How do you position your monitors and why?

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I get all the math...that's not the question, but AFAIK...the "agreed upon" monitor/mix position setup always indicted an *equilateral* triangle to be used.

So...I don't get how only the apex angle and the two sides from it are important but not the other two angles and the length between the speakers...?

Miro, slow down and read fully and carefully; you're confusing yourself for no good reason.

The apex and two sides are important only in defining any triangle. When you know those values, you don't need to bother specifying the rest, because there's only one waythe rest can be. That's the only point there. Like you yourself say, when you know you have a (for example) 60° angle and two sides of the same length, you don't need to specify the rest of it, because there is only one way the rest of it can be.

It's like saying I need a mannequin that's 6' tall, with legs that are 34" long. You don't need to bother specifying how long the upper half of the body needs to be, because there's only one length that will satisfy those conditions.

But the triangle does not need to be equilateral in order to produce a true stereo signal, because all that really important is that the distance from the listener to the two speakers be equal. Whether the apex angle is 50°, 60°, or even 90°, as long as the distance of each leg of that angle remain equal to each other, the stereo image will remain properly balanced, with no loss or shift of the center of the image (or any other part of it, FTM).

60° is usually agreed upon as more-or-less optimal because it's wide enough to provide a wide enough stereo field to easily perceive the difference between, (just for random example) a 0% pan and a 10% pan. But one can also tell that with a 70° or 75° angle just fine. You get smaller than 60°, and the "resolution" may start getting kind of tight to do that confidently, and OTOH, if you get too large and the exaggeration can get kind of, well, exaggerated. But that doesn't mean one can't mix perfectly well at angles other than 60°. There's nothing sonically or acoustically magical about an exact 60° spread...but it's a good ballpark to specify.

G.

 

[miroslav]

Miro, slow down and read fully and carefully; you're confusing yourself for no good reason.

No...not really...you’re just going off on a tangent about general geometry. All I was talking about was the angles for the triangle used in setting up an optimal monitor/mix position.

There's nothing sonically or acoustically magical about an exact 60° spread...but it's a good ballpark to specify.

OK…you say it’s a good ballpark but not “magical”...though in all comments/articles/discussions I've ever seen up to now and including the stuff Carl Tatz was saying (forget the spread...just the angles he’s talking about)...it's always been about using an *equilateral triangle* for the *optimal* (keyword) monitor/mix position, which forces 60 degrees at each angle.
Sure, you are right...you can set up using other angles and then say..."I can still mix with this setup"...but that's not the question (at least not for me).

Mind you...I'm not just debating this with YOU for the sake of the debate.
My monitor setup is something I spent a lot of time considering and doing using a tape measure, string, and getting the angles right, etc…mainly because 1.) I figured if that’s one of the things I COULD setup *optimally*, then I SHOULD go for optimal (since there would be other stuff I would have to just live with, in my studio environment)…and 2. because I never saw anything BUT equilateral triangles recommended for the *optimum* (keyword) mix position setup (we are talking about a 2-speaker stereo setup), that’s what I went with.
But I’m interested in other options/views. As I said, the monitor setup is something I CAN adjust…though even your own Feng Shui link shows/says to use an equilateral triangle in the included diagram….and then here’s a few more:


http://www.sweetwater.com/shop/studio/studio-monitors/buying-guide.php
” The basic rule is to follow the layout of an equilateral triangle, which is a triangle with all three legs the same length.”

http://www.genelec.com/documents/pu...ms - Resolution July August 09 Supplement.pdf


http://www.uaudio.com/webzine/2009/september/basics.html
” For stereo imaging, the ideal monitor setup is for the listening position and monitor placements to create three points of an equilateral triangle with the monitors turned in to aim toward the ears at approximately a 30-degree angle to the center line.”

I think this last one is the best, since the diagram clarifies perfectly what Carl Tatz was actually saying (at least about the correct angles if not the speaker spread). If you look at the layout…it uses the equilateral triangle with 60 degree angles and shows the speakers toed–in 30 degrees…exactly what Carl Tatz was saying. The point he was making about the sides being 67.5” long…well, like you, I find somewhat debatable…but I certainly don’t see how an equilateral triangle with say 3-foot sides is going to provide a good stereo image, as it will be rather mono-ish…while longer than his 67.5” sides will certainly cause the image to crap out totally.
Of course…this is about typical studio monitoring…not PA systems or theoretical mile-long equilateral triangles with massive amps to pump the sound out!

