Horn speakers with Imaging?

The main thing that hinders imaging in my systems, is wrong cues, nonharmonic distortion especially in the high treble. It the treble is wrong the image gets blurred. This is a problem with many causes, including bad recordings and production, use of compression, as well as the playback system. Testing Tori Amos: Speaking with trees (streaming). Her voice is distorted. No matter the system I use for playback. Otherwise the image is quite good, but this - no thank you. I have not heard the LP, though.

Checking a ’standard’ LP in terms of sound, Stones: tattoo you, I find that the sound is quite good and coherent, but here also, the recording is a bit too hot when the band sings and plays at full throttle. This is a remarkably "thoughtful" album, and the music sounds best when it is more subdued, moody, Even with Mick singing falsetto.

On the other hand, my best sounding LPs display few of the problems mentioned. The music is just there, I don’t worry about imaging or depth etc. Recently, Endresen and Wesseltoft Out here in there. Shelby Lynne Give me some loving. Cooder etc By the river. The best ECM and Speakers Corner records. Analogue Productions Doors at 45 rpm. And many others. All LPs. Streaming is still not up to the same level of emotional involvement in my system.

It has been argued that bipole speakers give a somewhat diffuse image, not as sharp as monopoles. This may be true, but a lot can be done by positioning the speakers and tuning the system including the room.

I find that, with my best-sounding LPs, my bipole speakers sound sharp and detailed - I am not sure if I need any more. The precision, needed for a good image, is good. Atlhough not quite as good as with the best pinpoint speakers I've heard.

The same thing goes on, with my medium or not so good sounding recordings, but now the outcome is no longer so good. My system is musical but also analytical, so it is like the system can now sound worse. Or more revealing. I hear the problems of bad recording, production etc. Its a give and take.

@willgolf wrote:

Does everyone have the same definition of imaging? In audio terms, what doe that word mean?

+1

From Alex Halberstadt’s Stereophile review of the Klipsch La Scala AL5’s:

The Klipsches created sonic images that were eerily, entirely life-sized and placed them on a stage as large as the recording and the room allowed. Combined with their hair-raising dynamic chops, this allowed the La Scalas to come uncannily close to creating the illusion of real musicians playing in a room. That’s a big-time reviewing cliché, so perhaps a more effective way to communicate this is to say that they reveal how radically most speakers—even large ones—miniaturize the dynamics and scale of recordings.

This to me underlines how a vital aspect of speaker "imaging" has become or rather for long has been a (limited) thing of itself in audiophilia - that is, as something that is less a representation of a live event and more a cultivation of sorts into the the smaller, more laidback ".. razor-sharp sonic holographs" that is so prevalently hailed by many in this hobby of ours. Later in his review Halberstadt writes:

Last, while the La Scalas throw an enormous and cavernous soundstage, they do not create the razor-sharp sonic holographs of the kind conjured by certain contemporary minimonitors. But if that’s crucial to you, you probably aren’t considering these speakers.

This may (or may not) to some degree tie into the following comment by John Atkinson in his measurements section of the La Scala’s:

... the tweeter’s output arrives first at the microphone. The output of the midrange unit doesn’t arrive at the microphone for another 1.5ms, while the woofer’s output starts to arrive 2ms after that. Although the arrivals of all three horn outputs are within the ear’s tolerance for arrival time difference (footnote 2), such behavior could interfere somewhat with stereo imaging precision.

Using horn-based speakers myself I can attest to the importance of either physically time aligning or (actively) digitally delaying the individual driver segments to more properly cohere into a sonic "simultaneity" of a presentation as a whole. One can almost "see" the radiation bubble forming more smoothly in front of you when carefully applying the right amount of delay, and the positive effects it has on spatial acuity. Certainly the "life-sized" aspect of imaging or overall presentation that Mr. Halberstadt touches upon - ideally in proper conjunction with delay or timing execution as well as attention into power response and dispersion pattern matching at the crossovers - in general is severely overlooked.

However to think that he was only presented to a fraction of a larger potential, while still being so enthused about what he heard through the La Scala’s, puts into perspective the outlook that is possible (and fully attainable) with horn-based speakers when more closely considering all or at least additional aspects in their implementation.

@phusis - thanks, very informative, although I havent measured the 'radiation bubble' in front of my bipoles I can well imagine that it changes like you say.

But what do you mean by 'life sized' imaging? That images should not be too tall? Or too close up? Too bombastic? I find that this varies with the recording and production, and when the presentation is too forward and in my face, I push the listener chair back.

One oddity about Audiophile vs. "real people" listening is our penchant for single seat optimizing vs. wide listening locations.

Worth kind of keeping that in mind when we discuss imaging and our preferences.