Horn speakers with Imaging?

I agree with @willgolf above: I welcome more info on 'imaging'. What exactly is it, and how do you test or listen for it? I understand that it has to do with the localization of instruments and voices in space, and maybe also with the speakers 'disappearing'. But how is it different from similar terms, like 'soundscape'? One reason I ask, is that imaging seems to be very different things in my sound systems. On the one hand, the floorstanders in my main rig are bipoles that fill the room with sound, very lively, but maybe not the last word in precision. On the other hand, the Arche Fr2 single driver speakers give a very sharp pinpoint type of sound picture - extremely different. My Nightowl headphones, also single drivers, give a third kind of picture, somewhere in the middle, but more like the floorstanders. I find that with these very different presentations, deciding what is 'best' is difficult.

The main thing that hinders imaging in my systems, is wrong cues, nonharmonic distortion especially in the high treble. It the treble is wrong the image gets blurred. This is a problem with many causes, including bad recordings and production, use of compression, as well as the playback system. Testing Tori Amos: Speaking with trees (streaming). Her voice is distorted. No matter the system I use for playback. Otherwise the image is quite good, but this - no thank you. I have not heard the LP, though.

Checking a ’standard’ LP in terms of sound, Stones: tattoo you, I find that the sound is quite good and coherent, but here also, the recording is a bit too hot when the band sings and plays at full throttle. This is a remarkably "thoughtful" album, and the music sounds best when it is more subdued, moody, Even with Mick singing falsetto.

On the other hand, my best sounding LPs display few of the problems mentioned. The music is just there, I don’t worry about imaging or depth etc. Recently, Endresen and Wesseltoft Out here in there. Shelby Lynne Give me some loving. Cooder etc By the river. The best ECM and Speakers Corner records. Analogue Productions Doors at 45 rpm. And many others. All LPs. Streaming is still not up to the same level of emotional involvement in my system.

It has been argued that bipole speakers give a somewhat diffuse image, not as sharp as monopoles. This may be true, but a lot can be done by positioning the speakers and tuning the system including the room.

I find that, with my best-sounding LPs, my bipole speakers sound sharp and detailed - I am not sure if I need any more. The precision, needed for a good image, is good. Atlhough not quite as good as with the best pinpoint speakers I've heard.

The same thing goes on, with my medium or not so good sounding recordings, but now the outcome is no longer so good. My system is musical but also analytical, so it is like the system can now sound worse. Or more revealing. I hear the problems of bad recording, production etc. Its a give and take.

@phusis - thanks, very informative, although I havent measured the 'radiation bubble' in front of my bipoles I can well imagine that it changes like you say.

But what do you mean by 'life sized' imaging? That images should not be too tall? Or too close up? Too bombastic? I find that this varies with the recording and production, and when the presentation is too forward and in my face, I push the listener chair back.

A big plus with my bipole speakers is that they sound good from a larger listening zone, not just a small sweet spot. Especially when setup with radical toe-in, so the  sound crosses a bit in front of the listeners. Is this detrimental to imaging? Not to my ears. Or just a very small minus factor. Sidewall reflections are also reduced with radical toe in.