In Reply to: Re: Backward Maggies - Not so backward? posted by Peter Gunn on March 10, 2007 at 20:38:05:
PG
Yep. I meant you, but didn't want to use your name without permission.
Everything you said in our Emails and in this post is true. I don't understand why it sounds different. You say the rear wave is more important. That wave is delayed (reflected, longer path) and has more chance of being changed (reflected and diffused) by the front wall, diffusion, equipment, ficus trees, etc.. It seems counter-intuitive, but definitely sounds good. I would never have thought to turn them around. Thanks for the idea. It is just amazing what these speakers are capable of. I can only imagine how they will sound modded.Thanks
Mike (Oh...that Mike)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Backward Maggies - Not so backward? - DragonEars 22:36:37 03/10/07 (5)
- Re: Backward Maggies - Not so backward? - Peter Gunn 09:07:35 03/11/07 (4)
- Ears vs Science - DragonEars 19:28:47 03/11/07 (0)
- Re: better clamping method - wazoo 11:11:33 03/11/07 (2)
- Re: better clamping method - Peter Gunn 12:00:03 03/11/07 (1)
- Re: No sir, that isn't my work. - wazoo 13:04:55 03/11/07 (0)