In article ,
harrogate wrote:
Another strange point: speakers with two drivers almost always produce a
better and more sharply defined stereo image than those with three
drivers. Try a LS3/5a against a Spendor BC1 and you'll see what I mean.

But the centres of the drivers in a BC1 are further apart than on a 3/5a
- if you believe the dual concentric theory. Also, *in general* the
smaller the speaker overall, the better the image. Don't know where this
leaves the ESL57, except of course that it doesn't have a baffle to
diffuse the image.

Mounting any speaker flush in a rack etc as they do in some TV production
control rooms for appearance really does mess up the imaging.

--
*Don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 01:44:16 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman
wrote:

In article ,
harrogate wrote:
Another strange point: speakers with two drivers almost always produce a
better and more sharply defined stereo image than those with three
drivers. Try a LS3/5a against a Spendor BC1 and you'll see what I mean.

But the centres of the drivers in a BC1 are further apart than on a 3/5a
- if you believe the dual concentric theory. Also, *in general* the
smaller the speaker overall, the better the image. Don't know where this
leaves the ESL57, except of course that it doesn't have a baffle to
diffuse the image.

It also depends how old the BC1 is - the originals were two-ways. BTW,
Lowthers are essentially dual-concentric two-ways, and IME they don't
image worth a damn!

Mounting any speaker flush in a rack etc as they do in some TV production
control rooms for appearance really does mess up the imaging.

Some of the finest imaging I ever heard was from flush-mounted
speakers. Think about it - there *is* no diffraction smear from the
baffle in a flush-mounted speaker.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

In article ,
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
It also depends how old the BC1 is - the originals were two-ways.

The original BBC design omitted the HF unit, but I doubt many of these are
around domestically. It also had a most noticeable mid range 'suck out'
which the BEEB favoured in those days.

--
*If you lived in your car, you'd be home by now *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

In article ,
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
It also depends how old the BC1 is - the originals were two-ways.

The original BBC design omitted the HF unit, but I doubt many of these are
around domestically. It also had a most noticeable mid range 'suck out'
which the BEEB favoured in those days.

--
*If you lived in your car, you'd be home by now *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

In article ,
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
Mounting any speaker flush in a rack etc as they do in some TV production
control rooms for appearance really does mess up the imaging.

Some of the finest imaging I ever heard was from flush-mounted
speakers. Think about it - there *is* no diffraction smear from the
baffle in a flush-mounted speaker.

We'll have to differ, then. I've never heard any flush mounted speakers
that compare to the same basic design free standing. Doesn't stop plenty
of recording studios fitting them, though. But the final positioning will
be done on near fields in this situation.

--
*What was the best thing before sliced bread? *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 13:33:20 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman
wrote:

In article ,
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
Mounting any speaker flush in a rack etc as they do in some TV production
control rooms for appearance really does mess up the imaging.

Some of the finest imaging I ever heard was from flush-mounted
speakers. Think about it - there *is* no diffraction smear from the
baffle in a flush-mounted speaker.

We'll have to differ, then. I've never heard any flush mounted speakers
that compare to the same basic design free standing. Doesn't stop plenty
of recording studios fitting them, though. But the final positioning will
be done on near fields in this situation.

Try one of the finest monitors in the world - the ATC SCM300 -
basically, it's *supposed* to be flush mounted.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 13:33:20 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman
wrote:

In article ,
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
Mounting any speaker flush in a rack etc as they do in some TV production
control rooms for appearance really does mess up the imaging.

Some of the finest imaging I ever heard was from flush-mounted
speakers. Think about it - there *is* no diffraction smear from the
baffle in a flush-mounted speaker.

We'll have to differ, then. I've never heard any flush mounted speakers
that compare to the same basic design free standing. Doesn't stop plenty
of recording studios fitting them, though. But the final positioning will
be done on near fields in this situation.

Try one of the finest monitors in the world - the ATC SCM300 -
basically, it's *supposed* to be flush mounted.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

In article ,
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
Mounting any speaker flush in a rack etc as they do in some TV production
control rooms for appearance really does mess up the imaging.

Some of the finest imaging I ever heard was from flush-mounted
speakers. Think about it - there *is* no diffraction smear from the
baffle in a flush-mounted speaker.

We'll have to differ, then. I've never heard any flush mounted speakers
that compare to the same basic design free standing. Doesn't stop plenty
of recording studios fitting them, though. But the final positioning will
be done on near fields in this situation.

--
*What was the best thing before sliced bread? *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 01:44:16 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman
wrote:

In article ,
harrogate wrote:
Another strange point: speakers with two drivers almost always produce a
better and more sharply defined stereo image than those with three
drivers. Try a LS3/5a against a Spendor BC1 and you'll see what I mean.

But the centres of the drivers in a BC1 are further apart than on a 3/5a
- if you believe the dual concentric theory. Also, *in general* the
smaller the speaker overall, the better the image. Don't know where this
leaves the ESL57, except of course that it doesn't have a baffle to
diffuse the image.

It also depends how old the BC1 is - the originals were two-ways. BTW,
Lowthers are essentially dual-concentric two-ways, and IME they don't
image worth a damn!

Mounting any speaker flush in a rack etc as they do in some TV production
control rooms for appearance really does mess up the imaging.

Some of the finest imaging I ever heard was from flush-mounted
speakers. Think about it - there *is* no diffraction smear from the
baffle in a flush-mounted speaker.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering