Mais, jalucine, personne ici ne prétend que les G3 sont les meilleures enceintes du monde comme d'autres annoncent le meilleur ampli du monde 
On est sur un fil G3, pda0 et moi avons des G3, alors on parle de G3
Les phases mesurées avec Trinnov par pda0 ou moi sont des mesures "complètes" intégrant les réflexions.
Amitiés
Ah oui.
Pour la question que tu poses et les remarques de Maxitonus, voici qq explications et positions de Atkinson auxquelles j'adhère.
http://www.stereophile.com/content/measu...two-page-4
Extrait
On est sur un fil G3, pda0 et moi avons des G3, alors on parle de G3
Les phases mesurées avec Trinnov par pda0 ou moi sont des mesures "complètes" intégrant les réflexions.
Amitiés
Ah oui.
Pour la question que tu poses et les remarques de Maxitonus, voici qq explications et positions de Atkinson auxquelles j'adhère.
http://www.stereophile.com/content/measu...two-page-4
Extrait
Citation :Does a loudspeaker's time coherence matter? A "perfect" speaker, of course, would have both a perfect impulse response and a perfect frequency response (at one point in space). Another way of looking at a loudspeaker's time-domain performance is to examine its acoustic phase response, the phase angle between the pressure and velocity components of the sound plotted against frequency.
Again, this is an aspect of loudspeaker behavior that has proved controversial. One school of thought holds that it is very important to perceived quality; another, which includes almost all loudspeaker engineers, finds it unimportant. Floyd Toole, now with Harman International but then with Canada's National Research Council, in his summary of research at the NRC into loudspeaker performance that is described in two classic 1986 papers [32, 33], concluded thusly: "The advocates of accurate waveform reproduction, implying both accurate amplitude and phase responses, are in a particularly awkward situation. In spite of the considerable engineering appeal of this concept, practical tests have yielded little evidence of listener sensitivity to this factor...the limited results lend support for the popular view that the effects of phase are clearly subordinate to amplitude response."
This is also my view. Of the 350 or so loudspeakers I have measured, there is no correlation between whether or not they are time-coherent and whether or not they are recommended by a Stereophile reviewer. However, I feel that if other factors have been optimized—on-axis response, off-axis dispersion, absence of resonance-related problems, and good linearity—like a little bit of chicken soup, time coherence (hence minimal acoustic phase error) cannot hurt. In my admittedly anecdotal experience, a speaker that is time-coherent (on the listening axis) does have a small edge when it comes to presenting a stereo soundstage, in terms of image focus and image depth. But time coherence does not compensate for coloration, poor presentation of instrumental timbres, a perverse frequency balance, or high levels of nonlinear distortion.