my statement was that the bass reflex design decreased the efficiency of that system itself (as in "it could be more efficient in itself, which is what the yout

my statement was that the bass reflex design decreased the efficiency of that system itself (as in "it could be more efficient in itself, which is what the youtube video was saying). Cancelling some frequencies decreases the efficiency of it's own components, but that it did so by choice in favor of accuracy of sound and beneficial compromises toward space-efficient form factor. I did NOT say it was more or less efficient than any other design, nor did the youtube video, which is what wikipedia has successfully attempted to delude you into talking about, and unsuccessfully at being correct because it conflates infinite baffle with acoustic suspension which with absolute certainty have vastly different efficiencies and tonal qualities and therefore the wiki simply wrong. On another dimension you have left out, different loudspeaker acoustic cabinet designs are optimized by coupling with completely different drivers (I'm using the term driver to refer to the metal-frame/paper-cone structure itself, not any wooden enclosure) With acoustic suspension, the air in the cabinet privates a taut springiness, and thus the spring built into the driver is more or less eliminated making the speaker cone on its own "floppy". You can't use that driver in a different design, the components must be designed together to work together, matching impedance, so it is silly to naively compare efficiency, and as I already pointed out, any 5% efficiency difference is dwarfed by other considerations. I'm happy to educate you, but you don't know what you are talking about, so arguing against your uninformed reading of wikipedia is tedious.