In Reply to: the midget returns posted by Peter Gunn on October 7, 2009 at 07:05:34:
I have a tremendous respect and appreciation for your contribution in these quarters. It is partially the reason that I have not gotten around to publish my results of MylarBACK (pole piece front) vs MylarFRONT with my MMGs . I needed to do further testing to confirm the items below (which I now have, after several months):1. It is NOT MylarFRONT that sounds brighter, it is MylarBACK. So much so, that they can screech in some recordings if something doesn't hold them back upstream. The latter is, I suspect, the reason why your xover - and specifically chosen components list - does so well. This brightness is the MOST salient feature of flipping the MMGs around. Even untamed, with a clean setup it can subjectively enhance some material. Old ears could certainly find it very alluring (mine certainly did, at first).
2. The mechanical filtering, or whatever, that causes this brightness with MylarBACK, may be killing accurate harmonics at the top. While MylarFRONT delivers extended harmonics, sweetness and overall musical quality at the top of the frequency spectrum, MylarBACK just delivers a TON of it...and not quite as right.
3. MylarBACK still wins the "first impressions contest" with somewhat better mid-range transients, aided by the extra brightness. However, a frame, or bracing, reduces this advantage of MylarBACK tremendously. In fact, this cleans the tweeter end so much that the superiority of MylarFRONT becomes more obvious.
4. Interestingly, with no frame or bracing, MylarBACK can also deliver STUNNING mid-range slam vs MylarFRONT but only if the MMGs are slanted back to at least the angle of the wire spacer in the factory stands. The downside is loss of detail. BTW, this loss of detail applies to both modes as they get progressively slanted backward. So much so, that I did not even test for framing/bracing results while slanting this much. Standing straight (or with up to about 3 degrees of slight slant) item #3 applies.
5. Some detail is still lost in MylarBACK vs MylarFRONT at any angle. With no frame or bracing, MylarBACK masks the disadvantage a little, perhaps because of items #1 & #3. Ironically, again, framing or bracing further allow MylarFRONT to show that it is more clear.
6. Imaging is the same for both, all other things being equal (except polarity, of course).
My conclusions:
A. If you need to impress people, I understand that MylarBACK may be the way to go. If you REALLY want to impress many people, then, I strongly suspect, the PG SYSTEM (which includes MylarBACK, a crossover to match and a great-looking, sound enhancing frame) is indicated.B. That said, my personal choice, now with no reservations, is MylarFRONT. It is more accurate, detailed and musical. I simply get far more easily engaged by the music. This, along with bracing the frame with wood, is a winning combination to my ears. I can say many things to support this...and all may be tinged with the inevitable subjectivity that could (will?) launch us into another round of arguments.
However, the measurements and the slide below were made back in early July after having listened and evaluated for several days. I wrote a review that included all of the comparison items above and more. Then, doubt hit me and I held back. Until recently, I had been trying to disprove myself. Yet, at least with my MMGs, in my room and even with several other "better" pieces of equipment instead of just my own, the above held.
![]()
This composite slide is more about what happens at the top end. I could not fit all combinations. So missing here is "MylarFRONT, Tweeter OUT , Standing STRAIGHT ". However, as you may see, even slanted MylarFRONT remain fairly flat.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Sorry, my respected PG. On this one, you are not "right" - JBen 10/8/0902:46:48 10/8/09 (21)
- Yes I am :^ ) - Peter Gunn 06:23:06 10/8/09 (19)
- RE: Yes I am :^ ) - Dawnrazor 22:16:20 10/8/09 (10)
- the practical side of motives - wazoo 05:11:51 10/9/09 (9)
- RE: the practical side of motives - MaggieLover 08:16:33 10/10/09 (1)
- our stodgy, old audiophile friend returns - wazoo 06:49:46 10/11/09 (0)
- RE: the practical side of motives - Dawnrazor 21:55:09 10/9/09 (6)
- form doesn't always follow function - wazoo 07:10:08 10/10/09 (5)
- RE: form doesn't always follow function - Davey 09:29:37 10/10/09 (3)
- perforate and acoustically transparent sheet metal panel - wazoo 19:47:25 10/11/09 (0)
- RE: form doesn't always follow function - gregmacknass2 19:38:50 10/10/09 (1)
- Who’s arguing? - wazoo 22:44:50 10/10/09 (0)
- Looks like you are way smarter than us - Dawnrazor 07:37:44 10/10/09 (0)
- Apropos of Dawnrazor - JBen 08:57:47 10/8/09 (7)
- RE: Apropos of Dawnrazor - Dawnrazor 22:37:33 10/8/09 (0)
- it's very simple - Peter Gunn 20:27:00 10/8/09 (5)
- RE: it's very simple - Dawnrazor 23:13:11 10/8/09 (4)
- RE: it's very simple - peterv 16:56:15 10/9/09 (3)
- RE: it's very simple - Dawnrazor 21:48:10 10/9/09 (2)
- RE: it's very simple - shiocboy@yahoo.com 16:49:15 10/10/09 (1)
- RE: it's very simple - Dawnrazor 23:05:27 10/10/09 (0)
- depends on the model - drkielbasa 06:11:41 10/8/09 (0)