Planars/ Electrostats benefits over box speakers?

Just thought. Line sources are more efficient as distance, dropping -3db at double distance rather than -6db for point source speakers. The guy/girl in the back row can enjoy.

"Or am I barking up the wrong tree?"

Some designers also attend to the cabinet shape to reduce diffraction (I used the wrong term last post).

You have excellent taste. You are on the right track. Check out the magnapan 1.7 for under $2000.00. It is about 5feet tall but has a small footprint of approximately 17" x 2". The sound benefits are real. You cannot get better sound for the money. They sound more like real music than other speakers at this price point. To get the most from these speakers you need to place them in a suitable room. You are need a good amplifier. Good here does not mean expensive. (Eg: Odyssey Khartago extreme for about $1250) Contact the company to find out if the dimensions of your your room is suitable for these speakers. Good luck

"You cannot get better sound for the money."

That's debatable.

Nothing against the maggies but see discussion above about the inherent differences, strengths and weaknesses.

Bottom line: if you enjoy listening to rock/pop/electronic music and want to feel teh energy of the music as well as hear it, Maggies are NOT a good choice.

If you just want to hear beautiful music sound beautiful, to hell with all the rest then Maggies are hard to beat.

Although there is also the mindset that for beauty in music alone, a simple low wattage 300B SET tube amp with high efficiency speakers is the way to go. There is merit to that argument IMHO. But that is a whole different can of worms, end to end.

The Mangaplaner 20.7 is one of the better bargains in the speaker world: fast, transparent, full range and not too hard to drive.

The Sound Lab is the state of the art in ESLs, and much easier to drive than Martin Logans, and usually have greater sound pressure capacity as well as deeper bass.

Both speakers have tube and transistor advocates.

Planars have a backwave that, because it arrives later than the front output of the speaker, aid the ear/brain system in improving sound source location; IOW imaging and depth.

"Planars have a backwave that, because it arrives later than the front output of the speaker, aid the ear/brain system in improving sound source location; IOW imaging and depth. "

All speakers have a backwave. Its more a matter of what frequencies are contained in the backwave and the magnitude. Planars have more of both than most box designs. Omnis also have more of both and also have a more 360 degree radiation pattern as opposed to a simple backwave firing 180 degrees in the opposite direction only.

The omni 360 degree dispersion pattern is more like what occurs when sound is generated in real life. IMHO, omni presentation is more realistic/lifelike in general as a result, but planars are a step in that direction compared to most forward firing box designs.

The wvefront generated by an omni is also phase coherent in all directions which results in a very coherent/natural sound.

Planar backwave is not in phase with forward firing wave. As a result, planars can have very holographic imaging when set up right but it does not necessarily sound coherent and natural like an omni. Its like listening to a gong strike. Very holographic and impressive with lots of sound everywhere but I find I do not enjoy planars nearly as much as I used to when I hear them now that I am acclimated to very high quality omni sound. The coherency is just not there. Except for things that radiate sound like a gong. :^)