... transparent (no back emf to damp these out as well)...
What the customer needs is a clear set of parameters to base the purchase on. It seems off-tracks to me to try to explain every detail in detail cleaning up sticky preconceptions given birth to by advertizing departments and fed to maturity by "the literature" aka glossy magazines and false friends in the internet.
I'm very unhappy that S. Linkwitz was cited with a minor concern that should back in the day support his ideal of a dipole speaker without cabinet. But one has to understand that his perspective was the reproduction of self-made in-ear recordings. I expect them to be done under not so ideal circumstances otherwise: less experienced orchestra--yep, just 'classic', and less sophisticated acoustics in the town hall. Let alone the difference between real in-ear and, what he used me thinks, besides-ear technology.
So, on the element of concern above, "EMF" namely, as part of the bigger concern regarding boxy harmonics whatever.
This is all, from the starting suspicion down to the ever deeper digging 'discussions' here
of utter irrelevance:
- "EMF" is contained in the Thiele / Small model of a dynamic loudspeaker; every argument addressing the EMF is already eaten-up by theory
- beyond the range of the T/S model the cone's acceleration, hence its radiation is mostly determined by mass and drive force, not rigidity--NOT, take note, thank You
- the drive force is (a) motor strength x current and (b) to a relatively tiny degree backpressure; to emphasize motor ./. pressure just make the cone heavier, not stiffer and raise the motor strenghthaccordingly
Even if backpressure was of any concern it would only shift the GROUP DELAY by a tiny bit; the latter being out of the detection capabilities of human hearing
To understand the argument You should be able to understand the concept of group delay. If You do not
exactly know what that is, please stop talking about stereo technology. It is absolutely hopeless. That is, why my early introduction of the argument was totally and not the least to say rudely ignored. Ignorance doesn't liberate from kindness.
Later reflections say at about 1ms with -20dB to -30dB level are of now concern, because they appear from the same source as the original, and just shift phase hence group delay which is in wider margins irrelevant for sound quality / fidelity.
In this S. Linkwitz, all honor to him, was plain wrong. Thank You.