I auditioned Devore O96’s when I was looking to upgrade. System was very good and listening room was in an old house with plaster walls and high ceilings. I was ready to be dazzled but in the 45 minutes I listened, the number one disappointment was the imaging. Granted, I was coming from Focal Electra standmounts but nowhere in the reviews had there been anything but gushing praise for the Devores. I value good imaging in my speakers so this was a dealbreaker for me. I purchased Totem Element Metals instead, which image almost as good as the Focals. So in, my mind, I have a bias towards narrow baffles imaging better than wide baffles. I am sure this is a gross stereotyping but still...
narrow and wide baffles and imaging
According to all the "professional" audio reviews that I've read over the last several years, narrow baffles are crucial to creating that so-desired pin-point imaging.
However, over the last few weeks, I've had the opportunity to audition Harbeth 40.2, Spendor Classic 100, Audio Note AN-E, and Devore O/93. None of these had deficient imaging; indeed I would go so far as to say that it was good to very good.
So, what gives? I'm forced to conclude that modern designs, 95% of which espouse the narrow baffle, are driven by aesthetic/cosmetic considerations, rather than acoustical ones, and the baffle~imaging canard is just an ex post facto justification.
I can understand the desire to build speakers that fit into small rooms, are relatively unobtrusive, and might pass the SAF test, but it seems a bit much to add on the idea that they're essentially the only ones that will do imaging correctly.