http://product-images.highwire.com/12510183/1772-14.jpg
But as far as highs having a 3 dimensional image, nothing touches my 360’ MP-02 Plasma Flame tweeters
https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/V5sAAOSwCJxZ6PXy/s-l1600.jpg.
Cheers George
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.
The best imagining Infinity ever, was the IRS Beta’s with midrange, tweeter, and super tweeter baffle’less. http://product-images.highwire.com/12510183/1772-14.jpg But as far as highs having a 3 dimensional image, nothing touches my 360’ MP-02 Plasma Flame tweeters https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/V5sAAOSwCJxZ6PXy/s-l1600.jpg. Cheers George |
Post removed |
I could be mistaken, but the IRS-V’s midrange/tweeter panel was also baffle’less, no? Yes line array, but that sure looks like a baffle to me, even though it curves away. http://www.infinity-classics.de/models/IRS-series+Beta+Gamma-Delta-Sigma-Epsilon-1988-95-98/IRS/IRS8... Cheers George |
Post removed |
Post removed |