- Joined
- Jan 23, 2020
- Messages
- 4,335
- Likes
- 6,702
That's... A long video. I'll watch eventually, but Any key points?
- The examples they used for good neutral narrow and good neutral wide dispersion speakers were the JTR Noesis 212 and the BMR, respectively. I really like how they normalized the polar maps. That made it much easier to see the differences in dispersion width. BMR was -6db at 90 degrees. 212 was -6db at 30 degrees. I wish reviews would normalize these graphs as they did here.
- Narrow dispersion gives a wider sweetspot when toed in in front of listener. I'm not sure I agree with this.
- Narrow dispersion has the same effect as absorbing the first reflections, only it does it much better. The problem with absorbing first reflections is that absorbers do a very poor job of preserving the tonal balance. Absorbers don't absorb lower frequencies well, and can often be reflective at higher frequencies, essentially causing a midrange dip.
* Not enough real research to support the points below, but most experts seem to agree, anecdotally
- Narrow dispersion will have a tighter more focused image
- Wide dispersion will have a larger and wider soundstage, with more space between instruments
- Narrow dispersion probably preferable for recordings that were recorded in absorptive rooms (Pop, electronic?)
- Wide dispersion probably preferable for recordings that were recorded in real rooms(live music, orchestral, acoustic?)
- Narrow dispersion maybe preferable for surround systems. <- More research needed
- Wide dispersion maybe preferable for 2 channel. <- More research needed
- Mono tests possibly insufficient for teasing out preferences of wide vs narrow. Only dispersion element present in mono is spaciousness. <- More research needed. He gives an example of good speakers that could be used to test. The example given for perhaps the best wide and narrow designs he's seen are Vivid Audio and D&D 8C, respectively.
Overall main point seems to be that insufficient research has been done to really say which is better, and even if the research is done, it may depend on room, listening distance, and source material. I thought it did a good job of highlighting the advantages of narrow and wide dispersion.
Last edited: