TIME ALIGNMENT

When traveling to different time zones, we need to correct our time-keeping tools in order to align our
activities to the local standard time. Very simple.
Likewise in sound reinforcement systems, we often encounter multiple sources of misalignment, albeit in
much smaller time increments. The importance of these misalignments is often subject to debate, but with
the advent of a wide variety of very good digital processing products, correcting such anomalies is no
longer out of reach for most of us. Further, the presence of affordable, accurate time-based measurement
systems (SMAART, TEF, etc.) means that it is by no means impractical to clearly determine the presence
of multiple arrivals from a sound system.
Almost all sources of misalignment are based on the physical positioning of various transducers in
relation to one another, to their surrounding physical boundaries, and to sound sources. The only place
where there are no appreciable time-based alignment problems (other than phase response) is in a sound
systems electrical signal path. The electrons that constitute electrical signals utilized in audio systems
travel at close to the speed of light, and even when there are great variations in cable length or multiple
stages of audio processing, the degree of leading or lagging across the audio spectrum is not perceptible
to human hearing. Digital processing does present potential for misalignment, but it is rare that DSP is
employed for selected single channels of audio.
Thus we focus on the transducers used for inputs and outputs when discussing misalignment. Although
there is a potential for microphones (or mic technique) to be just as much a culprit as loudspeakers,
traditionally we have not had the means to treat separate inputs nearly as easily as we do the outputs
feeding into the loudspeakers. The recent introduction of digital mixing consoles for sound reinforcement
will certainly change this, but for now, the primary focus of misalignment remains on the "tail end" of our
reinforcement systems.
Driver Misalignment
In loudspeakers with both high- and low-frequency transducers that are direct radiating (not very common
in sound reinforcement), there will be offset in the arrival times of the high-frequency transducer versus
the low-frequency transducer. This is simply due to their required physical positioning. A high-frequency
transducer consists of a smaller diaphragm with a shallower motor structure than its low-frequency
counterpart. When these drivers are positioned on a flat baffle (the most common baffle shape) the highfrequency signals arrive at the ears of listeners sooner than the low frequency signals, on the order of
several hundred microseconds (See Illustration 1).

Illustrations 1 & 2
This misalignment is reversed when the high-frequency driver is horn loaded (the more common method
used in sound reinforcement loudspeaker systems), requiring a waveguide of a certain depth to achieve
the needed pattern control. This is one of two primary reasons for using such horns; the other reason is
an increase in acoustic efficiency. With horns, high frequencies no longer lead low frequencies, but rather
they lag behind, again on the order of several hundred microseconds (See Illustration 2).

Illustrations 3a & 3b
In loudspeaker systems where high-, mid- and/or low-frequency components are in various configurations
of direct radiating and/or horn loading, it is almost impossible to realize horn lengths that position the
drivers in physical alignment to one another (See Illustration 3a and 3b).
Note that the alignment of multiple drivers is not as simple as visualizing or physically measuring the
location of each components diaphragm and then either positioning them to be in the same physical
plane or applying electrical signal delay to the leading component.
Every driver has varying points of acoustic origin that shift with frequency. The point of acoustic origin, as

applied to driver alignment, must be measured to be derive a mean value.

Inter-Cluster Misalignment
In multiple-component loudspeaker clusters constructed of self-contained loudspeakers (two-way, threeway, etc.) or individual drivers and horns, there is another source of misalignment not always
acknowledged and/or often confused by marketing hype. All loudspeakers provide varying degrees of
directivity or pattern control. But what is often referred to as a so-many-degrees by so-many-degrees
loudspeaker can only provide this stated coverage pattern within the frequency range that is within the
pattern control provided by the high-frequency horn, and to a lesser extent, the shape of the lowfrequency cone driver.
Illustrations 4a & 4b
In many designs, the direct radiating woofer provides pattern control that extends from the crossover point
down to the frequency range where the wavelengths become longer than the size and shape of the lowfrequency cone. The result is that the specified pattern control occurs, at best, within the upper five
octaves of the total of eight octaves of output supplied by typical two-way full-range loudspeakers (See
Illustrations 4a and 4b).
Thus any cluster consisting of multiple devices covering the same frequency range will have an overlap of
coverage. In a well-designed cluster, mid and high frequencies will not overlap significantly. But even a
very well designed cluster, using premium loudspeakers, will present overlap at lower frequencies.
Within the coverage zone of one loudspeaker, overlapping output from one or more neighboring
loudspeakers will arrive slightly later. The resulting combined coverage will be altered due to comb
filtering, also known as destructive interference. However, during the process of loudspeaker system
optimization, it is often possible to delay one loudspeaker in relation to another in order to minimize this
interaction within the primary coverage zone.
Illustration 5a
Part of this optimization process includes observation of the effects of such delay on each loudspeakers
coverage. As delay is applied to a loudspeaker to optimize the response of its neighbor, it is important to
insure that the response of the primary loudspeaker (providing primary coverage in its zone) has not been
worsened.
Another source of time-based signal corruption is the diffraction that occurs at lower frequencies. These
longer wavelengths literally wrap around a loudspeaker enclosure, and in clusters consisting of several
splayed loudspeakers, this diffracted energy enters the cavities between the enclosures and is reprojected back out towards the primary listening area (See Illustration 5a).
The interference that results from the combining direct energy with diffracted and redirected energy (that
is now lagging behind) can result in severe dips in the lower-mid frequency range.
Illustration 5b
The size and shape of these dips is dependent on the physical dimensions of the loudspeaker enclosure.
This anomaly cannot be equalized nor can it be corrected with delay, but fortunately, it can be treated
physically by inserting appropriate panels that close off the openings to the cavities (See Illustration 5b).
Architectural Boundaries
A potential source of destructive interference can exist outside of the loudspeakers or clusters
themselves, within the physical boundaries of a given space. If loudspeakers are placed close to room
boundaries (walls, floor or ceiling), there is interaction that results in interference patterns. This varies
across the frequency spectrum.
At low frequencies, there is reinforcement (boost) caused by boundaries, causing an increase (sometimes
desired) in low-frequency levels.
Illustration 6a
At mid frequencies, some points in the spectrum also are increased due to reflection, but many other
points are impacted by cancellation caused by reflected sound combining with the loudspeakers direct
output (See Illustration 6a).
At high frequencies, there is very little (or no) effect, because these frequencies are well controlled and
projected forward, away from nearby boundaries.

