Narrow baffles and better stereo imaging?

[Dal1as]

I'd say the room and proper setup does more. I say this because the best soundstage I've ever heard was in a well thought out home theater with Monolith thx in walls. The room just dissapeared. Blew my mind.

 

[YSDR]

I'd say the room and proper setup does more. I say this because the best soundstage I've ever heard was in a well thought out home theater with Monolith thx in walls. The room just dissapeared. Blew my mind.

If you think about it, in-wall speakers have practically infinite wide baffles, so no baffle step loss or baffle edge diffraction occurs, also there is no delayed reflections from the walls behind the speakers, because there is no wall behind the speakers.
If you don't want to build the speakers into the wall, then a good compromise is if the front baffle is wide enough for the baffle step loss beginning to be pushed down to below the Shroeder frequency beginning of the room, IMO.

 

[fpitas]

My very wide baffle speakers do a good job disappearing. I've seen no proof, just conjecture, and I doubt there's any particular magic in that regard for narrow baffles. For reference, the baffle step is at about 110Hz for mine.

 

[Cote Dazur]

Could it be that small speakers and narrow speaker disappear from our view easier than large speaker leading many of us into thinking that they do the same sonically.
I bought to the concept for years until I end up with large speakers for a while that also disappeared and created as good a sound stage as anything else once properly placed in the room.
@Blake Klondike maybe what you are hearing from the Totem is much more related to their dispersion and FR than their physical shape.

 

[YSDR]

@Blake Klondike maybe what you are hearing from the Totem is much more related to their dispersion and FR than their physical shape.

But the physical shape of the loudspeaker affects the FR and dispersion too.