Table of Contents

Introduction
Terms
Height
Head-height or ground plane?
Multi-tiered seating
Focus on the Problem
System 1: Coupled
System 2: Uncoupled—Vertical Displacement
System 3: Uncoupled—Horizontal Displacement
System 4: Uncoupled—V+H Displacement
What about the right side?
Find a Solution
System 2: Subs on the ground—Vertical displacement
Petal Aim
Max offset
System 3: Center Flown Sub—Horizontal displacement
System 4: Center Ground Sub—V+H displacement
System 5: Center Ground Sub Arc —😬 displacement
FOH
Average Phase
Further Questions
If it can't be aligned everywhere, why align anywhere?
Why did you use 10dB for the crossover region and not 12dB or
20dB?
Florian Spille: Where do I have the best chance to make a good
decision for most of the audience vs. where do I have a big
chance to make a real bad decision?
Marc Zeebregts: If I have a subwoofer array, let's say it's an array
of 8 subs evenly spread between L&R mains:
Where do I measure?
Do I measure with all subs on?
Is there a difference in approach when I arc these subs
(either physically or with delay)?
 Sajag Gupta: How do I align flown subs in an LCR system?
Liam Devlin: How is the process affected by multiple sub
positions? For example, if you had subs flown behind mains and
you also had ground stacked subs that were further from your
measurement position?
Τάκης Λόντρας: Mic placement in closed-space venues and small
venues.
What do manufacturers recommend?
Final thoughts
Acknowledgments
Bibliography
 T C G

M M
P

S A
2nd Edition

For sound engineers who enjoy a deep level of complexity

by Nathan Lively

Everything is chaos.
Learn how to live with the chaos.
-Mauricio Ramirez

I
Where is the ideal microphone placement for subwoofer alignment?
If we can only have one alignment point, but there are 800 seats in the
theater, does it even matter?
 It does, because the differences over location aren’t random. They follow
patterns. Mic positions sort out the patterns and connect them together.
Each mic position has specific roles to play with purposeful (not random)
placement. (McCarthy 446)
When it comes to subwoofer crossover alignment, we can define mic
placement with some precision. The ideal placement will result in the least
error across the audience. It will put the maximum number of audience
members in the coupling zone, where there is positive summation; and the
minimum in the cancellation zone, where there is negative summation.
While it is possible to calculate the magnitude and phase relationship of
direct sound at any specific point, all we really need to know is how much
those relationships have changed across the audience and whether or not the
original alignment position has given us the best shot at minimum variance.
Towards this goal, we will consider the ramifications of source
displacement with a detour through measurement height.

Terms
Some dry information that you'll probably skip over and then come back
to later.

1. Acoustic crossover region : The location where two separate sound

sources combine together at equal level.
2. Asymmetry : Lack of equal response characteristics.
3. Coherence : Signal to noise ratio.
4. Displacement : Distance between two sound sources.
5. Equidistant : At equal distances.
6. Frequency : Cycles per second expressed in Hertz (Hz).
7. Magnitude : Level component of the audio waveform expressed in dB.
Also a vital element in the nations of Mainland and Subterra (inside
joke for you Phase Invaders).
8. Microphone positions

1. ONAX : On-axis
2. VBOT : Vertical bottom
3. VTOP : Vertical top
 9. Phase : The relationship in time between cycles of a wave. The radial
component of the audio waveform expressed in degrees.
10. Summation zones (McCarthy 135)

1. Level-based

Combing : Magnitude relationship of 0-4dB with maximum

summation risk varying +6 to -60dB.
Transition : Magnitude relationship of 4-10dB with medium
summation risk varying +4 to -8dB.
Isolation : Magnitude relationship >10dB with low summation
risk varying +2 to -3dB.

2. Phase-based

Coupling : Phase offset of 0-120º with summation varying +6 to

0dB. When two sources are said to be coupled, they are within
120º through their operating range.
Cancellation : Phase offset of 120-180º with summation varying 0
to -60dB.

H
Head-Height Or Ground Plane?
Head-height is preferred since it most closely matches the listener's
experience, but should be abandoned for ground plane if actionable data is
heavily compromised by floor reflections. The lower the microphone
position, the shorter the path length difference due to floor bounce, the
higher the comb filter frequency. Keep in mind that changing height will
also require a change in depth.
In the example below, if you decide that you want to measure at ¾ depth,
consider a line from your main that intersects with your mic and then the
floor and move back to this position. Mauricio Ramirez says, "If this is your
first time ever, do it this way."
 If you are measuring at ground plane and getting low quality high-
frequency (HF) data because the floor is covered with carpet or full of
chairs, consider using a pane of glass, glazed ceramic tile, or rigid plastic,
with an area of 30-60cm 2 (1-2ft 2 ) and 2-5mm (0.08-0.2in) thick. Make
sure this object does not resonate or introduce (self)noise created by
mechanical vibration or rattling. Or, simply ignore the HF response during
your crossover alignment, then move back up to head height for other
calibration processes that focus on the HF.
If you are using multiple microphones (see Average Phase below),
consider lowering the height over depth in order to further randomize the
reflections and improve the average. For example, a 3-mic average might
use the following heights: VBOT 1.75m (5.7ft), ONAX 1.6m (5.3ft), VTOP
1.45m (4.8ft).
 Here you can see the cancellation pattern created by the floor bounce at
143Hz . I have moved all of the measurement mics into the null to create a
clear demonstration of what they might look like if they ended up there by
accident.

If the microphones all end up in the null, your average will have a null.
I'm showing you the magnitude response here instead of phase because it's
easier to see the results on top of each other.
 You can counteract this behavior by making a small adjustment in the
microphone height against the cancellation behavior.

Then the average between the microphones will not favor the null as
much.

Multi-Tiered Seating
If you have more than one audience plane, it can help to create a new
theoretical audience plane that represents the average connecting VBOT of
the ground floor with VTOP of the balcony. More on how to use this in
your calculations below .
 F P
In the beginning, there was a single source and the innocent audience
knew not of relative phase misalignment. Then, in 1964, the first subwoofer
was patented, the operating range was extended, and complexity grew. The
end user became responsible for a successful marriage between sources.
With great power comes great something-something.
 Coupling is a magic trick. We take two independent sources with
different locations and response characteristics and make them sound like a
single source to the listener. When there is minimal change between
distance offsets, phase relationships are consistent and microphone position
is less critical (and you probably don't need this guide).
If you walk around the audience from left to right and front to back and
the difference in distance from you to the main and sub (Δdist) stays the
same, so will the phase alignment (or misalignment). Meanwhile, if there
are large changes in Δdist then there will be a large phase span (aka phase
problem). Identifying these areas of significant change will help us focus
our efforts.

System 1: Coupled
Are these subwoofers coupled or uncoupled?

You might ask: At what location and frequency?

In front at 35Hz (bottom of operating range): Yes.

In front at 125Hz (top of the operating range): Yes.
At the side at 35Hz: Yes.
 At the side at 125Hz: Yes.

Observing the phase graph for measurements of each sub where Δdist is
greatest (side location), we can see that they are easily within 120º and
therefore we can expect them to be coupled at any other point in the
audience.

What if we push the subs farther apart?

At 1m apart, positions to the side will start to fall out of coupling and
into cancellation:

In front at 35Hz: Yes.

In front at 125Hz: Yes.
At the side at 35Hz: Yes.
At the side at 125Hz: No.

Although the word coupled is used to describe a phase relationship (0-

120º), it is also used to describe relative position in space as a function of
wavelength, as perceived by the listener. If two identical sources occupy the
same point in space then there will be no difference in arrival times at any
point around them and we can safely say that they are coupled through their
entire operating range.
As those two sources become separated by more and more distance, the
maximum frequency at which they are effectively coupled is lowered
(except for the one listener at the tip of the isosceles triangle who is
equidistant to both sources).
For the purposes of this guide, the word coupled, when used to describe
spatial positioning, generally refers to two sources that are close enough to
each other that all arrivals are within 120º throughout the audience through
the entire operating range.
E.g., if the operating range goes up to 125Hz, which has a period of 8ms,
then arrival times must not deviate by more than 2.7ms across the audience
for the sources to be considered coupled, because 120º is ⅓ of a 360º
complete cycle and 2.7 is ⅓ of 8.
1s = 1000ms / 125Hz = 8ms * (120º/360º) = 2.7ms. You can play around
with these calculations in this interactive math notepad .
In the following example we have a sound system with coupled main
and sub in a center position. You can see that the Δdist between main and
sub changes by a maximum of 1.32m across the 3 measurement positions ,
which translates to 120º at 87Hz. 120º is the limit for coupling, and because
wavelength increases as frequency decreases we know that everything 87Hz
and lower will couple. This is a common strategy for maintaining crossover
stability.
 System 2: Uncoupled—Vertical
Displacement
If we uncouple the elements and put the sub on the ground, we have
introduced displacement between the arrays in the vertical plane. Here we
see a total change in distance of 5.33m, which is a complete cycle at 65Hz.

