Matching directivity , low/mid waveguide ?

So basically, to get some control down there, the waveguide needs to be quite large and probably symmetrical ?
The inner shape can't be symmetrical if you want an asymmetric pattern but if you want then to both have the same pattern control frequency the final size must be the same or very similar.
The tilt angle i was more referring to having the driver pointed at a higher point than normal to try and help lower the early reflections to the floor since it is so close to the drivers in a normal setup.
I'm not aware of anyone claiming to do it for that reason, the floor is usually considered to be less detrimental to timbre modification than the ceiling so I'm not sure it would work out well for that reason alone.
 
@fluid i did read somewhat through it ... but i don't really understand what was your conclusion from your tests/simulations.
Could you please give a quick sum of what you found ?
I haven't made any comparative tests of different speaker directivities. I have run a lot of simulations that show what sort of directivity will result from different concepts. I can see the benefit of controlling the rear radiation particularly in the 200 to 500Hz range where there can be a lot of negative SBIR interaction in typical placements. Below that getting higher directivity becomes increasingly difficult and it is then becomes situation dependent on what is the best practical approach.