Grilles or No Grilles


I've always found that 'no grilles' leads to a more accurate listening experience. I've had many different speakers using many different grille cloth and components and always, no grilles works better for me. Often many of my friends find that a WAF means grilles on. What do you think?
buconero117
And equally valid is the psychological effect of removing the grilles and believing, therefore, that the sound was more direct. There's little doubt that the grilles change the sound but it is not universally true that the change is an improvement. See JA's measurements and comments here: http://www.stereophile.com/content/paradigm-reference-studio60-v3-loudspeaker-measurements

Kal
I agree with Kal. It depends on the speaker, as well as listener preference.

Until recently, I never listened to my speakers with the grilles on. Then I tried it as an experiment. As expected, there was a slight diminishment of perceived resolution. But unexpectedly, there was also a slight improvement in imaging and tonal balance. So now it's grilles on (except for the tweeter grille, which remains off).

The moral of the story is that experimentation is the Order of the Day.

Bryon
My Magnepan have the grills from Hell. They would be a giant pain to remove.. and the result is very ugly!
I used to use B&W 805s and they sounded better with no grill, but looked fine without.
Some speakers ARE really ugly without the cover. Others actually look like some sort of art with no cover.
I had paradigm 60v2's and now the v5's,to me they sound better with the grills off.