Is that how you have your Neumann monitors set up in your studio while in use, positioned in neat straight lines without any toe-in adjustments?
In the manuals, Neumann recommends that their speakers be pointed straight on-axis to the listener, and I think only small adjustment to that would be needed for fine-tuning the high-frequency and transient response.
Don't you have any acoustic treatment other than a rug on the floor? That must be unusual for a music studio.
When I finish a session, I point them straight ahead - just for aesthetics. When in use, I point them at the LP. As far as acoustic treatment, here is some info and photos:
This is my home studio - TES Productions - also known as the Meadowlarklabel. It is not commercial in the sense that over 16 years I have never charged an artist for a production.
My approach is quite different that anyone else I have seen. Instead of consolidating things into one workstation, I like to have separate workstations for different productions/functions. Thus in this room Ihave the three primary workstations.
Ialso have eleven separate workstations for my keyboards - a fewphotos below. Most of my productions now are keyboard based -primarily smooth jazz at this time. But I also do country, pop andsome hip hop.
As far as acoustics go, there is considerable attention to this, which I consider critical. The most important thing is the monitors and theirsetup. As you see, all of my primary monitors are Neumann (KH310's,KH150's, KH750, KH120A's and KH120 II's. These are all used in verynearfield mode - 1 to 1.2 meters from the listening position.
They are positioned from the front walls to avoid detrimental reflections. Since these are all in very nearfield use, the secondary reflections are relatively small compared to the direct sound.
There is some false information on the internet saying that there should beno room reflections. This is incorrect. A complete dead room would sound quite - dead. I room must have some reflections to allow the source music to be natural.
Next, all of the monitors are within one foot of the front wall. Since sound (in air) moves at the speed of one foot per ms. So the difference in timing between the direct sound and reflected sound is2 ms. As you know, it has been shown that one cannot distinguish two signals are less than 6 ms.
On the other hand, the reflections from the ceiling has a difference of about 110 ms, which is perceived an interference and not good. However the dispersion patters of these Neumann monitors are narrow. The loudness of the ceiling reflections are far less than the direct sound (very nearfield advantage).
Theside wall reflections are mostly greater than 20 ms. Reflections ofthis timing are perceived as echoes/reverb, not as interference. Andas mentioned above, to some significant degree this is desirable.
The back wall of the room is 50 feet away, with lots of furniture and objects that disperse the sound.
There are also heavy curtains behind each of the workstations and bas straps in the rear corners.
Bass is, as usual, the most difficult issue. The size of the room, which had opening of 8 and 9 feet are generally not a problem. One reason is that in every one of my productions, I cut off the frequencies below 45 Hz.
I have also attached some photos of the room. You can see that the large openings are there to dissipate reflected waves.
I also use the MA1 Neumann system, which makes adjustments for room acoustics.
Bu tI will repeat myself again - using very nearfield monitors completely changes the game.
I appreciate your inquiry.
