Once upon a time on usenet Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 13/12/2015 11:27 AM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 12/12/2015 11:32 AM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Was looking at some info today on the KEF B110, and the KEF blurb
says it should be front mounted on the baffle, recessed so the
chassis is flush with the front of the baffle. Yet on perhaps its
most famous application, the LS 3/5a, it's mounted to the back of
the baffle.

**I'll let you into a dirty little secret:

The LS3/5A is/was the most over-rated speaker of all time. Muddy,
poor imaging and just plain average.

Right.

There, I said it. The emperor has no clothes.

Did one fall of the shelf and smite you? ;-)

Forget the LS3/5A and mount the B110 the way KEF advises.

I was wondering if anyone had experimented and could give chapter and
verse on the effect?


** http://www.linkwitzlab.com/diffraction.htm
http://www.bodziosoftware.com.au/article5.pdf
http://www.salksound.com/wp/?p=160

Yeah late reply but thanks Trevor - I'm excercising my brain attempting to
come to grips with designing cabinets which minimise baffle step difraction
and those pages help.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)