Toeing speakers in, whats the point?

Y

yepimonfire

Audioholic Samurai
so ive been messing with my mains angling them in to get a perfectly balanced "phantom" image of a center with two channel sources. one of the things i realized is they have to be way angled in, and if you move your position even a few centimeters the phantom vanishes, i also realized this causes any seat that isnt in the sweet spot to sound worse then if they were only mildly toed in (not enough to phantom). so whats the point? anyone else noticed this?
 
F

FirstReflection

AV Rant Co-Host
How well your front L/R speakers are able to create a convincing "phantom" center image is dependant upon a number of things - including the dispersion pattern of the speakers, the room reflections off of side walls, ceiling and floor, and your seating position and its proximity to the wall behind you and to the side walls.

In general, if a speaker maintains flat frequency response, even at off-angles, it will be better able to produce a "phantom" center image over a larger seating area. Typically, the goal is to maintain flat frequency response over a 30 degree "window" - that is, 15 degrees to either side of dead center.

Therefore, the typical goal is to have all listeners' ears within that 30 degree "window". What you will normally find if you try to achieve that goal is that you have to toe in the speakers so that the person sitting on the right couch cushion has his/her right ear just within the 15 degrees-to-the-right portion of the Front R speaker's dispersion, while the person on the left couch cushion has his/her left ear just within the 15-degree-to-the-left portion of the Front R speaker's dispersion. The person in the middle couch cushion is going to thus have the Front R speaker pointed almost right at him/her.

Now, the thing is, a lot of speakers do NOT have flat frequency response at any angle other than dead on. Many speakers immediately begin to roll-off as soon as you go off angle. And many speakers also have diffraction problems, where the soundwaves hit the front side edge of the speaker cabinet and bounce off at weird angles. This is why you'll see speakers where the sides of the front baffle are rounded or chamfered or bevelled.

Certain tweeter designs tend to only have flat frequency response when dead on. Ribbons, electrostats, ring-radiators, some horn designs. With those designs, you tend to have to have the speakers pointed straight at you, creating a tiny "sweet spot" that only a single listener can enjoy.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, some speakers have extremely wide and even dispersion. With such speakers, you don't have to toe them in very much at all because they maintain a flat and even frequency response over a very wide "window". Sometimes as much as 45 degrees to either side of dead on!

It sounds as though whatever speaker you own have very limited dispersion. If you're finding that they only create a convincing center image when pointed straight at you and they are unable to maintain that image when you move even a hair out of that one "sweet spot", then your speakers likely have uneven frequency response at off-angles and/or diffraction problems.

That said, it could also easily be your room. If your side walls are flat and hard, and if you ceiling and floor are flat and hard too, then you are getting some very strong reflections. If you are also sitting fairly close to the wall behind you and that back wall is flat and hard, then you are getting strong reflections off of the back wall as well.

Those reflections interfere with the direct sound that is coming from your speakers. That interference can destroy a speaker's imaging and can make dialogue in particular a lot harder to clearly understand. What you would need in that case is some acoustic treatments.

The basics are as follows:

- place bass traps in all four vertical corners of your room. Focus on the wall-wall-ceiling corners. Don't worry too much about treating areas that are below your seated ear height.

- place bass trap panels directly behind your front speakers and directly on the side wall beside your front speakers

- *most importantly - place absorptive panels at the first reflection points on your side walls and ceiling. If you have a fairly long seating distance, also place absorptive panels at the second reflection points.

- place an absorptive panel directly behind your seating position on the back wall.

- treat the back half of your room (side walls and ceiling) with diffusion panels.

The idea is for the sound coming from the front of the room to be direct from your speakers and free from most of the reflections off of your room's surfaces. You want that sound from the front to "wash over" you and then "disappear" behind you - hence the absorption placed directly behind you.

You do not want a totally "dead" sounding room though, so that is where the diffusion comes in. In the rear half of the room, you want to "scatter" the sound so that you maintain the sound energy and some of the sonic signature of the room, but you do not get strong, direct reflections that will "muddy" your soundstage and interfere with the direct sound coming from your speakers.

