Setup for speakers and Ram suggesting 7 foot in.

[malsackj]

To WASP or not to WASP, that is no question here

My first exposure to the Wilson Audio set-up Procedure (or WASP for short) occurred during my research as to how the Wilson Audio Tiny Tot (WATT) and it's Woofer, the Wilson Audio Puppy (WAP) work. I did this to build my own pair (I was a bit short of the ten grand or so for a good 2nd Hand pair). In his review in Stereophile, Wes Philips went into a great length about WASP and emphasized two things.

One, using WASP does result in relatively living-room friendly positions for the Speakers and two; WASP provides an imaging and sound staging that is exceptional. None of the mathematical based Procedures even takes these two into account. WASP will work not only for Wilson Audio 'speakers but for any cone/dome 'speaker system on the market. The only speaker types I would not attempted to install using the WASP rules are: panel types, speakers which have specific positioning made mandatory by their designs (such as Klipschorns or Bose designs), various very British Designs which sound decent only when placed directly against the rear-wall (NAIM, LINN come to mind),

multi-enclosure systems, such as panel/cone hybrids consisting of a dipole element and a bass tower (Carver Ribbon Speakers and Woofers, Martin Logan Designs).

Still, as boxy 'speakers account for the vast majority of speakers sold; I think that the WASP methodology will be useful to most of you. As you can see from the illustration, all distances are determined using fixed points on the Speaker being set-up as reference.







Or Cardas Room setup.

http://www.cardas.com/room_setup_rectangular_room.php

http://www.cardas.com/room_setup_calculators.php


So are these some of the material where moving the speakers out into the room will open up the sound stage.

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

So are these some of the material where moving the speakers out into the room will open up the sound stage.

Empirically the setup I have currently is pretty close to that. Yes, for me at least, moving the speakers out into the room improves the depth tremendously. I've heard a couple systems where the speakers are pretty much in the middle of a 40 foot long room, and the depth is that much better.

Now honestly I think the depth thing is really a fakeout, a trick on our ears being pulled by our eyes. If there is "space" behind the speakers, the sound will seem to fill it. Cues in the recording, especially reverb, tend to place instruments farther back away from the listener - that's one of the ways our brains have always located distant sounds. I suppose if I were really ambitious I could do an A/B comparison by moving my speakers either out into the room and then immediately (well as immediately as you can move a couple hundred pounds of speaker) back directly against the wall.

But I don't think that would prove anything. I like my speakers out into the room, and I hear loads of depth, so I'm happy.

 

[malsackj]

So This visual Cue is the Key sometimes. Because if we add some absorbing panels on the back wall behind the speaker this should create some help on the sound and the depth of the sound. Another thing to think about is the use of rear ports on some of the speakers. They will be aimed at that wall and will be going into a sound absorbing panel. With my setup I am using some older JBL 2500 bookshelf speaker. This line of speakers has the port on the front of the cabinet.

Did Klipsh or other venders provide the output of the horns on the home speakers like the Pro Audio Horns do. 90 degrees x 40 degrees.
If angled correctly in the room and the seated position is set correctly the 90 x 40 could remove the horns 1st reflection point on the wall near the speaker. I use my big system with 60 x 40 degree horns with this purpose in mind in the larger rooms to help lower some of the reverb in the room because I can keep the sound off the walls close to the horns. But this works on only the sound in the horns and the crossover is around 2K and up.

 

[Flint]

I concur with the general practice of moving speaker far into the room. Even in my small-ish HT I pulled my speakers over 3 feet into the room AND completely covered the wall behind them (the front wall) with acoustically absorbent material.

 

[malsackj]

When I visited with Heeman, I found the depth and imaging to be very good. His setup is not out into the room. But he used various acoustic techniques to make the room a better fit. Absorbing panels, the walls not being at 90 degree rectangle box and so on. I have also enjoyed the visits to Bat's cave, and Pauly's. Some of the same with the Bat cave, Pauly did have the speakers out some from the walls. So some Near Field listening on some of the systems. I have my setup as near field and back near the wall 8 to 10 inches out. It's also on the long wall 12 x 24

 

[PaulyT]

Yeah, Zing's system always impresses me with its depth, and he has his speakers quite a bit forward from the "back" wall (forward of the speakers w.r.t. the listener). That may well be a big factor there.

 

[heeman]

One of the tricks in my room is that the front wall is total absorption. No hard surface at all.

 

[malsackj]

Correct and your room is approaching the Live end and Dead end room. Dead in the front and corrected first reflections. Back has the defusion and some live end. http://www.prosoundweb.com/topics/studio/re_p_files_studio_design_and_construction/# this link is on a studio design and upgrades. So you can see just how close your room is. Because Flint has two rooms, One for the drums and instruments, and one for the sound and theater. This is similar to the studio in that you build the rooms to the purpose. My music room is extremely slowly growing this way. Then possibly building the studio 7 walls in the back basement.