Mating a 6" midrange to a small tweeter is exactly what B&W does and most agree that they are not the best designs, I was pointing out that the Sierra 2 EX does the same exact thing.
It is for that very reason that I suggested in another thread that the Ascend Luna-monitor (with a 4.5 inch woofer) might be even better, if it's made into a threeway by becing crossed over to a woofer/subwoofer from 200 or 300 hz down.
If extremely wide dispersion were the ideal target, that would make the BMR the king under 2k.
Reading the measurements at Audioholics just now, I would be inclined to say that it indeed is.
After hearing a few Revel and KEF designs, I can personally say that the tradeoff is worth it. I think many people believe that you want the widest dispersion possible, ie omnidirectional, but that would end up having a flat in-room response and sound too bright. If this were the ideal, then I agree the BMR would pretty much be the best speaker around. I think the point-source quality that a properly designed waveguide creates is a more natural sound personally.
I've heard my fair share of horns and waveguides as well, including Revels. I've also heard a several omnis, wide-dispersion box speakers, etc. I would say it like this: They present the music in a different way. Both things have their advantages. Over time, though, I tend to perceive wide dispersion speakers as more natural - as long as I listen in the relative near-field and thus experience the clarity of direct sound with the envelopment I get from lateral reflections.
Last edited: