I was just curious whether or not B&W owners listen in nearfield? I have been experimenting with this and I find nearfield listening to be more engaging. To me, the dynamics and detail are much better. My speakers are about 6' apart and I sit about the same distance away. Also, does anyone have a scientific explanation for why nearfield sounds the way it does?
-
-
HI tboooe,
First, as far as I know there is no formal definition of the near field. It's one of those terms that only have a commonly accepted, inexact meaning. It's really just a description of an idea.
At any given listening distance from the speakers, one hears a ratio made up of the direct sound from the speakers and the reflected sound contributed by the room. The room sound is more diffuse and less specific than the direct sound. It is a mixture of many different reflection paths all of which are somewhat different in timing and frequency content. Transients in particular are smeared, high frequencies are less intense, and directional clues are less exact. The further one sits from the speakers the larger the room contribution.
An analogy is where one sits at a live concert. If sitting close to the stage you hear more sound directly from the instruments while those sitting further back hear more from the hall. The further back one sits the more difficult it is to identify exact sound source locations because the hall is contributing more to the listening position.
For most people the ratio of direct verses reflected sound is a matter of taste, since both near and far fields exist in reality. One can choose either or anything in between. I prefer a ratio closer to near field. I like its precision. But I have heard systems set up for medium far field that will bring tears of joy. Like so much in audio there is no one single right answer.
Near field can be taken too far. Anechoic chambers are designed to absorb all reflected sound. That’s why they are used for speaker testing. For normal use they sound terrible. They are extreme examples of what the near field sounds like without any contribution from the room. Clearly, an acceptable balance must be achieved.
I should mention that certain equipment is voiced to complement near or far field. For example, conrad-johnson amps are absolutely magical conveying a realistic medium far field space. Audio Research (and my Krell) is better at a near field perspective. It’s no accident that my two favorite amplifier brands are Audio Research and Krell. When setting up our systems we should take into consideration the strengths of the equipment we are using so we can gain the best from them. Further, we should SELECT our equipment with the listening position in mind. This is the art of system building.
Sparky -
It truly depends on your speakers and your room. The 2 best systems I have heard in regards to imaging and soundstaging are a properly set up Wilson system (using W.A.S.P> Wilson Audio Setup Procedure....which seems archaic and untechnical but works perfectly). They use a system of spikes to adjust to listening position, and a series of in-room "tests" to determine optimal positions for each speaker, and then tweaking by listening......anyway....once its done, its amazing the depth and width of the stage, and the imaging is crisp, precise, and lifelike.
The next closest I have personally heard was in a client's basement. The speakers were probably 10-12 ft apart. The listening position was maybe 6.5-7.5 ft from the plane of the speakers. They weren't toed in too much. The amp was an old Krell FPB200 ( I think). SOurce was a Wadia 301, and the speakers? We will get to that. But when we threw on Hell Freezes Over, it was unreal how "live" it sounded. Myself, my boss, and the client couldn't believe it. It was nuts. We spent an hour or so taking turns in the sweet spot just listening because it was so good. Next to Wilson, I think these would be by favorite speaker......Krell LAT-2. Dynamics, imaging and staging like no other. They need a subwoofer, but thats not a drawback. I am sure the LAT-1 would be worlds better in that regard, but $40k, compared to $10k is a stretch
Anyway....I digress.....listen where you like it the best.
Comment
-
Hi,
I'm a bit lost during measurements, please help.
I did some far field ground plane measurements and also near field measurements.
I tried to align the two graphs, applying calculated baffle step to near field.
They actually match quite well up to 2-3khz,... -
By Jon Hancock
This article will describe the fruits of my efforts to build a moderate sized speaker which might be moderately above average in performance for a basic two-way system. I desired a speaker like this both for my own use in secondary systems, and to fill a need for some friends, who desired fairly full range response (i.e., “it’s gotta have good bass”). Also, though I have access to a good wood shop, many potential DIY enthusiasts may not, so I hoped to use a modified...31 December 2024, 17:31 Tuesday -
Imaging
Imaging refers to the ability of a speaker system to create a realistic and accurate soundstage, where the listener perceives the sound originating from specific locations within the listening environment. It is a crucial aspect of audio reproduction that aims to replicate the spatial qualities of the original sound source. Good imaging is essential for providing a sense of depth, width, and height to the audio presentation. When a speaker system has excellent imaging, it can...19 July 2023, 09:49 Wednesday -
Did anyone see this baby?
Subject: Musical Fidelity - New 550K Supercharger product announcement
June 2007 - Musical Fidelity - NEW 550K Supercharger
Dear Fellow Music Lover,
Extra! Extra! New 550K Supercharger turns most... -
For my next project I’m thinking about making some rather small speakers for use in an office-based system. Maximum size on the order of ~6.5” wide x 10” tall x 8” deep. And try to make as high end of a design as possible with low distortion and such. Given that the listener will be closer...
Comment