How come that when most audiophiles

Thank you Albert. By the way, I checked out the Millenium 1 on the web. They look very nice and the TAS review was very interesting, however I couln't afford them and my amp wouldn't drive them. I can't help feeling that, for my needs, I saved the $14,500.00 difference and still achieved a very satisfying result.

As the person who posed the topic here, I think all of your feedback is very thoughtful and correct in the aspects you all approached from. It is good to hear knowledgable people and their valued opinions. If any of you are interested in my speaker design and its strengths and limitations, I will give you further info here. First, it is not perfect as all of you well know, and since you cannot hear it and I'm not selling it, you can only go by my description. I'm sorry Albertporter, I cannot meet all the criteria you posted, but in many areas I came surprisingly close. First, I used a Fostex FE103 driver(4") on each side.Don't laugh yet. It posesses an excellent moving mass to spl ratio(efficiency) of 92db unloaded.It's very quick and has much less phase shift on transients than larger cone drivers. It is quite flat in response from 100-6000Hz, outside of which it suffers from impedance rises that I dealt with to improve the response. I designed a TL tube cabinet tuned to 41.7Hz - exactly half the driver's natural Fs which gives bass to that freq within 3db. I reinforced the lower mids with a disc shaped baffle behind the diffraction plane. The highs were cured with the impedance mod. The Z mod was simply a 24ohm non-inductive resistor paralled across the terminals. This reduced the 32ohm rises at the Fs and the gradual rise above 6kHz to less than 13.7ohms while only reducing the nominal system Z to 6ohms. (Simple product/sum theory) By reducing the Z rises, the driver efficiency at the frequency extremes was increased to within the 3db down level of the OTL amp from 41Hz to 20kHz(in room response at listening position). I now achieve 100 db peaks at my chair. The TL tube is loaded by the floor(front firing)at the base of the unit. Judicious tuning was required to get the correct tube/direct radiator balance to reduce midrange contamination. It stands 6ft. tall and 18" across(cylinder shape)- not much different than Van.2c's. Sweet spot is smallish due to beaming of highs. Bass is full, solid and quick. Midrange is golden. Transient dynamics are tremendous and all detail is revealed. Rock, jazz, classical, all sound very well given good recordings and imaging is pinpoint and concrete. The downside is spl of only 100db/1 watt peak. Max power handling is 3w continuous, 8w peak. My listening habits are not affected by this. Strauss's Also Sprach Zarathustra, Sade, Weather Report, Kinks, Joni Mitchell, etc. are all handled with aplomb. They look like 6' tall stick telephones from the 1920's. Very unique. I welcome all comments. BTW, I'm driving them with a Berning MicroZ OTL - 1watt output.(NOS tubes)

I agree Viridian, that the above mentioned non-linearities should not be minimized. However, driver/cabinet non-linearities are present in all dynamic speaker systems regardless of the number of drivers. So are speaker/room interface problems and amp/driver impedance matches/mismatches. In my above design description, I attempted to explain the methods used to overcome some of these problems the best I could. I have admitted to max. spl limitations, and, at higher volumes, the attendant dynamic range limitations. These are not conflicting with my normal listening volume requirements. Of course, as you mention, IM distortion is present inherently in any driver that produces more than one frequency simultaneously as is also the case in multi-way systems, although I will agree that it may be more problematic in single driver setups. However, if you have ever done any speaker design work, you are aware that the above problems are not solved by multi-way systems. In fact, crossover slope overlap, phase shift,signal loss, even more complex impedance mismatches at diverse frequency points, image shift, and sometimes efficiency level are added to the problems you mentioned. I am not claiming perfection for my speaker design, but am merely pointing out the benefits of short signal path/low complexity philosophy as regards speaker systems in a properly designed one way system.

And, I might add, that since I have no commercial expectations, and have only done these speakers for my own pleasure, I have selflessy divulged virtually all of the design parameters to all on this board so that if anyone is so inclined, they may have an easier time of DIY. My sweat can be their gain. I have found the people here to be knowledgable and genuine and I am happy to share any of my experience, designs, tweaks, etc. with any and all.

Two responses for Onhwy61. It is true, the Quad 63 has alot of wire that effectively is part of the transducer. Sort of like the dynamic speakers have lots of wire in the voice coil. These are simply a part of the transducer design that one picks. You could say the perfect transducer is none, but that leaves us without music. So, I'm not saying reduce to zero, it is already effectively a one way system - with disadvantages, I'll grant you, but also great strengths. I am a fan of the Quads and other electrostats for their legendary strengths. Also, I've never designed or built electrostats, but have done many dynamic types and have wrestled with the multi way issues many times. I have concluded that single-way provides the most direct and pure interface currently possible. I will settle for the one way limitations for my system. Regarding digital crossovers having great potential, I'll believe that when I hear it. Thanx for adding to the post.