ernestcarl
Major Contributor
When you've spent 700,000 on speakers, you're probably not particularly happy about such feedback.
I also thought it didn't look broken. But to be impressed, I'd like to see a farfield measurement from a big studio for comparison (main monitors + the remaining megabucks for proper flush mounting). Unfortunately, I can't find anything like that anywhere.
That kind of data is going to be hard to find… one would have to ask the pro acousticians who’ve helped set up construct such rooms — and I don’t think they will just share that willy-nilly. The few mid-field measurements in studios I’ve seen still had imperfections even after an enormous amount of treatment. But judging the shape of the speaker and it’s configuration, it seems to have already been optimized…
Measurements aside, the thing to keep in mind is that the room acts as a filter and no matter what the transfer function will always change as one moves about the room. There will be optimal listening positions and not so optimal listening positions… this is true even in the most well treated spaces.
In a very well treated studio with good dimensions one has to expect there would still be variances as one veers too far away from the MLP since the timing and distances from the sound sources will change, thus their summed phase relationship — though we should expect to see far less extreme destructive interferences and a more even decay profile.