Less is More...with three Aperture IIs in the house
 

My bedroom is my primary “serious” listening venue. That’s because the audio system in the much larger living-dining room shares space with a flat-screen TV that gets a lot of viewing, and in the interests of maintaining domestic harmony—well, I think you get the picture.

The bedroom is just that, a not overly large (11’x13’x 7’8”) room stuffed with a queen-size bed, a pair of nightstands, a wide lowboy dresser topped by a couple of freestanding jewel cabinets, and an array of DIY stackable-slatted LP storage modules that fit nicely into an “L” in the wall created by the abutting clothes closet. To fill out the furniture complement, I’ve managed to shoehorn a DIY audio equipment cabinet (that I’ll have to replace with another one to cure a newly-created power-cord spaghetti tangle) into a corner, while the speakers sit with their grills about two feet out from the wall on DIY sand-filled pedestals flanking the dresser. My program material is hard-drive-sourced CD and SACD rips and high-resolution downloads of classical, jazz, film scores, vocals, choral, and a smattering of opera, while my “listening chair” is the foot of the bed, which places me forward of the center-of-room null.

To render this less-than-optimal lashup more than mid-fi listenable, I’ve played with a number of acoustic-treatment options over the last few years to deal with room modes, speaker boundary interference response issues, first reflections, etc. The most satisfactory solution I hit on involved a front-, side-, and rear-wall collection of four-inch-thick absorber, scatter-plate/absorber, and diffusor/absorber panels (would you believe 16?)—most of them 2’x4’ in size—that all but engulfed the room and made it look like a padded cell straight out of Franz Kafka...or, alternately, a mixing studio crafted by Edgar Allan Poe after he’d tippled too much amontillado. My wife tolerated the setup and said she heard an improvement with each treatment iteration, but to this day I don’t know what she might have been muttering under her breath—or how often.

Once I followed up this room-treatment regimen with a series of power cord and power distributor upgrades, I figured that I’d wrung all that I could out of the system within my fixed-income retiree budget. The sonic presentations were much better-defined and more tonally as well as dynamically nuanced float-free-of-the-speakers holographic. Relatively speaking, it turns out.

It was at that point that I started reading comments here and elsewhere about the Stillpoints Aperture II. That turned my curious eye toward my discretionary penny jar. In late February I had enough coppers to order one panel (thanks to Ivan), and what it did after replacing the 2’x4’ diffusor/absorber at the center of the front wall pushed me to get two more in stages over the next two-and-a-half months.

The following photos depict the placement of the Apertures at the speaker wall’s center and the right and left first reflection points. Since the right first reflection point coincides with the location of the aforementioned LP storage modules, I fabricated a cleated, screwed-from-the-inside faceplate for one of the modules from scrap lumber to provide a solid surface for the right Aperture’s mounting screw. The top of each of the two reflection-point Apertures is 43-1/2 inches above the carpeted floor. (I found that, using a 7/64” bit, drilling a hole in a wall or comparable mounting surface 3-11/16” below the desired top-of-frame height and inserting the supplied mounting screw and collar washer there places the Aperture at precisely the selected height when it’s hung via its rear-mounted flange.)

https://www.audioaficionado.org/pict...pictureid=5194

https://www.audioaficionado.org/pict...pictureid=5192

https://www.audioaficionado.org/pict...pictureid=5196

https://www.audioaficionado.org/pict...pictureid=5190

https://www.audioaficionado.org/pict...pictureid=5189

Before commenting on the specifics the three-Aperture configuration brings to the performance table, I’d note that the Apertures not only replaced the 2’x4’ panels that previously occupied those spaces but, as listening would demonstrate early on, obviated the need for (1) the two behind-the-speaker absorber panels that had flanked the front-wall center panel and (2) the two floorstanding scatter-plated absorbers that had covered the left and right second-reflection point. That’s a net reduction of four 2’x4’ panels in the bedroom system’s acoustic treatment complement. And they won’t be coming back.