You likely have a combination of both room reflections and less than even dispersion from your speakers. But I do not know what speakers you are using, so it's tough to say for sure.

If you use something like electrostats, they can basically sound like headphones - with incredible detail and resolution, but only with them pointing straight at you and only for an extremely small "sweet spot". If your speakers merely roll-off at off-angles, you have a choice: you can point them straight at you to glean maximum detail and resolution, but a small sweet spot. Or you can barely toe them in at all, or even face them completely straight forward. You'll gain a much larger sweet spot, but have less resolution and detail.

Hope that helps!
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Audioholic Jedi
so ive been messing with my mains angling them in to get a perfectly balanced "phantom" image of a center with two channel sources. one of the things i realized is they have to be way angled in, and if you move your position even a few centimeters the phantom vanishes, i also realized this causes any seat that isnt in the sweet spot to sound worse then if they were only mildly toed in (not enough to phantom). so whats the point? anyone else noticed this?
The short version is that a speaker that will not lock a center position from anywhere in what can be reasonably called the listening area has problems and big ones.

Your problem sounds very severe, so make sure you don't have an inadvertent phase reversal. That would make a stable phantom image impossible.

Basically frequency response errors, especially the integration of the drivers has a big impact on this. As has already been alluded to disassociations between axis and off axis response is a potent cause of poor image localization.

I have heard quite a few Polk speakers in my time, and I find poor driver integration to be a badge of the mark. I always seem to aware of what is coming from the woofer and what is coming from the tweeter from even a long way off. So I suspect that has something to do with your problem.

It is amazing how far out of a reasonable listening arc some speakers will lock images. For instance I had real trouble getting the driver integration right between the mid dome and ribbon drivers. Now they are right I can be way out of the listening area outside the left speaker by a long way. I do this when warming by the log fire. Even at that position I'm not fixed to the left speaker by a long shot and still get imaging between the speakers. When watching movies in the correct seating area, I have never found a need for a center speaker.
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
Some speakers just provide the details in a very narrow beam from the drivers.

Just for contrast, here is a cut 'n paste from Tom Andry's review of the Aperion Grand Verus. These appear to be essentially free of this concern:

The first thing I noticed after setting up the speakers was how well the Verus Grand Towers performed both on and off axis. This was obviously a design goal of Aperion and they hit it out of the park. While I prefer a slightly more detailed sound so you'd think I'd point the speakers directly toward my listening position, I found that they sounded just as good off axis. I've set up enough speakers to be very sensitive to performance decreases based on position. With the Verus Grand, any position I put them in from pointed straight forward to directly at me, they sounded great. Imaging was dead on in all positions which was astounding. Actually I ran without a center for the first week or so as I was doing mostly stereo testing. Even then, and even sitting off center, the vocals still sounded like they were coming from dead center. This was true even when you were sitting in line with one of the main speakers. While the center channel locked down the vocals, it wasn't strictly needed.
http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/speakers/floorstanding/verus-grand/verus-group-impressions
 
jliedeka

jliedeka

Audioholic General
Keep in mind that loudspeaker design is about making trade-offs. Most designers, but not all, strive for a good power response. Some, like the late great Jim Thiel prioritized phase accuracy over flat frequency response.

Someone designing to a price point, especially for a mass market speaker, may have to prioritize other things like sensitivity or power handling when choosing drivers which may limit crossover options.

I agree with most of what FirstReflect said except that I wouldn't overdo the room treatments. A dead room is fine if you are mixing with studio monitors but it's not ideal for general listening. OTOH, the room shouldn't be too lively either. I recommend bass trapping where appropriate and then focusing on the front and back walls first. Those reflections are the bigger culprits in ruining the stereo illusion. Side reflections could be good or bad. If the distances are short, the reflected sound will be perceived as part of the direct sound.

