Cool looking

[xavier]

http://www.theaudiobeat.com/topaudio...k_of_music.htm

[Erich H]

I drew out a design like that last winter, but never got it started. Well, mine wasn't layered though. It's certainly interesting.

[jeff_free69]

What, no diffraction or BSC theory discussions on this one?

[Paul Ebert]

Cool looking? I suppose, but, other than that, why?

[xavier]

That's reason enough for a LOT of people, Paul.

[David Crewe]

After reading Jeff's last write up on baffel step all I see is sticks, lots of sticks.

[mattk]

Reminds me of the cover of Prologue by Renaissance:

[benchtester]

I'll bet they sound pretty good... it's really hard to *mess* up those ScanSpeaks.

[Paul Ebert]

That's reason enough for a LOT of people, Paul.

True, and more power to them. But, it must really add to the cost and I can't see how it would provide any acoustic benefit. Do they claim any?

I'll bet they sound pretty good... it's really hard to *mess* up those ScanSpeaks.

Agreed, but I can't help wondering if for the added cost of the cabinet you couldn't get even better drivers (say, RAAL and Accuton).

It all comes down to the balance of form and function, I suppose, and everyone is entitled to their own such balance. It wasn't that long ago that form was more important to me. I guess I dreamed of having the ultimate of both at that time in my life and having realized that somethings gotta give, I've settled on less need for form. I must be getting old.

[m.a.c.]

I can't help wondering if for the added cost of the cabinet you couldn't get even better drivers (say, RAAL and Accuton).

What makes you think those are "better" than the Scanspeak drivers used in this design?