Yes…there is some “leeway” with all this, and sometimes a particular room forces one to go a little off-optimal, and I agree, it’s not going to be the end of the world. But I think you would agree that at least knowing/having a so-called “optimal” setup/starting point allows us to know how much leeway we have.
I mean…I wouldn’t agree that ANY setup is OK, and then you're forced to just learn to work with it.

Anyway…I’m going to once more take a look at my monitors and see how close I am to the optimal equilateral triangle/60 degree angles with the 30 degree toe-in. AFA the height and room distances, etc…I already have that as best as I can for my space.

 

[grimtraveller]

close enough for R&R!

Yeah ! That's what Nazareth {great band, incidentally} said.

 

[miroslav]

So you are a Nazareth fan.


I liked a lot of their stuff...they have that AC/DC style and were actually a pre-AC/DC band. I think AC/DC picked up on a lot of the Nazareth sound.
Their album RAZAMANAZ was a favorite of mine!

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

you’re just going off on a tangent about general geometry. All I was talking about was the angles for the triangle used in setting up an optimal monitor/mix position.

No, it's not a tangent, it is completely relevant. You just - still - don't get the point.

There is one fact. There is no such thing as an exact optimal degree of spread, not even within a few degrees. There is NOTHING magical about the idea of the equilateral triangle, it's just another one of those over-simplistic ideas that the great unwashed have glommed on to like so many of those simplistic ideas (didn't we just have this conversation in another thread? ), and has become accepted truth based simply upon the number of people who have parrotted it as fact without really thinking about it themselves.

There's only two special things about an equilateral triangle in this topic; it's easy to remember, and it *sounds* like a magical idea to those that don't have more than two brain cells to rub together.

And sure, there's nothing wrong with setting up that way. Just don't get the idea like that idiot who's article started off this whole moronic deal that the stars align at 60° and anything other than that brings on the anti-Christ. That's poppycock.

And what sticks in my throat is that you already knew that and know that. I know enough about what you do know and jut how smart you really are (which is pretty smart) to know that this is all a waste of time because I'm not telling you anything you haven't already figured out for yourself.

And yeah, my own article recommends the equilateral triangle too. Because going through all this bullshit would have made too long of an article, and because an equilateral triangle is an easy template to remember, and because it does work OK. But anybody who can actually think about it for themselves is smart enough to figure out that it's a guideline and not an exact specification.

Just like the acoustic treatment I diagram is representative, but not always an exact necessity. The number of studios that I have worked in that have that exact selection and exact placement of acoustic treatment I could count on one hand that had all five fingers blow off. Those are sample guidelines only. As is the equilateral triangle.

'Nuff said on the subject.

G.

 

[miroslav]

And yeah, my own article recommends the equilateral triangle too. Because going through all this bullshit would have made too long of an article, and because an equilateral triangle is an easy template to remember, and because it does work OK.

Mmmmm....OK.

'Nuff said on the subject.

 

[grimtraveller]

So you are a Nazareth fan.
I liked a lot of their stuff...they have that AC/DC style and were actually a pre-AC/DC band. I think AC/DC picked up on a lot of the Nazareth sound.
Their album RAZAMANAZ was a favorite of mine!

Yeah, I love Nazareth, along with bands like the Pretty Things and Wishbone Ash, criminally underrated. I dig AC/DC too {well, everything up to 'For those about to rock....'} but I never thought of them as similar, even though they were both heavy rock bands. The Nazareth LP that for me is their classic contribution to 20th century music is "Rampant". I borrowed it off a mate 30 years ago {it was his brother's} and never gave it back. The brother gave it to me in the end as he had eyes for my sister. I still have "Rampant" !