Jim
 
Y

yepimonfire

Audioholic Samurai
so ive been messing with my mains angling them in to get a perfectly balanced "phantom" image of a center with two channel sources. one of the things i realized is they have to be way angled in, and if you move your position even a few centimeters the phantom vanishes, i also realized this causes any seat that isnt in the sweet spot to sound worse then if they were only mildly toed in (not enough to phantom). so whats the point? anyone else noticed this?
Actually i fixed this issue, was my own fault. As far as off axis frequency response of polks it isnt the greatest due to the MTM designs. as far as diffraction goes they are built to minimize it both with the grills and faceplate. and tls i have never ever heard a polk speaker that i can seperate the drivers sounds. the towers i have are a cascade array x-over and have a suprisingly great "blending" of the drivers. the only off axis issues ive noticed is vertically, once agai due to the mtm design. once i corrected my issue i was able to get a frighteningly convincing phantom. if it wast for the fact i know its in stereo it appears the sound is emminating from the center. the phantom does cover a good couple of feet before it begins to diminish. ive never heard of a speaker that can phantom correctly when you're sitting all the way to the left or right of them and no speaker could due to the psychoacoustic part of it. the brain picks up on the delay ad phase information.
 
J

jostenmeat

Audioholic Spartan
so ive been messing with my mains angling them in to get a perfectly balanced "phantom" image of a center with two channel sources. one of the things i realized is they have to be way angled in, and if you move your position even a few centimeters the phantom vanishes, i also realized this causes any seat that isnt in the sweet spot to sound worse then if they were only mildly toed in (not enough to phantom). so whats the point? anyone else noticed this?
To be perfectly onaxis to the speaker, the amount of angle necessary is obviously dependent on the distance between the speakers, and the distance between the listener and speakers. This angle value doesn't exist in a vacuum by itself, just stating the obvious.

So, toe in allows you to be onaxis as possible to speakers, where they will all be more accurate when onaxis. As stated previously, some speakers still sound very good when offaxis, but those are the rarity, and even with these rarer speakers, I'm sure they still perform better if only on paper when onaxis.

Lastly, I don't necessarily agree with the OP's second sentence, because when the speakers have healthy toe in, I find there might be a better balance between the speakers. With zero toe in, this off axis listener might be perfecty on axis to one speaker, and extremely off axis to the other. With healthy toe in, the amount of angle may be perfect for neither, but at least only offaxis by modest angles to each.
 
Y

yepimonfire

Audioholic Samurai
To be perfectly onaxis to the speaker, the amount of angle necessary is obviously dependent on the distance between the speakers, and the distance between the listener and speakers. This angle value doesn't exist in a vacuum by itself, just stating the obvious.

So, toe in allows you to be onaxis as possible to speakers, where they will all be more accurate when onaxis. As stated previously, some speakers still sound very good when offaxis, but those are the rarity, and even with these rarer speakers, I'm sure they still perform better if only on paper when onaxis.

Lastly, I don't necessarily agree with the OP's second sentence, because when the speakers have healthy toe in, I find there might be a better balance between the speakers. With zero toe in, this off axis listener might be perfecty on axis to one speaker, and extremely off axis to the other. With healthy toe in, the amount of angle may be perfect for neither, but at least only offaxis by modest angles to each.
Well my second sentence makes no sense because i had the level gain on the right speaker 3 dB higher accidentally and i had the left speaker at a narrower angle then the right. unfortunately high frequecies are naturally more directional then low ones so speakers that have wide off axis response in the higher frequencies just aren't realistic. one way to help the off axis response from experience is to avoid room treatments so the sound is dispersed more evenly from reflections. but then you don't have perfect on axis imaging due to early reflections. its all about trade offs imo. perfection on all levels in normal house rooms just isnt going to happen and its not realistic to expect it.
 
D

dem beats

Senior Audioholic
Room treatments will help with off axis response in any given room.

