67.189.82.60
This Post Has Been Edited by the Author
In Reply to: RE: Limage: Oh my goodness. posted by ahendler on September 03, 2017 at 08:41:42
There is no question about absorption being a bad idea (generally speaking) for the wall behind Maggies---everyone knows that. But that's not the issue I raised. That's what they call a strawman argument ;-).It's not a question of absorption vs. diffusion, but rather of a bare wall (or a TV screen) vs. one fitted with diffusers. That, and dealing with reflections off a center-positioned TV screen behind and between a pair of speakers, which has become a common dilemma for audiophiles. Many have found the screen to create more of an imaging problem than that of an absorber placed over it for serious listening. Neither is ideal, but which is less bad?
The wall behind a pair of speakers will reflect the sound reaching it, whether than wall is a hard bare one, or one fitted with diffusers. I have seen the case for diffusers on the wall behind dipole planar speakers made many times, but the case against them proposed here is the first time I've seen it. Of course you don't want to overdamp a room with excessive absorption, but no one is suggesting that. Diffusion is the opposite of absorption.
Edits: 09/03/17 09/03/17 09/03/17 09/03/17 09/03/17Follow Ups: