Beyond Linearity: Why Speaker Dispersion Matters Far More Than People Expect

[anphex]

AI summary for everyone, especially for new readers. Thought this might be helpful.

Core Topic: The thread explores the subjective importance of speaker dispersion characteristics (wide vs. narrow, smooth vs. uneven) compared to pure on-axis linearity, particularly concerning perceived soundstage, immersion, and overall preference in typical listening rooms. The OP (anphex) kicked it off by contrasting his experience with narrower dispersion KEF Reference speakers (precise, focused, less immersive in his small room) versus wider dispersion Nubert speakers (more room-filling, immersive, but less linear/detailed).

1. What good points were made (scientific, interesting, or novel)?

• Dispersion Significantly Impacts Perception: This is the central theme. Many users agree that how a speaker radiates sound off-axis profoundly affects the listening experience, influencing soundstage width, depth, immersion, and perceived naturalness (anphex, ahofer, Matias, SSS, MattHooper, Duke, Mort).
• Smoothness vs. Width: There's a recurring point, often referencing Floyd Toole's research, that smooth and even off-axis dispersion is generally preferred, regardless of whether it's wide or narrow. Uneven dispersion (peaks/dips off-axis) is considered detrimental (Keith_W citing Evans et al., ahofer, rdenney, Duke).
• Linearity's Diminishing Returns: Several users echoed the OP's sentiment that chasing perfect on-axis linearity, like chasing SINAD in electronics, has diminishing returns past a certain point, and dispersion becomes a more critical factor for in-room sound quality (anphex, Multicore, Yasuo).
• Room Interaction is Key: Huge emphasis was placed on how dispersion interacts with the listening room. Room size, acoustics (reflections, decay times), treatments, and speaker placement/toe-in heavily influence the outcome and listener preference (anphex, thewas, EERecordist, chervokas, Pareto Pragmatic, tmuikku, Matias, rdenney, Duke). Asymmetry in rooms can be problematic, especially for wide dispersion (Matias).
• The Role of Reflections (Highly Debated):
  • Some argue reflections (especially early lateral ones from wide dispersion) enhance naturalness, spaciousness, and immersion (anphex, hashhar, SSS, MattHooper).
  • Others argue reflections detract, blurring imaging, masking recording details, and creating an artificial sound not present in the source (chervokas, LTig, Old_School_Brad, Weeb Labs, audiofooled). They prefer controlled dispersion and/or room treatment to minimize reflections and hear the recording more directly.
  • The timing (Initial Time Delay Gap - ITDG) and spectral content of reflections were highlighted as crucial factors (Duke, LIΟN, rdenney). Duke proposed that minimizing spectral differences between direct and reflected sound might be beneficial, though this is less explored than the conventional idea of a downward-sloping reflection spectrum.
• Recording Dependency ("You are there" vs. "They are here"): A critical point made repeatedly is that the nature of the recording itself is paramount. Recordings with natural ambiance might benefit from minimal room interaction (narrow dispersion/treatment), while multi-mono studio recordings might sound better or more "immersive" with some room interaction (wider dispersion) (chervokas, Keith_W, LTig, Sokel, ahofer, MattHooper, Duke, audiofooled).
• Individual Preference Reigns: While research (like Toole's) suggests population tendencies (e.g., preference for smooth, somewhat wider dispersion), numerous contributors stressed that individual preference is highly variable and may not align with the average. Factors include listening habits, music taste, and personal auditory perception (thewas, chervokas, Multicore, Keith_W, Sokel, Old_School_Brad, bmc0, MattHooper, rdenney).
• Perceptual Factors: The influence of sighted bias, expectation bias, and the brain's ability to adapt ("hear through the room") were mentioned as complicating factors in evaluating preferences (levimax, MattHooper). The challenge of distinguishing between listening to the music and listening to the system was also raised (JaMmy).
• Measurement & Experimentation: Users shared in-room measurements (MMM, Impulse) comparing different dispersion types (anphex, RayDunzl), and encouraged active listening experiments to understand personal preferences (tmuikku).

2. What is the current consensus?

There is no consensus on whether wide or narrow dispersion is inherently "better." Strong arguments and preferences exist on both sides.

However, there is broad consensus on several points:

• Dispersion is critically important to the subjective sound quality of speakers in a room, arguably as much or more so than perfect on-axis linearity beyond a certain threshold.
• Smoothness and evenness of the off-axis response are highly desirable characteristics, regardless of the overall dispersion width.
• Listener preference is highly individual and depends heavily on the specific room, the type of music listened to, listening habits, and personal taste.
• Room acoustics and speaker setup drastically affect how any given speaker's dispersion pattern translates to the listening experience.
• The debate often boils down to whether the goal is to minimize room interaction to hear the recording as directly as possible (often favoring narrower/controlled dispersion and/or treatment) or to leverage room interaction for a potentially more immersive or "live" feeling (often favoring wider, smooth dispersion).

The thread serves as a rich discussion highlighting the complexity of speaker-room interaction and the limitations of focusing solely on on-axis frequency response, while acknowledging the deeply personal nature of audio preference beyond objective measurements.