Also you are correct in that perhaps high hz energy can be more "directional" but it's pretty easy to fix in any speaker configuration. Almost every single speaker configuration I know of uses a horn(sometimes called wave guide) to help off axis. That is pretty realistic.
 
Pyrrho

Pyrrho

Audioholic Ninja
I find it interesting reading how much importance some people attribute to off-axis performance. Among the speakers I own, the ones that subjectively seem the most consistent on- and off-axis are among my worst sounding speakers. (The designers intended to have great off-axis performance, and thought that that was important in good speaker design. At least subjectively, they succeeded in achieving far off-axis sound that is very much like on-axis sound.)

The off-axis performance matters if one is off-axis, or if one is hearing reflections of the off-axis sound. But if one sits down with an optimally set up system, how the off-axis sound compares with on-axis can be totally unimportant.

As has been said many times by many different people, actual speakers are about compromise, and it is all a question of what is sacrificed for what other quality that is desired in the speaker.
 
D

dem beats

Senior Audioholic
In almost every case I agree with you Pyrrho, when you talk about the trade off between off axis, and on performance.

This is really apparent in my ML's. However, even off axis they are detailed and clear, I still think they sound great off axis. They definately don't have that magic that happens when on axis with electrostats though.


I do beleive though that in a really well thought out room that you can expand the off axis response to a much much larger larger area. If you include completely customised speaker instalations then you can get what I would call great off axis performance without sacrificing much on axis performance.

I got the chance to once be in a mildly treated room, with an all electrostat surround system. The off axis on that was just amazing. Nothing like my untreated room. In surround or stereo it was just as impressive. They just took the time to hash out the issues, and didn't have a wife to worry about weird objects placed all over a room.

I'm not saying throwing a lot of cash at quality equipment, or having a million room treatments(in fact less is usually more) will fix every issue. But quality and some well designed treatment will go a LONG way.
 
Pyrrho

Pyrrho

Audioholic Ninja
...

This is really apparent in my ML's. However, even off axis they are detailed and clear, I still think they sound great off axis. They definately don't have that magic that happens when on axis with electrostats though.

...

That makes me think of my Apogee Stage speakers. Listening far from the optimal position, they are still incredibly clear, but there is a loss of "magic" when the listener is not optimally positioned. Still, from another room, they sound more like musicians are really in the other room than with the vast majority of speakers.

I would not trade any of their "magic" for better off-axis performance.* When I play some old jazz, it almost sounds like I have resurrected Ella Fitzgerald from the dead and she is in my living room.

____________________
*However, what is going on with them is rather strange with regard to being on- or off-axis; see this thread:

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72574

And be sure to read the added part of this post:

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=793988&postcount=6
 
Y

yepimonfire

Audioholic Samurai
I find it interesting reading how much importance some people attribute to off-axis performance. Among the speakers I own, the ones that subjectively seem the most consistent on- and off-axis are among my worst sounding speakers. (The designers intended to have great off-axis performance, and thought that that was important in good speaker design. At least subjectively, they succeeded in achieving far off-axis sound that is very much like on-axis sound.)

The off-axis performance matters if one is off-axis, or if one is hearing reflections of the off-axis sound. But if one sits down with an optimally set up system, how the off-axis sound compares with on-axis can be totally unimportant.

As has been said many times by many different people, actual speakers are about compromise, and it is all a question of what is sacrificed for what other quality that is desired in the speaker.
yeah i know what you mean, the speakers ive owned that had the same off axis performance as on werent good speakers at all. those sony towers i had sounded the same on axis and off axis, same with tv speakers, they sound pretty much the same anywhere in the room you go.
The off-axis performance matters if one is off-axis, or if one is hearing reflections of the off-axis sound. But if one sits down with an optimally set up system, how the off-axis sound compares with on-axis can be totally unimportant.
in reality there is no point in sitting off axis when watching a movie, playing a game, or listening to music. I'm the kind of person who will re-arrange my furniture just so every seat is on axis :D;)
 
j_garcia

j_garcia

Audioholic Jedi
My speakers sound good off axis - they have great performance to about 20 degrees off axis, however the true sweet spot is pretty narrow. This is normal. Toeing in does one other significant thing for you - it moves the first reflection point behind you. If you have a small room though, this may not be as big of a benefit. If you sit right up against the wall then this benefit is lost.
 
