > > > speaker be thin and upper mid/lower treble oriented! But it is
        > > >still
        > > > > > not quite right.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "rzangpo2" <RZangpo2@>
        > > > > > wrote:
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Barnet,
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Yes, tweeter axis is important. I think all of us here who
        >have
        > > > > > M40s
        > > > > > > point them more or less straight at our ears, and sit with
        >our
        > > > > > ears on
        > > > > > > tweeter axis (or slightly below; TL and, I think, REG have
        > > >stated
        > > > > > that
        > > > > > > 1" to 2" below tweeter axis is optimal).
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > I believe it's safe to say that those of us who set up our
        > > >speakers
        > > > > > > with the tweeters 48" from the ground do not sit on couches.
        >TL
        > > > > > and I
        > > > > > > use pneumatic office chairs, so we can adjust the height.
        >REG
        > > >sits
        > > > > > on
        > > > > > > a stool and puts books on it to sit higher.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > I considered putting the M40s up high and angling them down,
        >as
        > > >in
        > > > > > BBC
        > > > > > > control rooms. But I quickly changed my mind when I actually
        > > > > > started
        > > > > > > setting them up. Those mothers are big! And heavy! Tilting
        >them
        > > > > > down
        > > > > > > would be a nightmare. You would need either to hang them
        >from
        > > >the
        > > > > > > ceiling, or to use a custom-made stand such as the BBC uses;
        > > >these
        > > > > > > have a lip in front to keep the speaker from toppling off. I
        > > >think
        > > > > > the
        > > > > > > speakers may be bolted to the stands, as well.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Ron Stiskin
        > > > > > > New York
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Barnet Feingold"
        > > > > > > <barnet.feingold@> wrote:
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > I hope I'm placing this comment in an appropriate string.
        >If
        > > > > > not, my
        > > > > > > > apologies.
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > I've seen a great deal of discussion regarding M40 stand
        > > >height,
        > > > > > > listener
        > > > > > > > distance and angle. However, I've seen relatively little
        >on
        > > >the
        > > > > > > importance
        > > > > > > > of being on tweeter axis. To the best of my knowledge, the
        > > >40s
        > > > > > were
        > > > > > > designed
        > > > > > > > to be listened to (in BBC control rooms) in that manner.
        >If
        > > > > > > listeners sit on
        > > > > > > > the average sofa, the most commonly endorsed stand height
        > > >(22"
        > > > > > or a bit
        > > > > > > > higher -- an appropriate height for listeners on high
        >stools)
        > > > > > would
        > > > > > > place
        > > > > > > > the 40's tweeters about 6" higher than their ears. While it
        >is
        > > > > > > unreasonable,
        > > > > > > > in a domestic situation, to raise one's sofa 6", it
        >appears
        > > > > > > reasonable to
        > > > > > > > place the 40s on high stands and tilt them down. Are you
        > > >aware of
        > > > > > > anyone who
        > > > > > > > has tried this? If so, did it make a difference?
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >From: Tom Mallin<tmallin@>
        > > > > > > > >Reply-To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
        > > > > > > > >To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
        > > > > > > > >Subject: Re: [regsaudioforum] M40 soft support
        > > > > > > > >Date: 3 Sep 2006 20:20:00 -0500
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >Even on other types of recordings, with 90-degree
        > > >separation,
        > > > > > one
        > > > > > > aspect of
        > > > > > > > >the superiority of the presentation is that the speakers
        > > > > > physically
        > > > > > > and
        > > > > > > > >psycho-acoustically get out of the way of the soundstage
        > > >they
        > > > > > are
        > > > > > > producing
        > > > > > > > >to a degree which does not happen with 60 degrees. The
        > > >imaging
        > > > > > and
        > > > > > > staging
        > > > > > > > >action takes place in an open space in front of your
        >eyes.
