Perhaps there is more to this "debate" than SCIENCE vs. IGNORANCE. Because if only science displaces ignorance, we may not end up with the best possible solution for each of our particular circumstances. Maybe there is real-world experience somewhere in between science and ignorance that can work in spite of, and without denying, the science supposedly against it. Maybe since compromises are always made, living with phase issues is one compromise that can work in our gigging life, because of some advantages that are achievable only in coexistence with some disadvantages. (Unless our only gigging is in audio analysis software.)
Right now in my rock cover band I'm using a 210 and 212 together, driven independently by a dual channel power amp. I can definitely hear phase canceling as I'm running one cab at volume and bring the other up. However, the facts that I can control each cab independently, and that they produce vastly different tones (yes, even though they are both full-range bass cabs, they produce different tones
), give me a large range of possible tonal combinations from this "wrong" configuration which helps greatly when faced with all the variables that playing in different venues present; concrete floors, wood floors, boomy wooden stages, big rooms, small rooms, high ceilings, low ceilings, lots of people, few people... and any combination of these elements in varying proportions. By varying the balance between the 210, with its punchy thump, and the 212, with its warm deep bass, using the dual channel amp, I can get a nice sound in almost any room. I would not have this range of possible results with a single driver, a single cab, or a single cabinet-type configuration. It's like cooking with many ingredients, versus cooking with just a few. I use the different tones of the cabs and the independent control to balance the tone I need for the room (which I couldn't do by selecting the "perfect" rig using charts even if I did understand them) then I COOK! 
In church, I use a single-driver, single cab rig. I'm happy that in that room I have a solution that works without having to deal with phase issue compromises. But it's only because the room never changes and I don't need to constantly adjust for varying conditions.
As to scientific ignorance; I am thankful for all the knowledge and understanding that is being shared and employed to help design and construct better equipment that we use to play music. But I don't have the natural desire to delve into all that. I have other pursuits. Likewise, I'm sure most of us don't understand the science behind everything! (Or am I wrong?) I just think it's sad when I see attitudes that condescend on those who haven't, can't, or don't want to fully immerse themselves in this knowledge.
This is my subjective, imperfect real-world experience and method, and it is not disproven by a graph. Maybe sharing this will help someone else who is unsure, and who is intimidated by the wizards of charts, and is reading posts like "I'll never mix cabs again after seeing those graphs." Or maybe I'm all wet and my very existence can be disproven by scientific analysis.
Right now in my rock cover band I'm using a 210 and 212 together, driven independently by a dual channel power amp. I can definitely hear phase canceling as I'm running one cab at volume and bring the other up. However, the facts that I can control each cab independently, and that they produce vastly different tones (yes, even though they are both full-range bass cabs, they produce different tones
), give me a large range of possible tonal combinations from this "wrong" configuration which helps greatly when faced with all the variables that playing in different venues present; concrete floors, wood floors, boomy wooden stages, big rooms, small rooms, high ceilings, low ceilings, lots of people, few people... and any combination of these elements in varying proportions. By varying the balance between the 210, with its punchy thump, and the 212, with its warm deep bass, using the dual channel amp, I can get a nice sound in almost any room. I would not have this range of possible results with a single driver, a single cab, or a single cabinet-type configuration. It's like cooking with many ingredients, versus cooking with just a few. I use the different tones of the cabs and the independent control to balance the tone I need for the room (which I couldn't do by selecting the "perfect" rig using charts even if I did understand them) then I COOK! In church, I use a single-driver, single cab rig. I'm happy that in that room I have a solution that works without having to deal with phase issue compromises. But it's only because the room never changes and I don't need to constantly adjust for varying conditions.
As to scientific ignorance; I am thankful for all the knowledge and understanding that is being shared and employed to help design and construct better equipment that we use to play music. But I don't have the natural desire to delve into all that. I have other pursuits. Likewise, I'm sure most of us don't understand the science behind everything! (Or am I wrong?) I just think it's sad when I see attitudes that condescend on those who haven't, can't, or don't want to fully immerse themselves in this knowledge.
This is my subjective, imperfect real-world experience and method, and it is not disproven by a graph. Maybe sharing this will help someone else who is unsure, and who is intimidated by the wizards of charts, and is reading posts like "I'll never mix cabs again after seeing those graphs." Or maybe I'm all wet and my very existence can be disproven by scientific analysis.