Having achieved, pre-Aperture, what I considered a pretty convincing replication of a given recording’s performance venue (where that was the intent of the producing/engineering team) with all the previous tweaks of the room acoustic and AC power delivery to the audio system, I was rendered “holy merde” dumbstruck by the first few notes of my first audition of the three-Aperture configuration, the first movement of Miklos Rosza’s “Tripartita for Orchestra” (“Modern Masters I”, David Amos conducting the London Symphony Orchestra, Harmonia Mundi CD rip) and remained that way through the conclusion of the movement. The CD, which also includes compositions by Morton Gould, Gian Carlo Menotti, and Marc Lavry, is a soundstage gem—open, spacious, and layered to the nines. I didn’t realize just how open, spacious, and layered, however, until the Apertures were in place. The soundstage expanded laterally and front-to-back with more definitive detailing of the ensemble’s individual constituents, the venue’s spatial and ambient cues, the score’s inner voicing, and both the macro and microdynamics infused into it at the conductor’s pleasure. Most impressive, however, was the seamless integration of soundstage “air” with that of the bedroom. They fused together into one entity, floating the performance freer of the speakers and putting the listener in the concert hall—and breathing the same oxygen--to a far more convincing degree than I’ve ever experienced with this system. It’s as close to “immersive”--or “enveloping”, if you prefer—as I’ve ever heard in stereo. If I were asked for a visual analog to describe the sensation, I’d call it “Cinerama”. (I’ve never attended an IMAX presentation, so I won’t go that far.) Further listening with comparable decently-engineered orchestral, and then choral and opera, recordings reinforces that “you are there to an unprecedented degree” impression.

What the new configuration doesn’t do is impose a spatial gloss on acoustically “dry” or hard-panned-to-death recordings. The soundtrack for “Evil Under the Sun”, a pastiche of Cole Porter tunes masterfully arranged and conducted by John Lanchberry, is unfortunately Mojave-dry and -flat, and despite their ability to elicit more accurate instrumental tonality from the recording, the Apertures do not wave a wand of 3-D liquidity over the soundstage.

What they do—among their many virtues--is rip a layer or two of gauze off recorded representations of the human voice...whether it’s Jane Monheit in “A Shine On Your Shoes”, Nicolai Ghiaurov in “Aria of Konchak” from Borodin’s opera “Prince Igor”, Sarah Vaughan in “Someone to Watch Over Me” performed live with Michael Tilson Thomas and the Los Angeles Philharmonic, or The Turtle Creek Chorale in “Make Our Garden Grow” from Leonard Bernstein’s “Candide”. In each of these instances—and every one of several others—there’s more tonal “meat” and nuance to the voice(s) as well as a more palpable evocation of the space around them. One can discern, for example, the air between Ghiaurov’s lips and his mike, reflecting just how effectively the Aperture configuration reveals the performers’ spatial environment.

Instruments and voices “breathe into” and “work” the space around them, and it’s that interaction that helps define what we hear as tonality and timbre as well as attack, sustain, and decay. Given the Aperture configuration’s ability to tease out the performing space in such granular detail whether the performance is symphony orchestra or guitar duet, operatic chorus or vocal solo, fortissimo or pianissimo, I’m not surprised that I’m hearing considerably more musical “there” emanating from the speakers. It’s unrestrained, unforced, and unfatiguing.

I could go on with the usual spiel about the improvements noted in all the finite audiophile usual-suspect categories--and they're there in spades--but I’ll end here by saying that I’m enjoying the heck out of the system with the Apertures in place. Enough so that a fourth is in the order on-deck circle. It’s slated to replace the 2’x4’ diffusor/absorber that currently inhabits the center of the rear wall.

Next step: Peel off the SBIR-addressing DIY traps fronting the jewel cases to see/hear what, if anything, happens. If there's no perceptible deterioration in audible performance, I'll report that here. Otherwise, no news is bad news, the front-wall photo will remain unchanged, and this thread will remain deathly quiet...

Until, at least, I take the next step after that: Peel off, one at a time, the 24"x24" absorbers that front the lowboy dresser to deal with its large reflective surface. If the removal of one or both of them does not degrade what I hear, I'll let you know.

In the meantime, I remain impressed with the palpable in-room presence, bass solidity, vocal and instrumental transparency, dynamic slam, transient quickness, and three-dimensionality with which the three-Aperture configuration has imbued decently-engineered recordings.

Wow! Great report. I am going to have to read it a couple of times!

The fourth Aperture II is scheduled to arrive later this week and is slated for the center of the rear wall (I've already drilled the mounting hole). Pending its delivery, I'm listening to familiar musical program with the diffusor/absorber panel currently installed there and, alternately, with it removed so I have a rough aural baseline for ascertaining the nature and degree of impact, if any, that fourth Aperture has on perceived system performance on that section of the wall seven feet behind me.

In the meantime, I continue to be impressed with what I'm hearing with Apertures at the left and right first reflection points. I'll just say that the bang-for-buck factor is extremely high...in this room, at least.

And then there were four...
 

The fourth Aperture II arrived on Thursday afternoon, and I've spent portions of the last couple of days listening with it mounted on the bedroom's rear wall as shown here:

https://www.audioaficionado.org/pict...pictureid=5210

The new Aperture replaced a 2'x4' diffusor/absorber at that location. Listening tests conducted both before and after the arrival and installation of the first three Apertures concluded that acoustic treatment of the center of the rear wall rendered the sonic presentation a tad more cohesive, more defined, "airier", and more dimensional than with that location untreated. And the "treated" configuration was in place when I posted my assessment of the impact of the Apertures installed at the center of the front wall and the first-reflection points.

So the question posed by the new Aperture boiled down to this: Would it make an appreciable difference in what I experience when listening to a given recording, especially when set against the quantum leap in perceived performance the installation of the first three Apertures had already achieved?

The short answer: It's not a quantum leap, but it strikes me as way ahead of whatever's in second place. Using the same program material listened to in evaluating the three-Aperture setup ("Modern Masters I", "Prince Igor", et. al.), I noticed--immediately, and without any tilt-or-stretch coaxing of my ears--an infusion of more palpable space into my listening room. Bass is even tauter and growlier, voice and instrument are even more finely delineated 3-D, and the "they're in the room" illusion at least a touch more spookily tactile than the gobsmacking illusion created by the three-Aperture configuration augmented by the previous (and twice the size) diffusor/absorber that occupied rear-wall center. At the same time, and as before, adding the rear-wall Aperture does not spray artficial gloss onto produced-as-flat-perspective recordings.

Happiness is... :D

Thanks, Ivan, for making it possible.

Jim... thanks for the update; very happy to hear you are enjoying all of your Aperture II Panels.

Having purchased the Aperture IIs one at a time over the last three months, I at one point had only two of them and stacked one above the other at front-wall center as shown in the photo.

https://www.audioaficionado.org/pict...pictureid=5212

I liked what I heard, as mounting the second one atop the first improved everything from perceived bass solidity to overall soundfield and all the sonic goodies we listen for in between. But when the third Aperture arrived, I naturally wanted to substitute two of them for the acoustic panels already occupying the first reflection points, as it's been my experience that treatment there typically offers excellent bang for the audiophile buck. To do that, I had to cannibalize the front wall for one of the Apertures. And you know from previous posts in this thread how happy I've been with the results, as well as with the placement of the newly-arrived fourth Aperture at the center of the rear wall.

Well, on a whim this morning I took the new guy off the back wall and mounted it above the Aperture that hovers above the lowboy dresser, restoring the earlier front-wall-center two-panel stack. I put on HDTT's DSD128 reissue of Leonard Bernstein's reading with the New York Phil of Aaron Copland's El Salon Mexico and heard more chest-thumping skin with each bass drum thwack. That started a mini-marathon listening session with a variety of classical, jazz, vocals, Broadway, film score, and opera program.

The bottom line? The two-stack stays where it is, and I'll have to start restocking my penny jar to reclothe rear-wall-center with another light-oak-and-cream Aperture. As good as the four-panel configuration that I've raved about earlier in this thread is, everything I've thrown at the system program-wise today sounds more cohesive, more foundationally solid, better defined, and more airily dimensional with two Apertures at the center of the front wall.

Yeah, they are like potato chips.

Like Potato Chips and also fun!

They encourage ongoing experimentation as they often impact your sound depending on where you put them.

I have settled on three across the front (left behind speaker, middle, right behind speaker) and two behind me as my room setup and the Strads design minimizes sidewall reflections.

Great photo. And I think I can relate to the upper-wall placement of your Apertures.

In my setup with just the lower Aperture in place at the front-center position, 39 inches of reflective bare wall separate the ceiling from the top of that lone Aperture. What I realized after comparative listening is that adding the second one to fill 22 inches of that vertical gap eliminates, among other things, a trace of output-muddying midrange "shout" that's most noticeable in vocals--e.g., Frederica von Stade singing the original deliciously unsanitized lyrics of Rodgers and Hart's "Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered". As a consequence, imaging is more fleshed out and layered with a concomitant increase in the resolution of instrumental and vocal output.

Now if I could only find another place to put those two jewelry cabinets that inhabit the top of the dresser that wouldn't get me into "you're getting rutabagas for dinner" trouble. (Even Saint Mrs. has her limits.)