In the horizontal plane Δdist changes the same as when the subs were in
the air. The change in distance is 1.38m.
 This leaves us with the question of depth for mic placement, which we'll
consider in the next section.

System 3: Uncoupled—Horizontal
Displacement
In another variation on this theme, we can look at the case of a center-
placed sub with uncoupled mains. Now we have distances that are matched
over depth and unmatched over width.

Over depth, the difference in distance offset is 1.31m ; over width the
offset is 10.23m.
System 4: Uncoupled—V+H Displacement
A center sub on the ground with uncoupled mains in the air is a complex
design that introduces displacement in both vertical and horizontal. Every
point in the audience will experience different arrival times.
 Let's look at how to deal with these various forms of asymmetry.

What About The Right Side?

I have chosen to complete all of the alignments with one side soloed
because

1. That's how I would most often do it in the field.

2. It's easier and the graphics look cleaner for this guide.
3. A majority of the audience will only experience one side or the other
in isolation.

Looking at a measurement taken from on-axis with the left side, it looks
like the left and right main arrays are close enough in level for combing .

If we combine the left main array with the sub array then their combined
level takes us to the edge of the combing zone.
 Observing the phase graph confirms that measuring the left and right
side together does add ripple (arriving 50ms late), but does not significantly
change the phase.
 If I switch to ⅙ octave smoothing, they look even more similar.

Best practice : If you have time, capture left+right.

Field practice w hen resources of time, equipment, experience, and
actionable data are limited: capture left solo.

F S
System 2: Subs On The Ground—Vertical
Displacement
Petal Aim
Let's dip our toes into the problem by looking at a section view of our
design. Here's a prediction at 63Hz with no processing added. On the right
you can see magnitude and phase measurements of main and sub in red and
blue.
Some things to notice:

1. A flower petal shaped lobe of summation down the middle,

represented by the equilateral triangle.
2. As the subwoofer position is moved backwards, the petal in the front
tilts down towards the audience while the petal in the rear tilts up in a
mirrored response.
 We'll do the same test, but this time with delay instead of placement.
Notice that when the subwoofer delay is increased, the petal in the front
tilts down towards the audience while the petal in the rear also tilts down,
opposite to the previous exercise. The more sides of the story you consider,
the better choices you'll make .
Max offset
While we can play around with predictions all day trying to find the
ideal balance, it is possible to calculate the correct position by determining
the maximum phase offset at the last row. This will allow us to put the
maximum number of people in the coupling zone and least number of
people in the cancellation zone.
For this discussion, let's use this example system.

I like to use Merlijn van Veen's Sub Align calculator . After inserting the
speaker positions and audience plane you'll need to choose a crossover
frequency. In Merlijn's instructions, he recommends choosing a frequency
that is ⅓ octave above the crossover frequency of your system. If your
crossover frequency is 80Hz, then 80 * 1.26 = 101Hz.
For further investigation you could use the highest frequency in the
crossover region, which may provide greater accuracy with wider crossover
regions. In this example, the highest frequency where the magnitude
relationship is within 10dB is 92Hz.
 Now you can adjust the phase offset until you discover your preferred
balance of coupling and tonal uniformity.
If you don't have information about the crossover region, then use
Merlijn's suggestion and focus on balancing the phase span.
Here are the basic steps:

1. Fill out the yellow boxes (see image below).

2. Choose a conservative SPL plot frequency that is at the top of the
crossover region, i.e. the end of the transition zone (see Terms ). Find
this by offsetting your sub magnitude trace by +10dB.
3. Adjust the phase offset for desired results. If the phase span is less than
240º, divide the phase span by two. If it is more than 240º, use 120º as
the phase offset.
 System 3: Center Flown Sub—Horizontal
Displacement
As we get into horizontal symmetry, I will offer you two solutions.

1. Zero offset line: This method will focus on discovering a line through
the audience where the offset between and main and sub does not
change. This is where we have the greatest opportunity for summation
or cancellation since magnitude levels will be matched.
2. Audience split: This method will focus on balancing alignment errors
evenly across the audience.

To find the zero offset line in this design, simply find the halfway point
between on-axis with the main and on-axis with the sub (see isosceles
triangle).
 Looking at a plan view , you can see that there is comb filtering with its
center on the zero offset line. Here you can see a combined prediction on
the right.
 For errors to be spread evenly across the audience, though, we'll need to
synchronize our arrivals at the center of one side of the audience, which just
happens to be on-axis with the main. If you count from the center petal of
summation you can see that we are almost three cycles out by the time we
get to the center of the audience, but you'll see that it is the same in the
other direction as well, and therefore, balanced.
 A combined prediction reveals the added benefit of less summation and
power alley down the middle of the audience.
We can also observe this phenomenon in Sub Align.
 The audience split is totally dependent on the audience dimensions. The
speaker positions may change, but the mic stays the same all day.
 System 4: Center Ground Sub—V+H
Displacement
Where is the zero offset line after you throw vertical asymmetry into the
mix?
 Merlijn van Veen's article recommends a head height intersection with
the median plane . We'll use the depth from System 1 using the Sub Align
calculator.

Here's a prediction with the alignment at the zero offset line.

 This may look like a complicated geometrical fire dance , but depending
on your need for accuracy, I have found it pretty easy to eyeball in the field.
Have you tried it?
Here's the audience split solution.
 You may be wondering why I'm not using the same depth for the
audience split calculation as I did for the zero offset line. Here's what that
would look like.
 The change is not overwhelmingly obvious, but the number of power
alleys are not balanced if we don't use the mid-depth position.
 System 5: Center Ground Sub Arc —😬
Displacement
This is one of the most challenging systems to align because you have so
many different arrivals to manage. It's especially hard to imagine if you are
deploying an electronically delayed arc instead of a physical arc.
The acoustic center of the array is always at an imaginary point behind
the array through the center, so I recommend calculating the zero offset line
using the center speaker.

Here's a prediction using the zero offset line location, keeping with the
convention of showing left main and sub together at 80Hz, then left, right,
and sub.
And here's the prediction for an alignment to split the audience.

FOH
 Aligning at FOH is, of course, monarchy. But, as long as the FOH depth
is at 50-100% of the audience, it is a sensible option that will avoid putting
the mixer in a null on accident. This is important because the decision of the
mixer affects everyone. This is especially relevant to the system designs
with more asymmetry.
Imagine if you went to all of the work we have discussed so far to
choose the best alignment position for the audience, but then FOH ended up
in a big area of cancellation? (see :( below)
In this case, you may prefer to move the alignment position to FOH. (see
:) below)
 A P
Creating an average between multiple measurement locations can be a
lifesaver in the field. When done correctly, it can remove many local
reflections and noise for more actionable data. The trick is to keep your
measurement locations in the coupling zone and balanced around the
alignment position to get a valid average.

1. Use the Sub Align calculator to find an appropriate alignment position.

See Max Offset .
2. Use at least eight positions distributed equally around the XOVR
position [1] . This may seem counterintuitive at first if the XOVR
position is not near the center of the audience, but if there are an
unequal number of measurements on one side then the average will
favor that side and will appear to be mis-aligned. Of course, this is all
much more critical with very large phase spans. If the phase span is
10º then the distribution is less critical. Most designs will have an
asymmetrical relationship between the main, sub, and audience, and
therefore require an asymmetrical placement of microphones.
3. If a null from the floor bounce is still present in the average, making
the data around the crossover inactionable, move to ground plane.

Here's an example of eight microphones spread through the coupling

zone. Notice that there are four to the left of the XOVR position and four to
the right.

Here are their measurements with combined systems, with a nice

demonstration of how the floor bounce can be removed.
 Here's a real-life example where the entire audience ended up in the
coupling zone. The microphones are not properly balanced around the
coupling zone, but it still provides a powerful example of the power of
averages.

Here are the solo measurements of main and sub (post-alignment) at

each microphone position along with their respective averages. Keep in
mind that at each new measurement location the delay locator is reset using
the full-range source.
Here are the averages alone.

Here's a comparison with the results from SubAligner .

 F Q
If It Can't Be Aligned Everywhere, Why
Align Anywhere?
One of my pet peeves is hearing someone say, "Sub alignment is useless
because it can only be aligned at a single position. It will still be misaligned
everywhere else." While that is true, there's a world of difference between
putting FOH into a region of cancellation and carefully balancing the
alignment errors across the audience.
Due to the complexity of audio, there is a tendency to say, "Fuck it. If I
don't understand it, then it's not important." But these things are not
random. Phase differences over location are entirely predictable. If that
weren't true then ArrayCalc , SoundVision , and MAPP3D would not work.
 But they do work. And if you would like to find the alignment position
that will result in the least errors across the audience, you can find it. And
you'll get the same answer whether you calculate it ahead of time , try many
locations in ArrayCalc, or observe them empirically in the field.
If you don't choose an alignment position, it will still be aligned
somewhere. You just won't know where it is. It's my recommendation to use
a reliable method to choose a reasonable alignment position that will
generate the least amount of alignment errors across the audience.

Why Did You Use 10dB For The

Crossover Region And Not 12dB Or
20dB?
I am aware of some other options. There is a great video series by
Mauricio Ramirez where he uses <12dB. My own tests show that complex
summation will return a change anywhere where magnitude relationships
are within 30dB. Meanwhile, it seems sensible to focus our efforts on the
area with the greatest opportunity for success and failure, which is the
combing and transition zones.

Florian Spille: Where Do I Have The Best

Chance To Make A Good Decision For
Most Of The Audience Vs. Where Do I
Have A Big Chance To Make A Real Bad
Decision?
This will always d epend on the system design, but a shortcut to good
results is to use the FOH position, as long as it is at 50-100% depth. Source
and reflection arrival differences are greatest in the first half of the
audience.
The shortcut to bad results is near a boundary. Our audio analyzers are
ineffective at removing reflections that fall within the time window, like
short reflections from boundaries. Your biggest threat will be side-wall
reflections. This is why the L-Acoustics paper Optimum Measurement
Locations for Loudspeaker System Equalization says, "the proposed
measurement area is limited to [1/4 – 3/4] of the audience depth, with no
measurement locations closer than 2 meters from the side walls."
Pro tip: the SubAligner app is impervious to reflections. :)
It's also probably good to point out here that we are commonly talking
about 1/9 of the operating range of our sound system. Instead of obsessing
over good and bad decisions, it's probably more productive to think in terms
of different results.

Marc Zeebregts: If I Have A Subwoofer

Array, Let's Say It's An Array Of 8 Subs
Evenly Spread Between L&R Mains:
Where do I measure?
Just give up. 😜
This is a tough one because you are averaging together many different
arrivals. I have experience with the coupled variation, so let's focus on that
one. To estimate the best measurement location over width, I recommend
that you use one of the two methods described in System 5.

Do I measure with all subs on?

Yes, you need to measure them as a group, unless you know exactly
which sub best represents their average phase.

Is there a difference in approach when I arc these subs (either

physically or with delay)?
No. In the two methods that I am suggesting the microphone position
would remain the same. The zero offset line references the center of the
array and the audience split references the audience. Neither would change.
Sajag Gupta: How Do I Align Flown Subs
In An LCR System?

Whenever I think about these kinds of potentially complex delay

dilemmas, I try to use Bob McCarthy's advice: Democracy (the number of
people affected).
In this case we can expect most mix engineers to put instruments in LR
and vocals in C. Therefore, the greatest number of people will be affected
by the alignment between LR and the subs making the problem very similar
to the one demonstrated in System 3: Center Flown Sub .
Drawing circles centered on the house-left sources, we can attempt to
observe three arrivals at once. The best alignment position is probably the
average between them.

Here's a ⅓ octave wide prediction at 50Hz.