Last edited:
D

dem beats

Senior Audioholic
That makes me think of ...lots of good info... be sure to read the added part of this post:

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=793988&postcount=6
I have heard the magnepan 20's, and those create the most "magic" I have heard in any speaker in my life. The image they create along with the way the sound enveloped me and the room was just silly. They are impressive to see, and more to hear.

Those were toed in when I heard them. I think that if I was farther away it would have even sounded better, as I was only 7 feet away from them. I also know exactly what you're talking about with that triangle with you and the speakers.

Electrostats are goofey that's for sure.

My logans definately benefit from toe in where as the Energy's do not, nearly as much but it does help a little.
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
The off-axis performance matters if one is off-axis, or if one is hearing reflections of the off-axis sound. But if one sits down with an optimally set up system, how the off-axis sound compares with on-axis can be totally unimportant.
Based on Floyd Tool's research, even 60° off-axis is important to the SQ. I think that is where much of the importance is coming from. This doesn't directly cite F.T., but it does reflect the approach Harman Labs decided to take based on that research:

Voecks: You recall that the Salon1 required a rear tweeter for it to deliver a uniform power response in the room. We were able to eliminate the rear tweeter in the Salon2 because of the increased power output of the new beryllium front tweeter, coupled with benefits from its new waveguide design and baffle shape, to deliver the same response on axis and 60° off axis. Why is that important? The 60–70° off-axis response constitutes the first reflection from sidewalls, which is demonstrably audible and psychoacoustically important.
http://www.stereophile.com/interviews/608kev/
 
T

Theresa

Junior Audioholic
Actually i fixed this issue, was my own fault. As far as off axis frequency response of polks it isnt the greatest due to the MTM designs.
MTM designs tend to have very good dispersion horizontally and poor vertically (seated vs. standing). It is partially determined by the spacing of the drivers on the baffle. It is not necessarily a bad thing.
I think a line source would provide very good horizontal dispersion horizontally but none at all horizontally if you are above or below the line.
 
J

jostenmeat

Audioholic Spartan
MTM designs tend to have very good dispersion horizontally and poor vertically (seated vs. standing). It is partially determined by the spacing of the drivers on the baffle. It is not necessarily a bad thing.
I think a line source would provide very good horizontal dispersion horizontally but none at all horizontally if you are above or below the line.
I think to be clear, we need to know which of his speakers are MTM, whether that be vertically arrayed mains, or horizontally arrayed center.

Vertically arrayed MTM reduces floor and ceiling bounce (a good thing). The issue with horiz MTM is that it flips the desired properties of the vertical MTM 90 degrees, for poorer horiz dispersion, and increased floor and ceiling bounce.
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Audioholic Jedi
I find it interesting reading how much importance some people attribute to off-axis performance. Among the speakers I own, the ones that subjectively seem the most consistent on- and off-axis are among my worst sounding speakers. (The designers intended to have great off-axis performance, and thought that that was important in good speaker design. At least subjectively, they succeeded in achieving far off-axis sound that is very much like on-axis sound.)

The off-axis performance matters if one is off-axis, or if one is hearing reflections of the off-axis sound. But if one sits down with an optimally set up system, how the off-axis sound compares with on-axis can be totally unimportant.

As has been said many times by many different people, actual speakers are about compromise, and it is all a question of what is sacrificed for what other quality that is desired in the speaker.
Off axis performance is important because of the reverberant field. If the off axis response is a mess, the reflected sound is a mess, and you have a speaker fussy about the room, and end up using room treatments, where you would not have to with a better speaker.

In your case, I bet it was a lousy speaker. You can and often do end up with lousy on and off axis performance.

A speaker overly fussy about rooms and placement has problems.
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top