As for monitors, I used to use my stereo speakers and I had them fixed to the wall, high up, about 7 or so feet apart. I think I read something like that in a catalogue but it always seemed to me to be logical to be in the centre of the two speakers in a triangular fashion. Having absorbed much of what I've read here over the last year, when I got 'monitors' I bought stands with them and made sure they're not against or close to walls, roughly ear height. I'm not in an equilateral triangle but it's close enough (even for rock and roll !). As for why, I don't really know. I guess that I'm experimenting with what I've read.

 

[kcearl]

I position my speakers facing the wall, I hate my music

 

[grimtraveller]

I position my speakers facing the wall, I hate my music

So do your neighbours !

 

[moresound]

Right now my speakers are dangling out the window!At full volume!
Police should be here in no time flat.

 

[miroslav]

... and Wishbone Ash, criminally underrated.

"There's The Rub"

I think I still have that album in LP vinyl. I can remember the cover...a picture of a guy, just the lower torso...wearing white or yellow pants and I think a yellow sweater...holding something that looks like a red ball...and he has a red smudge on his pant leg...hence the name "There's The Rub".

 

[kcearl]

thats a cricket ball...and they rub it on their trousers before bowling


damn dull sport

 

[miroslav]

Hmmm...never knew what that was...thanks!

 

[grimtraveller]

More totally off topic non essential info that may help someone, somewhere, someday..

"There's The Rub"

I think I still have that album in LP vinyl. I can remember the cover...a picture of a guy, just the lower torso...wearing white or yellow pants and I think a yellow sweater...holding something that looks like a red ball...and he has a red smudge on his pant leg...hence the name "There's The Rub".

thats a cricket ball...and they rub it on their trousers before bowling

damn dull sport

Nothing like a quick rub with the world watching.....

'There's the rub' was the first Ash album that they did with the new guitarist Laurie Wisefield, after Ted Turner had left the band. He left the music biz, bought a donkey {called Wishbone ! You know, wishbone Ass....} and went to explore Peru ! That album had heavy input from Bill Szymzyck and he tried to get Joe Walsh into the band but they were having none of it so he palmed him off on the Eagles instead. The bass player, Martin Turner, says that Szymzyck paid alot of attention to the way Wisefield and Andy Powell constructed their solos and that all showed itself in the "Hotel California" album which was done with the same team in the same studio.
Personally, it's Ash's first three albums that are their pinnacle for me, culminating in "Argus". It's funny, they were always criticized for being vocally weak, not having a commanding personality filled lead vocalist, but I think their English styled singing is unmatched to this day on those three LPs.

 

[d.bop]

I've always wondered...

When people say to position your monitors at least 1.5-2 feet from the front wall, do they mean the rear of the speaker, the front of the speaker, or the middle?

Also, do the "rules" change regarding front-ported monitors as opposed to rear-ported ones?

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I've always wondered...

When people say to position your monitors at least 1.5-2 feet from the front wall, do they mean the rear of the speaker, the front of the speaker, or the middle?

Also, do the "rules" change regarding front-ported monitors as opposed to rear-ported ones?

All it means is, "pull your speakers away from the wall". Where their port is located doesn't matter; just pull you speakers away from the wall by enough of a distance where most people would agree that it can no longer be considered "against the wall".

You can put the tape measure away. Precision isn't the point. But a good rule of thumb is that if the speaker is closer to to the wall by a distance less than about the size of the speaker itself, you could probably stand to pull it away a bit further.

G.

 

[Ethan Winer]

Geez, I go away for two days and look what happens.

All I can add to the discussion of speaker angles versus imaging is this:

My home studio setup is not typical, and the "sweet spot" or mixing location is standing up about ten feet in front of the speakers. I have a very large room, and I also use my big JBL monitors as "PA" speakers when friends come here to jam. So we might play drum loops loudly through the speakers, and play along through guitar and bass amps, with keyboards also through the big speakers.

With that said, I can stand in the middle of my speakers and walk forward or back, and the imaging remains excellent even as the width / angle changes 2 to 1. The key in this room (and all rooms) is the size of the reflection absorbers on the side walls and ceiling. As long as the listener is within the "Reflection Free Zone" and centered left / right, imaging is fabulous. This is true regardless of the angle or distance to the speakers.

--Ethan