PM writes ...
I use the equilateral triangle method for a starting point only and what I wind up with is almost never that. It’s just a starting point.
GL writes ...
Generally a good starting point is an equalactial triangle (speakers equal distance to the distance from a speaker to the listener) if you sit in your listening position and point at each speaker your arms make a 60deg angle. What Paul did was distance from centre same as distance apart which makes 53deg (isosceles triangle) and then said the seat was even further back so even smaller angle for his room and speaker combo.
Start at 60deg, then move back and forth it’s all a compromise, especially in a small room. Closer you get the more nearfield (dominately direct sound only) it becomes, which means less unwanted room accoustics but a more direct sound, also the sound changes a lot more as you move left to right and the sweet spot becomes smaller. Further away more reflections you here, creating livelier sound, but the clarity drops. All while trying to avoid standing wave nodes.
Based on the room in question I’d be looking at treating the problems around 320Hz, the issues around 160Hz try and avoid by seat position, and live with problems below that frequency. Also I’d be careful of overpowering the bass end, go for subwoofer something small (8″-10″ driver) with a fast response and a good reputation, and allow the room gain to help out for the deepest notes rather than becoming a problem.
HS writes ...
Doesn’t equal lateral triangle positioning assume the acoustics of the room are the same or close on each side? But if one side is walled and the other is open, then it would seem that a different method is called for. The speakers will not be the same distance from the listening position. For example, I’ve seen positioning one speaker at a time for optimal sound..
