Does Time alignment and Phase coherency make for a better loudspeaker?

actually the major difference is the Jim T objective to be flat at the listening position vs at 1m for Richard V. One can debate the merits of both. Until recently i owned both and while i prefer the Vandy, I can understand the allure of increased treble energy inherent in the JT approach.

For those interested , no violin in flat at both 1m and 3 m...... of course if your reference is 32 track studio stuff, keep chasing your tail....

Y’all get the crappy lossy cabinet output shows up in the impulse response, and more importantly the waterfall...right ? All easy to hear.

Mijo in 1983 I was using an FFT program on a Commadore PET in the design of loudspeakers.... I feel like Lew... hackles and all

Mijo - measure and listen, not that difficult

you missed the essential point " rest of chain "

time and phase are just part of the magic since 1977.... 

actually phase accuracy in the rest of the chain is difficult and requires an engineer with ears deeply involved in the listening and design process... Charlie at Ayre comes to mind... No global negative feedback.... think thru what NFB is, how it works and what positive and negative aspects it can have.... Of course we owe Dr Otalla a debt of thanks for derailing the THD crowd.... The T in TIM is all about time... ( a quiz of sorts ). I have a variable NFB amp ( RIP Roger, you were a genius )... Assuming level matching, the changes to stereo image across various NFB is apparent.

Carry on ! enjoy the music.

Even Levon Helm's ( RIP ) brilliantly damped kick drum has harmonics and reflections that allow the human ear to locate it and ascertain the acoustic reverberant space it is located in. Time and phase information in the waveform that makes it to the ear ... or not..  

Wolf if time and phase don't matter, how is it your ears or the Decca tree  ( substitute in your favorite semi religious cult microphone array choice ) can discern the placement of those musicians on the stage ?

IF the answer is subtle differences in frequency response aka loudness, then matching drivers down to .25 db makes sense...

just my $1.50 , two cents adjusted for inflation...

Mijo like a said 11 bands of Analog eq below 120..... in each speaker Quattro and above, admittedly not everyone's cup of tea, java, pinot, etc.....

the powered KEF 50 use DSP to correct the passive KEF 50 impulse response...somebody at KEF thought that a worthwhile thing to invest effort into....hmmmmmmmmm....

Jason excellent point which is why i don't use or advocate modern multi track recordings as a reference. Cat will chase own tail using those......

2 or 3 microphones please....

Eric - yes and as you no doubt aware, there are lots of other fundamental design principles at work; pistonic drivers, matching of drivers to within .25 db, testing the assembly in aneochic chamber against the reference, cabinet within a cabinat, high pass filtered midbass and up, same transfer function for main amp as sub amp, 11 bands of EQ below 120 hz for best image placement vs eliminate bass issues and live w image....the list goes on, since 1977

Not for everyone 

there is a big difference between absolute phase and time and phase correct, but IF you can't hear absolute, move right along....

some people are essentially deaf to it. Move on if it doesn't float your boat. My favorite Strad player " gets it ". So do I.