Often were forced to place a cluster or fill loudspeaker in front of the proscenium walls surrounding a
stage, with the resulting frequency response altered, primarily at mid frequencies. Lows are largely
unaffected (because they are long enough to wrap around the proscenium) and highs, much more
controlled and directed outwards, are hardly affected at all.
Illustration 6b
But at lower-middle frequencies, where the wavelengths are long enough, stray energy will wrap around
(diffract) the enclosure, reflect off the proscenium wall and combine with direct energy coming from the
loudspeaker (See Illustration 6b). Again, the primary culprit is the reflected energy lagging behind the
direct energy, and again, this cannot be corrected other than by removing the source of reflection, usually
moving the loudspeakers away from the boundaries.
In recording studios it has long been common practice to soffit-mount large-format monitor loudspeakers
into the front walls of the control room. In doing so, diffraction induced anamolies are minimized, and lowfrequency boundary reinforcement is maximized.
The same technique can be applied to installed reinforcement systems as long as proper architectural
positions are available. And, it takes confidence on the part of the system designer, confidence in
choosing the correct positions and that loudspeakers wont have to be moved.
In designing and building soffits (or closets as theyre sometimes called), its imperative that the cavities
behind the loudspeakers are closed off, made to be acoustically benign. Further, loudspeakers must be
anchored so they do not vibrate or move, and also, convenient access for service should be planned.
Finally, there can be no obstruction to direct energy emanating from the front of the loudspeakers. To this
end, it is wise to remove the factory grill so that sound must only pass through the grill installed to conceal
the soffit opening.
Backline Alignment
With systems for music or theatre application, another potential alignment problem can occur when
sources on stage are loud enough to be heard by the audience at the same (or nearly the same) level of
these sources are heard through the loudspeaker system. Because the loudspeaker system is almost
always positioned in front of sources, the combined sound of the direct source with the reinforced source
will be smeared to varying degrees.
This is most commonly encountered with a pop or rock band using a trap drum set. Snare and kick drums
are typically loud enough to project into the house at fairly high volume levels. If a show is mixed at
conservative to reasonably loud sound pressure levels, most of the audience hears both the direct
source and the reinforced source. Due to the percussive nature of these instruments and the degree of
misalignment that can occur (as much as 30 milliseconds), the smearing that results has a very
destructive effect on the clarity or definition of the source signals.
Add the typically overly reverberant nature of most performance spaces, and you have an all-too-familiar
situation where its next to impossible to produce a distinct rhythmic sound. More melodic or sustained
instruments, as well as those lower in source level, are less affected. But spoken word - in particular that
of upstage actors projecting well - will display a decrease in intelligibility from this misalignment.
Localization of sources to the stage can also be compromised. Other musical sources that can be
hindered include brass instruments, bass guitar, electric guitar and other percussion instruments.
Fortunately, it is relatively easy to minimize this problem by delaying the front-of-house loudspeaker
system so that the arrival time of the direct sound is more closely in sync with the reinforced sound.
Synchronizing to the loudest acoustic source on the stage, such as the snare drum, provides much
improved alignment for the majority of sound sources located elsewhere on the stage.
Those Pesky Stage Monitors
In amplified pop music productions and some theatrical events, it is necessary to provide stage monitors
for performers. When stage monitors are run at high volume levels in enclosed stage areas, sound from
these loudspeakers is projected into the rear wall and may be reflected back into the house.

In this scenario even sources that are low in natural output (such as pop vocals) are reinforced in the
stage monitors to a point that reflected sound becomes the source for misaligned combined energy in the
audience area.
Interestingly, there is also a misalignment problem for those using the stage monitors. The wrap around of
the front-of-house loudspeakers can arrive at the performers ears at a high enough level that it can effect
their perception of things like timing cues.
On a crowded stage, performers also hear leakage from nearby stage monitors and/or stage instrument
amplifiers. Almost unconsciously, they ask for more stage monitor level and without the guidance of a
seasoned audio crew, this escalation of levels can easily reach a point where there is risk of hearing
damage. Further, the excess stage energy can impact front-of-house sound in two ways: stage monitor
sound is reflected out into the house, and it can leak into open microphones. It can sometimes be helpful
to delay signal feeding the stage monitors, so that the wrap-around from the front-of-house loudspeakers
is in alignment with the stage monitors. However, one must be cautious not to apply so much delay that
the timing of performers is affected.
Of late, the use of in-ear monitoring (IEM) systems has become much more prevalent as musicians,
system operators, contractors, consultants and even the more general public have become familiar with
this technology. And, more manufacturers see IEM as a growth market and are offering low-cost, goodquality equipment.
In general, IEM offers the potential to minimize many of the time-based problems that can be caused by
stage monitors. But some issues, such as the aural conflict caused by front-of-house loudspeaker wrap
around, will still be a hindrance and therefore remain likely candidates for the corrective measures
outlined in this article.