Vandersteen 3A Sigs vs Klipsch Forte III

Have you or roxy even heard the Forte III

Yes I owned them for 4 mts got them cheap, as they were a good turnaround to make money on. A friend owned the older version, bass wasn’t as good/low on them.

Cheers George

Since the spatial info is encoded in the signal, somebody walk me thru the physics of how a big baffle improves the image ?
you do get the bounce off the panel and the back wall is 100% distortion....
but have at it, math gets extra credit
the same applies to focusing energy with a horn, ain’t nothing free.....
remember, I own horns, listen to them every day, I can assure you depth of image is not on my list of things they do well....

i will I’ll accept the homework assignment to go in and put a constrained layer damping treatment on the horn body, 

tomic601"Since the spatial info is encoded in the signal, somebody walk me thru the physics of how a big baffle improves the image ?
you do get the bounce off the panel and the back wall is 100% distortion...."

No it is not 100% distortion because recordings are made, mixed and mastered to be played over a loudspeaker in some kind of room except lousy recordings that are made to be played in a car although I am not sure that is common practice in the industry today.

Someone mentioned somewhere, that they put a dampening substance inside the horn throat to reduce coloration or resonance. I highly recommend against that. It should all be from the exterior of the horn. 

@tomic601 

No math required. In my particular experience, it's very easy to hear. I'm not saying wide baffles are inherently better at imaging. I'm sure the opposite is often true, but my experience tells me it's not a universal rule. Some of the best speakers I've heard, regardless of price, have massive baffles. Anyway, I agree that in the case of Klipsch Heritage speakers, great imaging isn't exactly their forte.