Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DS-21" data-source="post: 6597633" data-attributes="member: 577690">I work under the assumption that we&#039;re all adults.&nbsp; If you think my post merits &quot;harsh words,&quot; then use them.&nbsp; I&#039;m not particularly thin-skinned.My overriding preference, though you didn&#039;t mention it, is to keep crossovers out of the midrange whenever possible, and to certainly never use drivers of differing directivity through the midrange under any circumstances.&nbsp; That means either a coincident driver (e.g. KEF Uni-Q, Tannoy Dual Concentric) or a relatively small wideband driver augmented down low.Time coherency where is the question.&nbsp; It&#039;s desirable in principle, but in practice it&#039;s just about impossible to obtain in a car over an area that encompasses both ears of a typical human being.&nbsp; I would not compromise something else that is audible to achieve a theoretical ideal.Of course, if it audibly and measurably improves matters, one should invert the polarity (which is different from phase) of a driver.&nbsp; I don&#039;t understand why that is even a question.&nbsp; Chasing something that may be audible under certain circumstances at the expense of something audible to everyone everywhere is not my idea of rational behavior.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DS-21, post: 6597633, member: 577690"] I work under the assumption that we're all adults. If you think my post merits "harsh words," then use them. I'm not particularly thin-skinned. My overriding preference, though you didn't mention it, is to keep crossovers out of the midrange whenever possible, and to certainly never use drivers of differing directivity through the midrange under any circumstances. That means either a coincident driver (e.g. KEF Uni-Q, Tannoy Dual Concentric) or a relatively small wideband driver augmented down low. Time coherency [I]where[/I] is the question. It's desirable in principle, but in practice it's just about impossible to obtain in a car over an area that encompasses both ears of a typical human being. I would not compromise something else that is audible to achieve a theoretical ideal. Of course, if it audibly and measurably improves matters, one should invert the polarity (which is different from phase) of a driver. I don't understand why that is even a question. Chasing something that may be audible under certain circumstances at the expense of something audible to everyone everywhere is not my idea of rational behavior. [/QUOTE]

Verification