I don't think we come to terms. Lets give the aGnome, metaphorical speaking, some room to breath (despite its miniscule enclosure ;-)I agree that the standard calculation is ...
´Natural´ was meaning solely the bass from the given driver+enclosure w/o heavy EQ or boost.
But the deep notes are still in the signal, aren't they? Won't they make the driver exceed excursion limits anyway? More so, as they hit below tuning and see the driver un-loaded. Was that issue of unload solved recently without me taking note?In fact it's the contrary; I would have chose a higher Fb in order to gain middle bass level; tuning to i.e. the 30Hz region would have exceed x-mech of the passive radiators and limit the bass level. What is the interest of searching low-bass with such a concept?
O/k, cost cuttings, But the Vifa would have allowed forIn France, a Vifa dome is more expansive than this Monacor and the reason of its choice is partly given in my first post. Fx around 2.3kHz is clever assuming the mid-woofer is fully able to go this frequency while limiting costs.
a) better vertical dispersion, especially benefitial if listener position is not fixed or distributed
b) less intermodulation, less distortion
c) better dispersion in treble
d) maybe, better linearity
The initial concept wasn't explained in too much detail:It's funny to see that some people give their opinion on this speaker explaining that Vb is too low, that the mid-woofer is too small, that the tweeter coulfd be another and on... without staying connected to the initial concept.
"My goal was to create the most affordable standed/bookshelf speaker with an enclosure of H10.12” x W5.75” x D7.24”, so a size smaller than the well known LS3/5A."
For instance, regarding necessary compromise, what was the weigthing of quality parameters versus cost in money and/or size. Targeted listening volume, distortion, dispersion etc. What is the actual use case for which audience?