Same reason I don’t prefer polar plots over seeing the actual FR measurements; our ears may be more forgiving, but I’d rather have more data.Spinoramas are certainly a clean and concise way of representing a speaker, but I do personally prefer being able to see the specific responses at different angles a-la soundstage network's NRC measurements.
Also, I thought there was a dipole that did perform well in one of these blind tests? I can't remember which though.
The directivity plots are good though.
As notes by others, Spinorama’s don’t tell the full story on their own, you still need things like distortion graphs (including at reference loudness levels) and FR linearity (aka compression), vertical measurements (not just listening window) are good as they show what the intended listening axis is (usually tweeter, but some have it between the tweeter and mid/woofer), and a waterfall plot is good as if the decay is very uneven that will change the sound (e.g., if there’s is a huge dip at 3kHz after 0.1ms, that will be audible). Impedance and phase graphs will also tell you how difficult of a load the speaker is.
Last edited: