Thank you, it’s a good advice to increase distance between speakers, I could get a sound similar to near field listening position when sitting further back in the room.
1 Like
If you strictly define nearfield as the distance where you mainly hear direct sound from your speakers, the distance could conceivably be quite large, if you have suitable floorstanding speakers that are sufficiently distant from any reflecting surfaces.
Conversely, if you consider the definition of “nearfield” strictly in terms of distance, I suspect that many would define that as 2M, or even less than that.
FWIW, as it’s a pro audio site, 77.5% of respondents indicated that their nearfield monitor distance was between 1M to 2M.
In your specific case, though your listening distance is less than 2M, the distances to reflecting surfaces are quite small (as close as 5"), which for me casts some doubt on whether it is a true nearfield configuration or not.
When you mention power filtering, are you thinking of a power conditionner like an Audioquest Niagara 1200 (for example). And how do you treat digital noise?
Cube Audio Nenuphar.
FYI, my listening space is 6.4L and 5.1M wide and part-treated, especially the front and rear walls. ‘Speaker baffles are ~2.3M from rear wall, and I sit ~2.6M from this (to each baffle) i.e. ~ what many manu’s recommend at ~1.1:1.
This cancels out some nasty reflections which, as others have said, is a good place to be IME. To me, it’s perhaps counter intuitive, but establishing a close-in triangle and keeping away from side-walls as best possible, seems to deliver the best sound, with the soundstage behind the ‘speakers. Obviously, everything is room dependent, and ceiling reflections can be difficult to manage.
Yes power conditioners can help, though with Naim gear this is hit and miss. A dedicated line is your best bet if feasible. Regarding digital noise, there are many products out there that can improve your signal meaningfully (e.g. switches with clean power, ethernet filters, and specialized ethernet cables to name a few).
I’ve just realised that I missed part of this, and that you aren’t talking about nearfield with near-equilateral triangle positioning only small in relation to the room, the normal concept of nearfield, but the closeness relative to speaker spacing, far closer in relative terms.
In the past had found that standing directly between the speakers is interesting, delightfully bass heavy and with volume turned up is very inducing of air guitar playing… (That is with speakers aimed at normal listening position - I haven’t tried rotating them to point at each other.
Then in the past couple of weeks I’ve been using the floor between listening and speaker positions as a good space to sort out some stuff while enjoying music, involving kneeling or sitting on the floor anywhere in that space. I haven’t tried rotating noticed an expansion of soundstage, and when, say, around half the equilateral distance, sound often seems to come from a full 180° angle, sometimes more. It is quite enjoyable.
Nearfield works very well with Quad electrostatics. I use the 2805s
I love near field listening! It’s just not always possible..
Surely nearfield is easier than not, because all you have to do is move everything close, and the room has less effect!
1 Like
It’s not always possible. You may think so , but honestly depending on the room size , furniture and other specifics of the room it might not be feasible.
Historically - in my ignorance - I assumed nearfield listening was inferior, a compromise. Pretty much the domain of recording studios. HiFi stores didn’t utilize it. And I never saw the audio press discuss it. So, for me, for many years, it was a non-starter.
However, a few years ago, the guy over at 6 Moons praised it in his reviews of some stand mounts. And soon after he wrote some dedicated articles on it.
I was intrigued enough I tried it, and immediately liked it. It revealed all the details you get when listening to headphones, while feeling like the musicians are playing right in front of you.
1 Like
Nearfield is great for sound quality, though conventional nearfield (equilateral-ish) can be limiting in terms of number of people able to listen, and reduced coherence with speakers having multiple drive units. At the same time in a large enough room there is something very enjoyable in having big distances (especially when playing loud!), whan the OP’s experience of near listening (say half equilateral triangle listening distance or less) is also an option.
Why then not just get a decent set of ‘phones?
I have never been particularly comfortable with near field listening and have been trying to work out why. At present I have come up with two things, one is historic, never really well off, my concert going was dictated by earnings from a Saturday job in Macfisheries. I preferred to go to two concerts a week and sit in the back stalls or balcony than have a front row seat at one. In fact the only front row concert I recall really enjoying was Buddy Rich, there again, I was sat next to his daughter!
The other is visual, I like to see what is going on and take in the whole stage, particularly orchestra, opera and musicals. So there is an ingrained habit of sitting back.
The room at home is impossible to set up for nearfield unless you like sitting six feet from speakers at least ten feet apart. So normal, and with a good sweet spot is twice as far from the speakers as they are apart.
Near field to me is often what you see in pictures of studios, a mixing desk with a pair of “shoeboxes” on and then larger speakers wall or soffit mounted. In reality, if listening to recorded or broadcast music, the engineer is more than likely listening in nearfield, the tradition and design of the room mean floorstanders are not practical rather than you cannot listen to them domestically in a near field layout if that is what you want.
Agreed
I prefer near field over headphones.
I’ve moved my 660s2 to my computer desktop setup.
1 Like
To me, nearfield is a property of the speaker. Forcing the listeners to a position with the tweeter directly aimed at the listeners ears. The distance is as close to speakers as possible.
ATC, Tannoy (SGM) are designed for this job. The “beam” of the frequencies is radiating in an angle around the 70 defrees wide. This to eliminate reflections of te room as much as possible. Just to hear what exactly is recorded. ATC recomments to toe the speakers in direct to the listeners ears.
Common speakers radiate at appproxamaly 90 degrees. So the listener has more options in placement and interaction with the listeningroom.
This is my understanding of nearfield listening. Correct me if I am wrong.
Enjoy listening 
My best near field speakers were, of course, LS3/5a’s
If we are talking about floor standers then probably the Rega’s I owned… I think they were RS3’s or something similar
A different meaning of nearfield has been given previously in this thread. Maybe two, though not hugely different. (I am not taking the OP’s non-equilateralish experience as one). To the best of my awareness there is no formal definition, rather genaral concensus, But neither “as close as possible (just a foot from each ear, perhaps?) nor it being a property of the speaker are not ones I’ve heard propounded before, though the shorter the distance the more significance the speaker driver arrangement. Regarding dispersion angle, surely the closer to the speaker you are relative to the rest of the room, the less significant any side dispersion, rather the opposite way round from your suggestion?
BTW I don’t think 90 degrees is a particularly common angle, and it varies with frequency. Domes tend to relatively wide dispersion, horns narrow.
I owned a couple of pairs of Klipsch Heresy’s (horns) which were fairly close to my listening position and I would definitely not recommend them
I have had the luxury of hearing Klipsch La Scala’s a couple of times and they sounded absolutely awesome but tricky to place in a home environment… you need an awful lot of space for them at home … I tried but couldn’t get them to work well…however they were the best speakers I’ve ever heard, only second to the famous Klipschorns..
If I could get Klipsch, especially the full horns, to work in a home environment then that’s what I would buy… but unfortunately they are so difficult to get working properly at home unless you have a huge room for them to shine… they are the very best if you have the full room for them to work properly though… just amazing
For what it’s worth I purchased my brand new Heresy’s at a bargain price and they are now about £4K… I consider them to be the worst speakers for £4K… don’t touch them!