As the title says...

It's hard to explain, or say why in technical terms but I really liked the effect when I heard it in the neat MFS range, you got good bass without the need to big bass drivers, it has a different kind of quality and sound.

Thats what I heard with the neats sort of a thicker, weightier sound from a smaller driver.

Think this thread is a no goer!

Unless dvv has some technical worrds of wisdom?

Frank uses isobarik speakers I believe so he will chip in, all threads will attract an answer and have value.

I didnt mean an immediate lack of interest ads, I just mean ur dirst answer was kinda my own thoughts, maybe we should move it on a little and discuss the difference between isobariks and speakers of the same proportion with front firing drivers.

I have never tried isos up against a wall and with a closed cabinet or front firing port maybe there would be good benefits there with roll off and deep but controlled bass, I have to be close to a wall these days with my current layout.

There's a world of difference between isobaric and isobarik.

The isobarik was an isobarically loaded sealed enclosure speaker made by Linn nearly 30 years ago. I've heard them on a couple of occasions and must admit the were very convincing indeed. Admittedly, I couldn't fit a pair of Isobariks in my room since they were pretty big and needed room to breathe. They also looked like big boxes, so not the most aesthetically pleasing to put it mildly.

I don't use isobarically loaded speakers any more. A few years ago I enjoyed Totem Mani-2 Signatures, and for the size and configuration, they were (are) magnificent. They're also unusual in that they are one of very few (the only?) isobarically loaded speakers which uses a ported enclosure with that isobaric loading.

For those not in the know, isobaric loading places a (typically) mid/bass drive unit directly behind the drive unit you can see. The two unitshave a small sealed chamber. The idea is that the unit which makes the sound in the room does not see the air suspension and behind it because the drive unit behind it is moving in the same direction at the same time. The drive unit inside the box sees the air suspension of the main part of the enclosure and suffers the problems that most speakers have to suffer. The result is true pistonic action by the front drive unit leading to better quality bass, but not necessarily deeper bass.

The Mani-2s had prodigious bass for such a small speaker, going down to 26hz (-6db) and in many rooms this would be too much . They also needed very weighty speaker stands (50kg each) to control the excess energy int he system. I wish they hadn't been ported to give a better defined bass, but they were very good at what they did with 6.5" drivers and a tweeter!

Dynaudio's old Confidence 5 was a tall floorstander with isobarically loaded 8" drive units at the top in a sealed enclosure and (IIRC) an esotar tweeter which was a peach. It had a bass response down to 35hz and this gave a tight fast articulate bass.

Wilson benesch use isobaric loading in their larger speakers to great effect. I'm not sure if those use sealed enclosures but it certainly sounds like they might.

Generally speaking, the downside of isobaric loading is that the speaker ends up showing a rather difficult load to the amplifier. The most benign was the Linn Isobarik, but even this needed a fair amount of poke to get going. The Confidence 5 and Mani-2s were/are quite awkward (ok, very awkward in the case of the Mani-2) but I'm not sure about the Wilson benesch.