I know. No bad feelings. It is a technical topic and it seems You are not on my wavelength. Your argument regarding the "sentiment" took me one whole minute to debunk. Because of Your eloquent English.Is English your second or third language? I don't mean this as an insult, I'm just having a difficult time in this thread comprehending exactly what you're talking about.
Translated by DeepL:
The advantage of concentric aka coaxial designs is to avoid these nasty dip around the crossover area when you go off the axis.
With "planar" many myths have arisen from incoherent technical speculations. For example, the moving pattern of a plan's membrane is literally chaotic in space, meaning that the phase correlation between parts of the membrane is simply lost, also known as "breaking up," but extremely (see DML speakers). The electrostatic speaker experiences a positive feedback through mirror charges ... and many problems more.
Who is Gallo? Is there a place in technology for misleading sentiment? Is the majority right?
Not to say that all these examples didn't even deliver!
Today, "time accuracy" is only achieved to a certain extent by digital, frequency-dependent phase shift - as an aftermath. This is the only way to possibly have a "time alignment" that can be spoken of. (So that it can be measured reasonably, mind you.) The examples show only unsuccessful attempts, storytelling, no actual realizations.
So, with modern tools, it was found that all the "time alignment" wasn't worth the effort at all – again, not to mention that all the legacy stuff never delivered anything! See https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...g-klippel-andrew-jones-and-james-croft.11291/
For inclined walls see my post => #76 with an example.
Last edited: