In various monitor and show us your setup threads I have been seeing a lot of MTM configurations being used in ways that, to my understanding, are sub-optimal. In the interest of not 'picking on' or singling anyone out, I figured I'd start a new thread about just this, vs replying when I see it. The 'mistakes' I see are:
1) Laying MTMs flat horizontally
2) Using MTMs as near fields to begin with
2.5) Same as item 2 but the MTM has a side-firing sub and the room is small/narrow (item numbering pun intended)
Now I have never been a fan of MTMs to begin with, and so, despite having been exposed to them, have never owned and used them regularly.... So my reasons for thinking the above are all based on theory vs practise, but I have yet to hear a good defense of any of these items; summary of the reasons against follows.
Joseph D'Appolito (the dude who designed the MTM speaker configuration) is on record as saying that they should never be used horizontally. The reason is that the entire purpose for using 2 midwoofers (correcting the lobing problems of more typical MT designs) is completely defeated when you do this. Also it apparently affects the sweetspot shape/size.
MTMs are not the best option for nearfield use because of their use of 2 midwoofers, spaced so far away from each other (tweeter in between). Each are producing the same frequencies and have 2 different distances and travel paths, including reflection paths, to your ears; this is a recipe for midrange mud and loss of detail affecting the soundstage. Same/similar could be said for any 2.5 way or dual midwoofer speaker (e.g. MMT). Anything more than a straight-up 2 way really.
This difference in travel time is minimised as you move further back from the speakers, so for mid to far field (depending on the speaker and room geometry) MTMs can be great.
Not to single anyone out, but I once even saw Barefoot Micromain27s, one of the models with side firing subs, in a room no more than 8 feet wide, nearly if not right up against the wall, with the mix chair 4-6 feet away from them. This seemed like it was just piling on the potential for issues (despite what appeared to be decent room treatment - though I don't recall specifically if there were any bass traps at the sidewalls/corners those subs were firing at).
So lets discuss - am I overthinking this or are these real issues. As mentionend, I have never used MTMs with enough regularity to have tested these things in real world situations, merely going on the theory and extrapolating from of what I do know typical 2 and 3 way behaviour as well as acoustics/speaker design generally. To all those rocking MTMs in any of the above 3 ways, might I suggest that if you have access to something point source (like Tannoys or Equator or even Mixcubes) you compare them in your room as regards midrange clarity and stereo image just to see ... or if you already have, please chime in. peachh
1) Laying MTMs flat horizontally
2) Using MTMs as near fields to begin with
2.5) Same as item 2 but the MTM has a side-firing sub and the room is small/narrow (item numbering pun intended)
Now I have never been a fan of MTMs to begin with, and so, despite having been exposed to them, have never owned and used them regularly.... So my reasons for thinking the above are all based on theory vs practise, but I have yet to hear a good defense of any of these items; summary of the reasons against follows.
Joseph D'Appolito (the dude who designed the MTM speaker configuration) is on record as saying that they should never be used horizontally. The reason is that the entire purpose for using 2 midwoofers (correcting the lobing problems of more typical MT designs) is completely defeated when you do this. Also it apparently affects the sweetspot shape/size.
MTMs are not the best option for nearfield use because of their use of 2 midwoofers, spaced so far away from each other (tweeter in between). Each are producing the same frequencies and have 2 different distances and travel paths, including reflection paths, to your ears; this is a recipe for midrange mud and loss of detail affecting the soundstage. Same/similar could be said for any 2.5 way or dual midwoofer speaker (e.g. MMT). Anything more than a straight-up 2 way really.
This difference in travel time is minimised as you move further back from the speakers, so for mid to far field (depending on the speaker and room geometry) MTMs can be great.
Not to single anyone out, but I once even saw Barefoot Micromain27s, one of the models with side firing subs, in a room no more than 8 feet wide, nearly if not right up against the wall, with the mix chair 4-6 feet away from them. This seemed like it was just piling on the potential for issues (despite what appeared to be decent room treatment - though I don't recall specifically if there were any bass traps at the sidewalls/corners those subs were firing at).
So lets discuss - am I overthinking this or are these real issues. As mentionend, I have never used MTMs with enough regularity to have tested these things in real world situations, merely going on the theory and extrapolating from of what I do know typical 2 and 3 way behaviour as well as acoustics/speaker design generally. To all those rocking MTMs in any of the above 3 ways, might I suggest that if you have access to something point source (like Tannoys or Equator or even Mixcubes) you compare them in your room as regards midrange clarity and stereo image just to see ... or if you already have, please chime in. peachh
Monitors In room - MTM dos and don'ts
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire