Hello all,
It's been quite some time since I've contributed here but thought I'd post what I have recently done and the complete and amazing difference it has made for those chasing that ultimate sound using speakers. Briefly, I've had 10 channels of audio for a long time. The past 4 - 5 years I've been routing 6 of those channels in stereo pairs to the front and the other 4 off to the sides and behind me. Quite some time back I posted a number of times about different speaker layouts and routing arrangements I had tried with some very interesting and good results. Without getting into a lot of detail just yet (stay tuned), the main issue for the 6 channels up front is I was using Polk Audio T15's which are smaller bookshelf size speakers with 6" drivers. I like their very clear sound but they don't have enough oomph for the lower frequencies, so after a few years I ditched them in favor of a couple pairs of larger tower speakers along with one remaining pair of the smaller T15's which then created a not so good mix and match of speakers, all which do not sound the same. It worked OK but for the next few years I tried endless arrangements of speaker layouts with the towers, I tried different spacing, laid the speakers on their sides, etc., etc., but nothing sounded as good as I thought it should.
A number of years back while using the 6 Polk speakers up front I posted about 2 things I found that made a rather amazing difference. The first thing I found was if you stacked the speakers on top of each other rather than placing them side by side and spread out from right to left in front of you that this stacking idea alone made a rather amazing difference in realism. The next thing I found was if you send 'like' sounding ranks to each pair of speakers this made things even better. These 2 things added much clarity and realism to the sound. So, what I ended up with was 3 speakers stacked on top of each other on the left back corner off the console and the other 3 in the same arrangement on the right back side corner off the console. Very important, the lowest speaker of each stack on each side need to be at about head height when seated at the console and go up from there! I was then at the time using 2 more speakers in stereo to the rear for surround sets.
So, what happened? Well, again the only issue was the smaller speakers didn't provide the low end I was looking for and thinking I was going to be smart I went with the tower speakers up front which of course you really can't stack on top of each other so I had to go with a side by side arrangement. This solved the low end issue but I lost a ton of clarity and realism and was not nearly as convincing no matter what spacing or arranging along with rank routing I tried, but I put up with it for quite some time and called it good enough.
A few weeks ago it dawned on me, I've had for quite some time a smaller Yamaha sub I picked up with an 8" driver that's actually pretty respectable for what it is, but it had been sitting collecting dust. So, the question was, what if I go back to the 3 stacks of Polks on each side but this time add that smaller sub and put it up front as well and in between the 2 stacks and see what happens? My thinking was this would solve the lack of low end up front issue and I get back the clarity and realism I had with the stacking arrangement.
We're not done quite yet. Going back a few years when I still had the towers in place up front there were some posts, one by me where we were tinkering with adding a pair of speakers off to each side. Mine ended up near the ceiling (about 8' off the floor) but pretty much off my right and left shoulders, one closer, one further away, the rear speakers were still in place for surround and I had 1 large sub with a 15" driver to the rear as well. I thought at the time this adding of side speakers would open things up add to the towers and overall realism. The side speakers were on a mix down of all. Well, it helped but not as good as I had anticipated and I could never get a decent balance of the sound and it didn't sound natural.
So, back to a few weeks ago. After my revelation of what to try a 2 hour project ensued. Down came the towers up front, up went the 2 stacks of 3 speakers on each side, in went the small sub in between the stacks and the small side speakers got moved up to the ceiling directly above me, one on each side of my shoulders, so not much spacing between them, maybe 2-1/2' total. Rear speakers still in place for surround, front sub between the stacks on mixdown, overhead speakers on mixdown, rear sub dedicated to 8' and lower pipes.
As soon as the first organ (Armley Schulze) loaded I was like WOW! A bit of tinkering with levels to each pair and I was pretty much blown away by the new sound! I have never heard the Armley as it sounds now and the Buckeburge Janke by SP was good but is now absolutely amazing, same goes for St. Max.
A few key things here. First, if you can stack your front speakers as I describe I'd recommend at least 4 channels if not 6 up front to help with splitting up the rank routing as best you can. Lowest speaker in the stack on each side at head height off the back corners of the console. Route like sounding ranks (or at least as close to like sounding as you can) to each pair. Forget about cycling and split C stuff and all of that, just route the ranks as best you can in like sounding families to each pair up front, reeds and horns don't go with flute sounding stops, etc. If you really want to add some extra realism add the 2 overhead speakers on mixdown of all. If like me you don't have speakers up front that can reliably produce the lower frequencies then add a small sub, also on mixdown of all and place it up front in between the stacks. As far as the second sub, place it where you like, I recommend sending all 8' and lower to it and have one pair of rear speakers for surround. Now, there are these new 6 and 8 channel sets which opens up even more possibilities but I'm not there yet and only have surround sets but I am quite happy with what I now have and the odds of any further changes will likely be slim to none.
If anyone tries this, let us know the results.
Have fun!
Marc
Learning from the past with my speaker arragement
-
Jan Loosman
- Member
- Posts: 389
- Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 4:33 pm
Re: Learning from the past with my speaker arragement
Hello Marc
Thanks for this interesting topic!
Some time ago you contributed to the topic why no vertical channels in samplesets.
We had a nice discussion.
I think just as me you are a sort off Hauptwerk audiophile and a good hauptwerk setup deserves a good audio setup!! I see al lot off similarities in our goal to get the best sound.
I also have small front speakers 8x and 2 bigger ones, two side and two rear and one small set also in front just left and right off the main spreakers for the front wet perspective and two rel q200 subs L R just below the front speakers.
also a combined seperate sub a Jamo for the side and rear speakers.
As you mentioned a good sub ads a lot to the sound.
Your experience with the side /height speakers let me think that it would indeed benefit to bring them closer together. I also consider as you said to route corresponding stops to the same speakers and not use cycling but i my case i will keep using c split because this avoids using crossovers in my setup which i don’t have.
As far as the routing i mainly use my setup to accomodate 8 channel sets and i seperated the perspectives to have their own speaker set.
So i use rears for the rear perspective the sides for the most distant front perspective and close to the main (dry) speakers another speaker set for the closer wet perspective.
I think that perspectives contain a lot off spatial information that is best be heared when you send them through dedicated speakers for each perpective.
Have you also considered using roomcorrection software?
This can make a marked improvement to the sound.
Regards Jan
Thanks for this interesting topic!
Some time ago you contributed to the topic why no vertical channels in samplesets.
We had a nice discussion.
I think just as me you are a sort off Hauptwerk audiophile and a good hauptwerk setup deserves a good audio setup!! I see al lot off similarities in our goal to get the best sound.
I also have small front speakers 8x and 2 bigger ones, two side and two rear and one small set also in front just left and right off the main spreakers for the front wet perspective and two rel q200 subs L R just below the front speakers.
also a combined seperate sub a Jamo for the side and rear speakers.
As you mentioned a good sub ads a lot to the sound.
Your experience with the side /height speakers let me think that it would indeed benefit to bring them closer together. I also consider as you said to route corresponding stops to the same speakers and not use cycling but i my case i will keep using c split because this avoids using crossovers in my setup which i don’t have.
As far as the routing i mainly use my setup to accomodate 8 channel sets and i seperated the perspectives to have their own speaker set.
So i use rears for the rear perspective the sides for the most distant front perspective and close to the main (dry) speakers another speaker set for the closer wet perspective.
I think that perspectives contain a lot off spatial information that is best be heared when you send them through dedicated speakers for each perpective.
Have you also considered using roomcorrection software?
This can make a marked improvement to the sound.
Regards Jan
Re: Learning from the past with my speaker arragement
Hello Jan,
Good to hear from you and I hope you had a good Christmas and a happy new year to you!
What got this all started again was a recent visit to our mother church here which is the Cathedral of St. Paul in St. Paul, MN. Here's a link to give you an idea of this magnificent church and the acoustics it produces.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathedral ... Minnesota)
We were sitting in the pews about a third of the way back from the altar as the organ played before Mass and I said to myself (like I have in the past), man I gotta figure out how to produce this sound scape at home! The sound of the organ(s) at the Cathedral just pours down on you from above with the original smaller Skinner organ behind the altar up front, and the much larger and recently renovated organ up in the choir loft at the back of the church. With both organs coupled and playing at the same time it's somewhat hard to say exactly where the sound is coming from, it just seems to surround you.
So, a bit of head scratching ensued and I ended up going back in large part to what I originally had but with some new additions. The change back to the stacked speakers with the addition of the smaller sub up front really made the first big difference. The second and big surprise was moving the 'center' speakers from my left and right sides to directly over me as again I was recalling that sound coming from above and if you think about it the very large cathedrals with high ceilings have a lot of space up there and are of a material that reflects the sound. The difference between the center speakers being off to your side to directly above made a huge improvement in the overall sound and with careful mixing the sound is very convincing now.
Add in the sending of 'like' sounding ranks to the front speakers along with stacking the front speakers and it all comes together nicely. Most from what I am reading are using smaller monitors and so on so the stacking thing should be easy to do for most. As I mention, if you have at least 6 channels up front this makes the grouping of like sounding ranks much easier. For the up front speakers I do 4' and lower flute sounding for channels 1-2, reeds, horns, clarinets, oboes, etc., for channels 3-4, and anything 2' and higher for channels 5-6. Add in an extra pair of speakers up front (so 8 channels up front) and you can get even more creative, maybe do all 2' and 4' flute sounding to one of the pairs? In my setup front sub is on mixdown of all, rear sub is tied in with channels 1-2 so is 4' and lower, speakers above also mixdown of all and then I have the rear speakers for surround.
I hope there's those who have also been chasing this sound thing like myself that will try or are able to implement these ideas to see how it works for them! Let us know, I'd be curious to hear a few results!
Marc
Good to hear from you and I hope you had a good Christmas and a happy new year to you!
What got this all started again was a recent visit to our mother church here which is the Cathedral of St. Paul in St. Paul, MN. Here's a link to give you an idea of this magnificent church and the acoustics it produces.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathedral ... Minnesota)
We were sitting in the pews about a third of the way back from the altar as the organ played before Mass and I said to myself (like I have in the past), man I gotta figure out how to produce this sound scape at home! The sound of the organ(s) at the Cathedral just pours down on you from above with the original smaller Skinner organ behind the altar up front, and the much larger and recently renovated organ up in the choir loft at the back of the church. With both organs coupled and playing at the same time it's somewhat hard to say exactly where the sound is coming from, it just seems to surround you.
So, a bit of head scratching ensued and I ended up going back in large part to what I originally had but with some new additions. The change back to the stacked speakers with the addition of the smaller sub up front really made the first big difference. The second and big surprise was moving the 'center' speakers from my left and right sides to directly over me as again I was recalling that sound coming from above and if you think about it the very large cathedrals with high ceilings have a lot of space up there and are of a material that reflects the sound. The difference between the center speakers being off to your side to directly above made a huge improvement in the overall sound and with careful mixing the sound is very convincing now.
Add in the sending of 'like' sounding ranks to the front speakers along with stacking the front speakers and it all comes together nicely. Most from what I am reading are using smaller monitors and so on so the stacking thing should be easy to do for most. As I mention, if you have at least 6 channels up front this makes the grouping of like sounding ranks much easier. For the up front speakers I do 4' and lower flute sounding for channels 1-2, reeds, horns, clarinets, oboes, etc., for channels 3-4, and anything 2' and higher for channels 5-6. Add in an extra pair of speakers up front (so 8 channels up front) and you can get even more creative, maybe do all 2' and 4' flute sounding to one of the pairs? In my setup front sub is on mixdown of all, rear sub is tied in with channels 1-2 so is 4' and lower, speakers above also mixdown of all and then I have the rear speakers for surround.
I hope there's those who have also been chasing this sound thing like myself that will try or are able to implement these ideas to see how it works for them! Let us know, I'd be curious to hear a few results!
Marc
-
Jan Loosman
- Member
- Posts: 389
- Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 4:33 pm
Re: Learning from the past with my speaker arragement
Hello Marc
Thx i had a good christmas hollyday, i hope you also had a good hollyday.
What a coincidence you mentioned the cathedral in st Paul.
A few years ago we visited the twin city's because our son had an 1/2 year student exchange from the university off Amsterdam with the University off Minneapolis.
So we also visited this cathedral but sadly the organ was not playing.
But the building was impressive.
First thing i will try is to change the position off the side speakers.
I will let you know what the results are.
Regards Jan
Thx i had a good christmas hollyday, i hope you also had a good hollyday.
What a coincidence you mentioned the cathedral in st Paul.
A few years ago we visited the twin city's because our son had an 1/2 year student exchange from the university off Amsterdam with the University off Minneapolis.
So we also visited this cathedral but sadly the organ was not playing.
But the building was impressive.
First thing i will try is to change the position off the side speakers.
I will let you know what the results are.
Regards Jan
Re: Learning from the past with my speaker arragement
Thanks, Jan,
Good to hear you at least had the chance to visit the Cathedral of St. Paul, they have many visitors there each year who come just to see it.
I forgot to answer your question about room correction. No, I've looked into it but have not pursued it.
One thing I didn't like about the speakers off on each side is as soon as I turned them up I immediately heard them, no matter the level adjustments they didn't blend in well and instead they kind of took over the front speakers and it didn't sound realistic. With them overhead they're there, you can hear what they add, but they now blend in, the sound is much more realistic and they now add to the overhead and overall sound instead of just noticably sticking out and taking over.
Some tricks you can also try with the overhead speakers since HW now has convolution reverb is try applying it here and there on a few channels if you see fit, the overhead speakers in particular. I've tried it and so far it seems no additional reverb is needed.
Keep us posted on how things work our for you!
Marc
Good to hear you at least had the chance to visit the Cathedral of St. Paul, they have many visitors there each year who come just to see it.
I forgot to answer your question about room correction. No, I've looked into it but have not pursued it.
One thing I didn't like about the speakers off on each side is as soon as I turned them up I immediately heard them, no matter the level adjustments they didn't blend in well and instead they kind of took over the front speakers and it didn't sound realistic. With them overhead they're there, you can hear what they add, but they now blend in, the sound is much more realistic and they now add to the overhead and overall sound instead of just noticably sticking out and taking over.
Some tricks you can also try with the overhead speakers since HW now has convolution reverb is try applying it here and there on a few channels if you see fit, the overhead speakers in particular. I've tried it and so far it seems no additional reverb is needed.
Keep us posted on how things work our for you!
Marc
Re: Learning from the past with my speaker arragement
Hello again all,
Looks like this post has had quite a few views already, but so far no reports of anyone trying any of the suggestions and what the results were.
Regards,
Marc
Looks like this post has had quite a few views already, but so far no reports of anyone trying any of the suggestions and what the results were.
Regards,
Marc
Re: Learning from the past with my speaker arragement
Just a quick update. I've been using the Armley Schulze set for testing the new speaker layout and I've been loading both the Chancel and Nave perspectives all along and routing both to the front speakers, a mixdown of all to the overhead speakers and surround to the rear speakers. I have found loading both the Chancel and Nave together in this new arrangement now creates somewhat of a conflict in the sound, a bit of added harshness or out of phase beating takes place between the Chancel and Nave perspectives and is probably the best way I can describe it. Adjusting the mix between the two one way or the other with the sliders hasn't helped much.
I am now loading the Chancel perspective only, leaving the Nave perspective out and routing Chancel only to the front speakers, sending a mixdown of the chancel to the overhead speakers with a slight amount of reverb using the Hauptwerk impulse responses, and surround to the rear speakers. This made a nice difference keeping the clarity much sharper and it has added to the overall realism. It's now quite difficult sitting at the console to pinpoint exactly where the majority of the sound is coming from, so it's now much like listening in a large acoustic like a cathedral. A bit more of the sound is coming from the front but the sound is most definitely surrounding. I'm quite pleased with the outcome thus far.
More tinkering to come!
Marc
I am now loading the Chancel perspective only, leaving the Nave perspective out and routing Chancel only to the front speakers, sending a mixdown of the chancel to the overhead speakers with a slight amount of reverb using the Hauptwerk impulse responses, and surround to the rear speakers. This made a nice difference keeping the clarity much sharper and it has added to the overall realism. It's now quite difficult sitting at the console to pinpoint exactly where the majority of the sound is coming from, so it's now much like listening in a large acoustic like a cathedral. A bit more of the sound is coming from the front but the sound is most definitely surrounding. I'm quite pleased with the outcome thus far.
More tinkering to come!
Marc
Re: Learning from the past with my speaker arragement
If sustain loops are out of phase between Chancel and Nave, maybe loading only single loops might clear it up, assuming the recordings are synchronized and the cause is different loops being selected on different perspectives for the same rank.
It might also be beating because of different random detuning of the same pipe between perspectives, which can be turned off in organ settings for a test.
I'm curious what you might find out. I don't hear this effect, but I may just be used to it. I send all the Chancel and Nave manual ranks to a front group of 6 speaker pairs, using the "Dynamic: cyclic within group" allocation algorithm for convenience (after I got tired of fiddling with rank offsets).
It might also be beating because of different random detuning of the same pipe between perspectives, which can be turned off in organ settings for a test.
I'm curious what you might find out. I don't hear this effect, but I may just be used to it. I send all the Chancel and Nave manual ranks to a front group of 6 speaker pairs, using the "Dynamic: cyclic within group" allocation algorithm for convenience (after I got tired of fiddling with rank offsets).
Re: Learning from the past with my speaker arragement
Hello Mark,
Up until my recent project / experiment here I've been loading both Chancel and Nave and routing both to 3 pairs of speakers up front with the routing scheme I described earlier and I've pretty much blended both perspectives equally. As described by David, the Chancel perspective is brighter than the Nave perspective, so I used both to come up with a mix I liked and to also tame down a few of the high pitched stops such as the mixture on the great as an example. I started by sending Chancel and Nave to the front speakers and a mixdown of all to the overhead speakers and surround to the rear and it's OK but I still felt there was room for improvement as the sound got pretty mushy in a hurry and overall clarity was impacted negatively and it didn't sound realistic. So I thought I'd try Chancel to the front speakers and Nave to the overhead as they are 2 separate recordings with some space between them thinking that might give the sound a bit more space as well, but this is where the sound got a bit gritty and again muddy. I've found the two perspectives play nice with each other when sent to the same speakers, but once separated and Chancel is sent to the front speakers and Nave is sent to the overhead speakers they don't play nice, and along with the perceived slight beating / harmonic distortion it added it also once again took away from the clarity and sharpness of the sound and again didn't sound good to me.
So, I got to thinking what if I only load Chancel to the front speakers but also send Chancel as a mixdown to the overhead speakers, send surround to the rear speakers as intended and try a bit of reverb to the mixdown of the overhead speakers? This so far has been the best, the sharpness and clarity has returned in a very nice and surrounding perspective, almost like you're sitting in the pews around half way back where the sound just seems to come at you from all angles and in particular also from above. Trying different impulse responses to the overhead mixdown along with adjusting the length of the fade out has added to this new perspective that I've not heard with any of the other arrangements and the sound is now very close to what I've been after. I'm now trying to add a bit of additional 'warmth' to the sound if that makes any sense, it would be almost like a chorus effect of sorts but I'm not sure what I need to do. This 'warmth' is something I hear in the sound at our Cathedral of St. Paul, but is something I've yet to fully produce at home and I'm not sure where to go next, but I'm very close.
It's an elusive sound for sure!
Marc
Up until my recent project / experiment here I've been loading both Chancel and Nave and routing both to 3 pairs of speakers up front with the routing scheme I described earlier and I've pretty much blended both perspectives equally. As described by David, the Chancel perspective is brighter than the Nave perspective, so I used both to come up with a mix I liked and to also tame down a few of the high pitched stops such as the mixture on the great as an example. I started by sending Chancel and Nave to the front speakers and a mixdown of all to the overhead speakers and surround to the rear and it's OK but I still felt there was room for improvement as the sound got pretty mushy in a hurry and overall clarity was impacted negatively and it didn't sound realistic. So I thought I'd try Chancel to the front speakers and Nave to the overhead as they are 2 separate recordings with some space between them thinking that might give the sound a bit more space as well, but this is where the sound got a bit gritty and again muddy. I've found the two perspectives play nice with each other when sent to the same speakers, but once separated and Chancel is sent to the front speakers and Nave is sent to the overhead speakers they don't play nice, and along with the perceived slight beating / harmonic distortion it added it also once again took away from the clarity and sharpness of the sound and again didn't sound good to me.
So, I got to thinking what if I only load Chancel to the front speakers but also send Chancel as a mixdown to the overhead speakers, send surround to the rear speakers as intended and try a bit of reverb to the mixdown of the overhead speakers? This so far has been the best, the sharpness and clarity has returned in a very nice and surrounding perspective, almost like you're sitting in the pews around half way back where the sound just seems to come at you from all angles and in particular also from above. Trying different impulse responses to the overhead mixdown along with adjusting the length of the fade out has added to this new perspective that I've not heard with any of the other arrangements and the sound is now very close to what I've been after. I'm now trying to add a bit of additional 'warmth' to the sound if that makes any sense, it would be almost like a chorus effect of sorts but I'm not sure what I need to do. This 'warmth' is something I hear in the sound at our Cathedral of St. Paul, but is something I've yet to fully produce at home and I'm not sure where to go next, but I'm very close.
It's an elusive sound for sure!
Marc
Re: Learning from the past with my speaker arragement
For Armley, I think it sounds best with my default routing, which has the Chancel and Nave manual ranks on a group of 6 stereo pairs on the wall in front to the sides of the console, on four shelves at two levels spanning 10 ft wide, Chancel and Nave pedal ranks on 2 pairs of heavier floor speakers stacked in front about 12 ft apart, Surround 8' and up ranks on 3 pairs of rear shelf speakers about 10 ft behind me on the right wall, and Surround bass ranks on 1 pair of floor speakers, all mixed down to a sub behind me on the right wall.
There's no left wall and the ceiling is too high, so middle speakers aren't an option, but the front speakers alone give a fairly immersive effect even without rear ranks.
I mix Chancel and Nave equally, although for most organs I'll use more Diffuse/Middle than Direct/Close.
I've tested splitting front speakers into two groups and routing Chancel and Nave separately, but it sounds thinner and full organ seems more brittle that way. Combining the front perspectives seems to give me more warmth and a somewhat diffuse, relatively sourceless sound, which is how I hear real organs in big churches.
I use Dynamic: cyclic within group allocation, which seems to keep IMD down on the 6 pair front group.
There's no left wall and the ceiling is too high, so middle speakers aren't an option, but the front speakers alone give a fairly immersive effect even without rear ranks.
I mix Chancel and Nave equally, although for most organs I'll use more Diffuse/Middle than Direct/Close.
I've tested splitting front speakers into two groups and routing Chancel and Nave separately, but it sounds thinner and full organ seems more brittle that way. Combining the front perspectives seems to give me more warmth and a somewhat diffuse, relatively sourceless sound, which is how I hear real organs in big churches.
I use Dynamic: cyclic within group allocation, which seems to keep IMD down on the 6 pair front group.
Re: Learning from the past with my speaker arragement
Hello Mark,
Yes, when Chancel and Nave are combined to the front speakers it sounds quite good and I too balance them against each other. Once I separated the two between front and overhead speakers is when things went south for me and is how I ended up discovering leaving the Nave out and instead sending Chancel to both the front and overhead speakers and using some reverb for the overhead is how I got me to where I am now.
Here's the best recording at the Cathedral of St. Paul (St. Paul, MN) I was able to find. It sounds good but is still nowhere near what you hear when there in person, but it gives you at least an idea of the sound, the size of the church and it's acoustic. Put on a good pair of headphones to listen to this short video and think add more sound coming from overhead and we're pretty much spot on.
Enjoy!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WM-a2-aQMk4
Marc
Yes, when Chancel and Nave are combined to the front speakers it sounds quite good and I too balance them against each other. Once I separated the two between front and overhead speakers is when things went south for me and is how I ended up discovering leaving the Nave out and instead sending Chancel to both the front and overhead speakers and using some reverb for the overhead is how I got me to where I am now.
Here's the best recording at the Cathedral of St. Paul (St. Paul, MN) I was able to find. It sounds good but is still nowhere near what you hear when there in person, but it gives you at least an idea of the sound, the size of the church and it's acoustic. Put on a good pair of headphones to listen to this short video and think add more sound coming from overhead and we're pretty much spot on.
Enjoy!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WM-a2-aQMk4
Marc