• 09-05-2006, 09:04 PM
    R332
    Speaker placement/room set-up guide?
    Is there a generic on-line guide or rule of thumb for placing speakers in a room? The time has come for me to set up my stereo in my new living room and I don't know where the correct places are to put the speakers and subwoofer. Any tips would be appreciated :)
  • 09-05-2006, 09:17 PM
    paul_pci
    Check out this link from Dolby Labs:

    http://www.dolby.com/consumer/home_e...oomlayout.html
  • 09-05-2006, 11:18 PM
    teledynepost
  • 09-06-2006, 04:12 AM
    kexodusc
    Another decent link...
    http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messa...79/129031.html
    http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messa...79/129023.html

    Not sure ifyou're more interested in stereo, 2-channel setup or home theater setup specifically?
  • 09-06-2006, 05:58 AM
    R332
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by kexodusc
    Not sure ifyou're more interested in stereo, 2-channel setup or home theater setup specifically?

    Thanks for the links! It isn't for a theater so I gues that makes it 2-chanel or stereo?
  • 09-06-2006, 07:45 AM
    kexodusc
    Ahhh...in that case also check:
    http://www.tnt-audio.com/casse/waspe.html
    Googling Wasp and Cardas with speaker placement should reveal a bunch more links that might go into more detail if you need more.
  • 09-06-2006, 09:11 AM
    Wireworm5
    Just so you know. 2 channel stereo/2 speakers isn't going to sound any where near as good as multi-channel stereo/ many speakers. But not everyone can have 4 sets of speakers in their audio room and it can get expensive buying speakers. Mind you that is not to say that 2 channel stereo can't be as good. I just haven't heard a system that can do that yet (need to get out more).
    I was listening to my friends system which is just a basic stereo nothing fancy. I noticed that with even poor speaker placement their was pretty good room interaction with the room. Perhaps with better speakers and placement it might have convinced me the 2 channels could rival multi-channel stereo.
    So whenever you get the itch to upgrade to better speakers. Don't throw them out, you can still use them to enhance your sound even more by going multi-channel. :)
  • 09-06-2006, 11:17 AM
    Feanor
    Cardas speaker placement guide
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by R332
    Is there a generic on-line guide or rule of thumb for placing speakers in a room? The time has come for me to set up my stereo in my new living room and I don't know where the correct places are to put the speakers and subwoofer. Any tips would be appreciated :)

    Here's the famous Cardas speaker placement method ...
    Note the variation for dipole speakers.

    Most who've tried is say the results are great, but there is the big practical problem that the speakers, especially the non-dipole, have to be place a long way from the rear wall, e.g. a room with a 14' wide rear wall, speakrs are supposed to be 6.26' in front of it. :(
  • 09-06-2006, 03:53 PM
    E-Stat
    I began with that placement following my recent move
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Feanor
    Most who've tried is say the results are great, but there is the big practical problem that the speakers, especially the non-dipole, have to be place a long way from the rear wall, e.g. a room with a 14' wide rear wall, speakrs are supposed to be 6.26' in front of it. :(

    and found optimum frequency balance with my bipolars was an arrangement using a slightly greater distance than the "standard" flavor. I spent a Sunday afternoon experimenting with 22 different combinations of speaker, listening couch and bass trap placement along with different bass contour settings on the backplates. I used a Radio Shack SPL meter and a Stereophile test CD recording ten readings for each trial in third octave increments from 200 hz down to 25 hz. In my dedicated 25' x 16' room, the stats ended up 7.5' out from the back wall. I achieved a +/- 2 db response from 60 hz to 200 hz with a gradual rise below that of a db or two down to 32. I find that getting the smoothest response in the lower midrange / upper bass is critical to neutrality. With the recommended Cardas bipolar position, I was getting a 16 db octave to octave difference between 60 hz and 120 hz. Dueling peaks and troughs. It sounded heavy.

    I did the same with my HT system. There, however, I ignored the Cardas distance to back wall recommendation (I used about 3') and balanced the mains crossover on the receiver and powered subs crossover and level to achieve a neutral response. Surprisingly (at least to me), I ended up using the lowest crossover settings for both (40 hz on the receiver and 50 hz on the subs) with a judicious level control on the subs with my Polk RTi-35 mains (6.5" woofer) and Eosone 12" subs. I actually removed a Behringer third octave EQ from the mix with the placement in its new room. It really wasn't needed. This experience reinforced my belief that most folks crank their subwoofers beyond flat.

    Bipolars are definitely trickier to place since the room becomes the enclosure. With any speakers, however, my advice is experiment, experiment, experiment. Ideally using some test gear (which doesn't have to be expensive).

    rw
  • 09-06-2006, 05:17 PM
    Feanor
    Thanks, very interesting
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by E-Stat
    and found optimum frequency balance with my bipolars was an arrangement using a slightly greater distance than the "standard" flavor. I spent a Sunday afternoon experimenting with 22 different combinations of speaker, listening couch and bass trap placement along with different bass contour settings on the backplates. I used a Radio Shack SPL meter and a Stereophile test CD recording ten readings for each trial in third octave increments from 200 hz down to 25 hz. In my dedicated 25' x 16' room, the stats ended up 7.5' out from the back wall. I achieved a +/- 2 db response from 60 hz to 200 hz with a gradual rise below that of a db or two down to 32. I find that getting the smoothest response in the lower midrange / upper bass is critical to neutrality. With the recommended Cardas bipolar position, I was getting a 16 db octave to octave difference between 60 hz and 120 hz. Dueling peaks and troughs. It sounded heavy.
    ...

    rw

    And evidence that experimentation pays off.

    In my case, and I'm sure it's the same for many, the lack of a dedicated room precludes every finding or using the optimal position. :sad:
  • 09-06-2006, 06:05 PM
    E-Stat
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Feanor
    In my case, and I'm sure it's the same for many, the lack of a dedicated room precludes every finding or using the optimal position. :sad:

    Well the good news is that EQ in the digital domain can assist getting the frequency balance correct with fewer sonic compromises than before. Unless of course, you are working with an analog source.

    On the other hand, I recommend that (for at least an afternoon) you experiment with your Maggies out into the room. My guess is that you will be surprised at the difference in apparent image depth. The 1.6s are really nice in that regard I suspect especially more so with the new amp. :)

    rw