What creates the perception of Image Height

[Venere]

I have always felt that with typical dynamic cone and dome speakers the perceived image height was essentially dependent on the height of the tweeter and midrange, and to a lesser degree by the vertical rake of those drivers. Typically the taller the speaker the higher the image, which i find very appealing since it seems more real and natural. Barring the very rare minimalist one or two mic recording made in a live acoustic space I have to assume there is very little actual height information on most recordings. So, my question is this: With tall line source speakers like Infinity/Genesis IRSs, Apogees, Maggies etc where you have a nearly floor to ceiling tweeter/midrange, what determined the image height? Is it basically just the midpoint of the primary drivers just like in a dynamic design, or do they somehow convey more of the recorded acoustic? Is it the lack of floor and ceiling reflections that allows them to excel in this area? Curious what your thoughts are.

[jfrech]

About 2 years ago I switched from Wilson Maxx 3's to Rockport Altairs. I swear I was nervous on the image height issue...the tweeter in the Rockport's being ~8 inches lower and the the top midrange on the Maxx 3 being nearly 2 feet higher ...

So I do think speaker height contributes here...it's not the sole factor...in some records the Rockports have a better sense of height. Go figure. I have a friend that had Dali Megelines with nearly 7 ft of ribbon tweeter and mid/woofer array's and now
Focals Utopias with discrete cone driver...and I think it's still dependent on the recording.

A second friend has Rockport Arrakis, and I do think they portray a different perspective and fills in the image higher with more "density"...but I don't think the sense of height is different.

I am guessing the crossover and the reflections along with the recording are more important than the driver config from my experience.

Great thread to post. Curious what others think...

Speakers: Rockport Altair 2
Preamp: Robert Koda K10 Amp: Ayre MX-R
Cables: Transparent Opus MM2 Spkr, Opus Gen 5 Interconnect
Power Shunyata Triton/Typhon/DPC-6, Anaconda Zitron cords (x9), Sigma HC (x1)
Digital dCS Vivaldi DAC, Transport & Clock w/ Transparent Reference XL Digital cables
Phono: Grand Prix Monaco TT, Spiral Groove Centroid, Jan Allaerts MC2 Finish & Lyra Atlas, Nagra VPS/VFS
Racks: Grand Prix Audio Silverstone F1 (x2)

[Douglas]

In my experience it has very little to do with speaker height, but mostly with speaker positioning.

With my speakers in my room I can literally change the height by simply adjusting toe-in. Sharper toe-in tends to drop the height and vice versa, but this is not a hard and fast rule.

A friend had Acoustate 660 speakers. These monsters are about 2.5m high and the image height was low in his system, in fact lower than the height in my system.

I once tested AR REF 110 amp and it had a marked influence on height, creating a huge soundstage in all directions

Pic of the actual Acoustates I am referring to:

http://www.esotericaudio.co.za/images/as2.JPG

[Venere]

Interesting. When I adjust toe in I normally only pay attention to tonal balance and soundstage width/depth. Now I will listen for height info as well and see if I notice a difference. I would have expected the Accoustats to have great image height and would be rather disappointed if they were lower than a dynamic speaker.

[crwilli]

My midbasss \ upper freq panels are large dipoles and I adjust height by tipping them forward ~1.0 cm. Two things happen. The forward sound is more directly aimed at my ear (improving the presence and feeling of seeing deeper into the sound) and the rear sound reflection seems to raise the height as it goes into the upper back wall and reflects. It is yet another adjustment in a seemingly endless series of adjustments that are possible with my room \ speakers.

I should rewrite this somewhat... The change in SS height for me was a result not the goal. My primary goal for tipping the panels forward slightly was to improve the presence and to account for a room that is a few feet too small in all dimensions...

[audioguy3107]

I've thought about this before as well. In my experience, the height of the speaker and volume of the room make the biggest difference. While rake angle, toe in, etc. all contribute to the size and height of the sound, things change remarkably when you place yourself in front of a very large speaker. I really discovered this one year when I was at AXPONA and got to listen to speakers of all shapes and sizes. This was the first time I was really able to listen to some mega speakers. The first thing that comes to mind was the YG Acoustics Anat model. As ya'll know, this speaker is very tall.....they put on Tears in Heaven by Eric Clapton and I couldn't believe the size of the image. Sure, they sounded great, but holy crap they sounded big. You could picture Clapton's head about 3 feet tall and 2 feet wide and the image of his voice was coming at least 7 to 10 feet in the air. I was kind of a weird sensation, not sure if it was wrong, but unusual to me. This past weekend (I'll post a pic in another thread) I got to spend about an hour listening to a pair of Sonus Faber Aidas....again, they sounded very tall....the image height was at least 7 feet of the floor. As soon as I listened to speakers that were in general smaller, quality didn't necessarily decrease, but the image height sure did.

- Buck

[Venere]

That's also been the knock against some of the mega-speakers, that they make everything sound huge, even a single acoustic guitar or voice. I think it would be enjoyable (and maybe realistic) on large scale orchestral music, but maybe not so great on more intimate music. I guess that is one of the many challenged of designing a statement speaker.

[audioguy3107]

Originally Posted by Venere

That's also been the knock against some of the mega-speakers, that they make everything sound huge, even a single acoustic guitar or voice. I think it would be enjoyable (and maybe realistic) on large scale orchestral music, but maybe not so great on more intimate music. I guess that is one of the many challenged of designing a statement speaker.

It's one of the issues that most affects what size room you have IMO. At the same AXPONA show, I heard some relatively large speakers crammed in a small hotel room, and they sounded small and closed in. I've always loved listening to speakers in large rooms where they can really open up and breathe. I seriously considered a pair of Magnepan 20.1s before I got the Avalons, but there was just no way for them to not overpower the room visually as well as acoustically, and I have a pretty good size room. I'm not really sure how I would like an image that is larger than life, I guess I would have to live with it for awhile to see how I enjoyed it over the long term. The Avalons I have are the absolute perfect size for my room which is probably one the reasons they integrate so well with it. They throw a very good size convincing image without being overly huge. It's been said before many times, but if everyone paid as much attention to their listening space as they do the equipment, there would be a lot less upgrading!

- Buck

[Douglas]

spot on Buck

[o0OBillO0o]