Alright!like your def. of "shockingly" (that could start a new post all on it's own)!!
As far as the term "laid-back" is concerned, I don't have many warm feelings for that one as a standard way of describing a speaker. Seems to me that there is no easy way to describe a Neither foreward nor laid back speaker. I used the term "Neutral" but I think that's more often used to describe tonality.
My M3s position the main image right at the plane of the speakers-in this room as well as in my last room-so, are they foreward or laid-back? I dunno. They ain't foreward and although they've been described here as laid-back, they ain't that either. (I've heard, in other places, "relaxed" or "easy-going, and that may be a bit closer to what "I" think I hear, certainly not "laid-back")
I think what we need is some kind of a standard definition as to variations in the level of either "foreward" or "laid-back"
I'm sure that no one would argue that an M40 is more laid back than an M60 or that an M60 is more foreward than an M40, but by "how much" which one is closer to the ideal? (not the ideal speaker, but as relates to the degree of foreward or back) Anyone?
and Yup, Alan had a good comment a few weeks ago-perhaps you read it too-about the more rapid fall off of the 6.5 woof vs the 5.25 that contributes to a reduction in the strength of the first reflections in the upper mids that causes a loss of the upper mid sonic content at the normal listening position.(or something like that) But yeah, I'm bettin' too that it must add to the "laid-back" nature of the 6.5 speakers.-however we want to define "laid-back" and to what degree.
Rich.
