do you listen in nearfield?

**Karma** · 24 April 2006, 07:05 Monday

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

**Audiophiliac** · 24 April 2006, 10:32 Monday

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.

do you listen in nearfield?

do you listen in nearfield?

Comment

Comment