Great Speakers - More is More?

Reflecting on my other thread desperately seeking great midrange, I recalled some of the holy grail audiophile speakers of my youth including the Quad ESL 57 and the KHL 9.

At that time, there was an interesting superlative which could be added to either of those names: STACKED!

Stacked Quads! Stacked KLH 9s! The Levinson HQD system featuring "stacked" Quads! Stacked Tympanis!

As I fine tune my listening room and enjoy the unusually articulate bass of my Tympani IVa's, I recall that it is often attributed to the unusually large surface area of the bass panels.

So why not "stacked" Magneplanars? Stacked MG-20's?

There was another thread discussing the surprising virtues of the cheapo Radio Shack speakers. In that thread, one of you suggesting "stacking" the monitors for a bargain priced "line source".

This seems like an obvious area for audiophile experimentation, yet no one seems to ever discuss it.

Please help me to buy more audio.
I guess if your ceiling was high enough for stacked MG-20's it could work if you built a custom frame to hold the panels. Although I don't know how much better that would work than a single pair... you'd have more power handling and greater dynamic capability, but you'd probably have to deal with damping more room reflections as well.

Have you ever tried any of the stacked Acoustat models like the 1+1, 2+2, Sixes, or Eights? They can be pretty impressive and detailed and they have a great midrange.
I have three MG1.6 in the front, so I guess that is half-stacked Maggies.

It would be practical to vertically stack MMGs. I thought about this in context of creating high and low left and right front speakers as required for the 2+2+2 multichannel configuration. For stereo or 5.1 multichannel you would simply drive the high and low speakers with the same signal.

I believe "stacked" did not necessarily mean vertically stacked.

After posting this thread, it occured to me that greater surface area for planars would probably help the bass. But perhaps it would not be good to have doubled up tweeters, at least in different locations?

Re room reflections, I believe they could be tamed.
I have never tried stacking speakers, though I have read stacking Advents was apparently enjoyed by many years ago.

I don't have a room that would accomodate large speakers being stacked, plus my budget couldn't finance it. Sounds like fun though.
CW, yes, I think the problem of having multiple tweeters at different points on the horizontal axis can be problematic and lead to time smear distortions and complicated reflective patterns. I think that's why vertical arrays are generally more successful and coherent. Plus in panel and ribbon speakers the drivers do not have much vertical dispersion...

You can get more relative bass with horizontal stacking, but sometimes too much bass and then the imaging usually becomes more vague, as well.
many years ago, i visited an audio dealer at his home. he owned 8 pair of quad esls, placed at various locations in his listening room.

i remember listening to an lp of dave bruck "take 5". it was a most memorable experience.

i also listened to 8 pairs of sound labs, also a memorable experience.

Maybe 2 pairs of MG-20s, where the mid and tweeter were disconnected in the second pair, vertically biamped and crossed over at about 80 cycles?

That sounds like fun.
My apologies to those who've read this from me before. I'd be curious to hear these planars doubled up, but, placed back to back.

Back to Back? How would that work?

More energy to both the front and rear?

Wouldnt there be conflicts or cancellations?
Unsound...That would be like pitting the Maggie in a box, only worse. Constraining the backwave.