optimizing for front row vs back row: implications on riser

I've been fighting the riser height calculator for a few hours now trying to determine how to get the dang thing under 16" or so (which is impractical for all of the obvious reasons).

Bryan Bape and I originally settled on the REAR row to optimize the acoustical design . As a result, the front row is quite close to the screen (1.1x or so), and the rear row gets the sweet spot in sound and field of view.

However, pushing the entire seating area back by about 10 - 12" makes a significant difference with the height of the riser and was a factor I had forgotten about completely. If I pushed the seating area even farther, to make the front row where the rear is now, then I would be able to get even lower on the riser height.

So what did you guys go with? Optimizing the front row, or optimizing the back row?

Yeah, I look at a ton of risers beforehand. I also toyed with the idea of doing one of the risers that just under the chair, with a step in front, and no riser between the rows. This has a similar advantage but I discarded that idea.

I will likely do the mini-riser regardless of the final height requirements. That is, if I have a 10" riser requirement, I will frame an 8" riser, etc.

In my discussions with Bryan, we chose to an either/or scenario for which row will get the sweet spot in acoustical design, but I may see about compromising all of the seats to get a sub-sweet-spot for two rows.

Also: has anyone explored the idea of simply extending the feet of the chairs on the seats, instead of a mini-riser?

I'm thinking a couple of hockey pucks screwed to the underside of the legs of my home theater seats might serve the same booster function.

Honestly....this type of solution might be the best bet.

The Riser calc gets you to input a worst case scenario...short people in the back and tall people up front.