Magico - Wide vs. Narrow

When I was thinking of Magico as a wide-baffle, I was thinking of the M5 with the ring radiator. It has a baffle that is proud of the cabinet. For me this is still a wide-baffle speaker.

I’m also not trying to pick on Magico per se, just looking more for a company that has done both.

Sonus Faber may be a better brand to ask about since they have the Stradivari  but not sure how many have heard the Strad and the narrow models to compare. The larger Focal Utopia line may also in a sense be like this, the mids and tweeters were much narrower than the baffle width. In start contrast to say Wilson or Vandersteen who minimize the baffle width per driver.

Again, not looking to argue about overall value of any brand, just want to know if others have noticed distint differences we could attribute to baffle width.

@erik_squires   : "  just want to know if others have noticed distint differences we could attribute to baffle width "

No one could do that with different kind of speakers. The only way is two similar speakers ( same everything. ) with difference only if wide or narrow.

Sense to you?

R.

Hey @rauliruegas  ---- Not really.  I get what you mean about apples to orange comparisons but I think it's possible to hear trends, especially in regards to the acoustic effects I'm asking about.  :) 

In my experience most wide baffle speakers do have somewhat of a distinct sound. This may also be due to the fact that many wide baffle manufacturers also subscribe to old fashioned design ideas like lossy cabinets, flat baffle fronts, etc. 

Imo, all else being equal, the edge diffraction of a wide cabinet is more likely to degrade image precision because its false azimuth cues arrive at a worse time.  But imo cabinet shape matters more than cabinet width. 

It is not clear to me that baffle width has a major effect on perception of the acoustic space on the recording, but if it does, I think the advantage would lie with the wide baffle. 

Duke