        > > >The
        > > > > > > speakers
        > > > > > > > >are far enough out of your direct line of sight that
        >their
        > > > > > > positions can
        > > > > > > > >better be ignored. This is further enhanced in a semi-
        > > >darkened
        > > > > > > room. On
        > > > > > > > >well-recorded material, nothing much seems to come from
        >them
        > > >and
        > > > > > > they just
        > > > > > > > >form the suspension-bridge towers of the span of sound
        > > >between
        > > > > > them.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >Secondly, the placement of sound sources on the stage is
        >more
        > > > > > > precise and
        > > > > > > > >solid, with less wander or uncertainty. You can tell the
        > > > > > > positioning of
        > > > > > > > >each instrument with respect to others more clearly. You
        > > >can
        > > > > > also
        > > > > > > better
        > > > > > > > >distinguish the actual sound source position from echos
        >of
        > > >the
        > > > > > > sound off
        > > > > > > > >the walls of the recording venue.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >Sure, there are recordings which sound better with 60
        > > >degrees or
        > > > > > > even less
        > > > > > > > >of separation. Those are generally the recordings made
        >with
        > > > > > ping-pong
        > > > > > > > >stereo where everything is panned hard right or hard
        >left.
        > > > > > > Sometimes, even
        > > > > > > > >three-channel recordings sound better with less
        >separation.
        > > > > > That
        > > > > > > includes
        > > > > > > > >some of the old RCA Living Stereos, some of which had
        > > >inadequate
        > > > > > > center
        > > > > > > > >fill, and many pan-potted recordings where everything is
        > > >mixed
        > > > > > left,
        > > > > > > > >center, and right. But most of the modern spaced omni
        > > > > > recordings
        > > > > > > by Telarc
        > > > > > > > >and the Mercury Living Presence series sound better with
        >90-
        > > > > > degree
        > > > > > > > >separation. If all I ever listened to was old jazz
        > > >recordings,
        > > > > > I
        > > > > > > would use
        > > > > > > > >60 degrees, I guess, but since that's not my steady diet,
        >I
        > > > > > > strongly prefer
        > > > > > > > >90-degree separation.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > >>> nedmast2@ 09/03/06 09:21AM >>>
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >I appreciate the detailed description of your listening
        >set-
        > > >up
        > > > > > > (with the
        > > > > > > > >M40s) that you've given, Tom. I'm still in the process
        >of
        > > > > > finding the
        > > > > > > > >configuration that works 'best', so having your
        >measurements
        > > > > > will
        > > > > > > be a help
        > > > > > > > >to me. Achieving the 90 degree separation will not be a
        > > > > > problem,
        > > > > > > nor will
        > > > > > > > >sitting at the proper height and at a 4 to 5 foot
        >distance
        > > >(will
        > > > > > > try from 4
        > > > > > > > >to 6 feet). I am compromising on the distance behind
        >each
        > > > > > speaker,
        > > > > > > and am
        > > > > > > > >therefore using eq to bring down some LF peaks.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >I understand why the 90 degree angle is important for
        > > >Blumlein
        > > > > > > recordings,
        > > > > > > > >but why so important for all the other types (which,
        >after
        > > >all,
        > > > > > is
        > > > > > > almost
        > > > > > > > >all)? Just curious; whatever sounds most natural is what
        > > >I'll
        > > > > > use.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >Thanks for your helpful suggestions -
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >Ned
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > >_________________________________________________________________
        > > > > > > > Call friends with PC-to-PC calling -- FREE
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?
        > > >locale=en-
        > > > > > us&source=wlmailtagline
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        > >_________________________________________________________________
        > >Search from any web page with powerful protection. Get the FREE
        >Windows
        > >Live
        > >Toolbar Today! http://get.live.com/toolbar/overview
        > >
        >
        >_________________________________________________________________
        >Check the weather nationwide with MSN Search: Try it now!
        >http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=weather&FORM=WLMTAG
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >

        _________________________________________________________________
        Windows Live Spaces is here! It�s easy to create your own personal Web site.
        http://spaces.live.com/signup.aspx
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.