Why 50Hz? Because that's the highest frequency at which the sub array
is still coupled. A conservative estimate I often use is 2/3λ.
 f = 345 / distance * ⅔ = 57.5Hz
highest coupling frequency = speed of sound / distance * ⅔

No one asked me, but I can't help but comment on the system design
here. A wide spread of speakers evenly across the proscenium is pleasing to
the eyes, but lowers the operating range at which the subs can couple
effectively and narrows the coverage. In this case that may be exactly what
the designer in tended , but it gives me an opportunity to make a point.
One particular conflict of interest with respect to horizontal arrays is the
desire to extend the line length to the width of the stage or venue. Narrow
venues require long lines whereas wide venues require short lines
regardless of the width of venue or stage. -Merlijn van Veen, Low
Frequency Control

Liam Devlin: How Is The Process Affected

By Multiple Sub Positions? For Example,
If You Had Subs Flown Behind Mains And
You Also Had Ground Stacked Subs That
Were Further From Your Measurement
Position?
The process would be the same except for the crossover frequency in the
case of infra-sub. If your subs on the ground are only covering infrasound,
then find their crossover region with the flown subs to discover your
alignment depth. If the subs are doing double duty (matched operating
range), then use the same process already described above.

Τάκης Λόντρας: Mic Placement In Closed-

Space Venues And Small Venues.
Just watch out for those wall reflections and use ground plane
measurements if the floor and ceiling bounce are distorting the
measurements. If you are unable to get actionable data, use a multi-mic
average. If you are still unable to get actionable data, abandon the audio
analyzer for the relative absolute method .

What Do Manufacturers Recommend?

For d&b , the help documents for ArrayCalc recommend measuring on-
axis with "the left source selected" and a depth that is "sufficient distance
from the sources. Usually a typical FOH position is a good choice." This is
most related to the split the room position we used above.
In Optimum measurement locations for large-scale loudspeaker system
tuning based on first-order reflections analysis L-Acoustics recommends
avoiding measurements near side walls and identifying any data corruption
from floor and ceiling reflections since they cannot be avoided. Here are a
few more important quotes.

Floor and ceiling reflections are the ones that lead to more risk of
error. (L-Acoustics 8)
The proposed measurement area is limited to [1/4 – 3/4] of the
audience depth, with no measurement locations closer than 2 meters
from the side walls. (L-Acoustics 6)
First-order reflections are usually energetic and cannot be dissociated
from the direct sound in contrast to higher-order reflections and
reverberation. This makes any time windowing method inefficient to
remove them from the measurements. (L-Acoustics 2)

While Meyer Sound has not published any specific recommendations,

its employees have.
Bob McCarthy

The floor bounce vs. microphone placement question concerns which

position most closely resembles how the floor reflection will be
experienced by listeners during the show. Is it closer to the sitting,
standing, or laying on the floor placement? (McCarthy 450)
Ground plane is preferable when sitting/standing positions are heavily
compromised by floor reflections that won’t be present (or will be
 significantly different during the show), e.g. an empty flat arena floor
with no seating or audience (yet). (McCarthy 450)
Mic location is usually ONAX to mains. (McCarthy 482)
Mic #1: ONAX, mid-point depth, on axis horizontally to mains. Can
be ground plane. (McCarthy 482)

Merlijn van Veen

Ground-plane measurements short-circuit the "floor bounce" all

together, by turning your measurement microphone effectively into a
boundary microphone. However, you might find yourself outside of
HF-coverage, or measure the loudspeaker that's intended for someone
else at ear-height (line arrays), or HFs might end up being occulted.
(van Veen 1)
It's for this reason that you will never see me measure at the last row,
in front of a specular wall. I always measure at the second-to-last row,
where I intercept the sound destined for the last row. 1,5 m in front of
the rear wall, the sound will be negligibly louder, but whatever sound
is reflected off the rear wall will be late by 8 ms or more and not show
up in my measurement for those mission-critical frequencies. (van
Veen 1)
Anyone that has attempted to do phase alignment in the far field
knows from experience that room interaction will likely make the
phase traces go FUBAR unless you happen to be outside. (van Veen)
Most of the time, we can fix this for one point in space only (it's a
geometrical problem) and it's one of few instances (depending on the
circumstances) where I'm likely to choose the front-of-house position
(FOH) and put all means at the king's disposal (monarchy). Provided,
the FOH position is sensibly located, anywhere from fifty to one
hundred percent venue-depth. I do this for the sole purpose of
preventing that the FOH-engineer ends up, unforeseen, despite our best
efforts, in a null for a particular frequency throughout the crossover
region which he or she is likely going to try to fix with EQ. However,
a level-band-aid is not gonna remedy a time problem. It will not
improve the situation at FOH and make things worse for all other
audience members! (van Veen)
 Mauricio Ramirez has probably given me the most practical advice of
any teacher. Unfortunately, I can't find anything he's published and it
doesn’t work well to link you to my hundreds of personal notes. In one of
our recent conversations he shared with me some interesting research he is
doing with directional microphones (like an SM81 or C414) to isolate them
from reflections, making the phase graph easier to read. Look for him to
publish something about that soon.

F
My intention with this document is not to make anyone wrong. Instead,
it is a celebration of the complexity of acoustics and loudspeakers. If it's not
fun, why do it? :)

Acknowledgments
A big thank you to the people who helped me edit this document and
provide feedback.

Terry Nelson
Dwayne Roberts
Adam Hill
Paolo Tommasini
Elis Bradshaw
Harerton Dourado
Vincent S. Du Beau, Ed.D.
Tucker Burnes
Ivonne Martínez
Samantha K. Cristobal

B
 L-Acoustics. Optimum measurement locations for large-scale
loudspeaker system tuning based on first-order reflections analysis . Audio
Engineering Society, 2019.
McCarthy, Bob. Sound Systems: Design and Optimization: Modern
Techniques and Tools for Sound System Design and Alignment . Taylor and
Francis, 2016.
van Veen, Merlijn. Know Your Time Records . Merlijn van Veen, 2020.
Merlijn van Veen , https://www.merlijnvanveen.nl/en/study-hall/178-know-
your-time-records.
van Veen, Merlijn. “Subwoofer Alignment: The Foolproof Relative /
Absolute Method.” Merlijn van Veen ,
https://www.merlijnvanveen.nl/en/study-hall/166-subwoofer-alignment-the-
foolproof-relative-absolute-method. Accessed 5 October 2020.

[1] Eight measurements is based on the recommendations from AES

Convention Paper #10234 titled Optimum measurement locations for large-
scale loudspeaker system tuning based on first-order reflections analysis .
Although I recommend eight because the research recommends eight, I also
recommend that you do your own experiments to observe the results with
more or less measurement locations.
1. Introduction
1. Terms
2. Height
1. Head-height or ground plane?
2. Multi-tiered seating
3. Focus on the Problem
1. System 1: Coupled
2. System 2: Uncoupled—Vertical Displacement
3. System 3: Uncoupled—Horizontal Displacement
4. System 4: Uncoupled—V+H Displacement
5. What about the right side?
4. Find a Solution
1. System 2: Subs on the ground—Vertical displacement
1. Petal Aim
2. Max offset
2. System 3: Center Flown Sub—Horizontal displacement
3. System 4: Center Ground Sub—V+H displacement
4. System 5: Center Ground Sub Arc —😬 displacement
5. FOH
6. Average Phase
7. Further Questions
1. If it can't be aligned everywhere, why align anywhere?
2. Why did you use 10dB for the crossover region and not 12dB or
20dB?
3. Florian Spille: Where do I have the best chance to make a good
decision for most of the audience vs. where do I have a big
chance to make a real bad decision?
4. Marc Zeebregts: If I have a subwoofer array, let's say it's an array
of 8 subs evenly spread between L&R mains:
1. Where do I measure?
2. Do I measure with all subs on?
3. Is there a difference in approach when I arc these subs
(either physically or with delay)?
5. Sajag Gupta: How do I align flown subs in an LCR system?
6. Liam Devlin: How is the process affected by multiple sub
positions? For example, if you had subs flown behind mains and
 you also had ground stacked subs that were further from your
measurement position?
7. Τάκης Λόντρας: Mic placement in closed-space venues and small
venues.
8. What do manufacturers recommend?
8. Final thoughts
1. Acknowledgments
9. Bibliography