Hi Kiwi - Very interesting thread you linked. I agree with many of the things you said. Among them, that the choice between absorption and diffusion is often the choice between imaging and soundstaging. Absorption often improves imaging at the expense of soundstaging. And diffusion often improves soundstaging at the expense of imaging.
IME, the rate at which absorption detracts from soundstaging is *much faster* than the rate at which diffusion detracts from imaging. And of course well placed diffusion results in *much better* imaging than an untreated room, so together that gives diffusion a significant advantage over absorption for many applications.
Again, IMO, IME, etc.
Bryon
IME, the rate at which absorption detracts from soundstaging is *much faster* than the rate at which diffusion detracts from imaging. And of course well placed diffusion results in *much better* imaging than an untreated room, so together that gives diffusion a significant advantage over absorption for many applications.
Again, IMO, IME, etc.
Bryon