I've narrowed it down...

Israel, said that SET's sound there best without any feedback. What say you Atmasphere. I think Very little local feedback is not a problem and helps most speakers drivers not flop all over the place.

When all is said and done I believe the need/advantage for feedback comes down to amp design and certainly the speaker involved. Some speakers simply don`t need the additional damping feedback provides, other speaker types would benefit.

The proof is in listening, my amp has no loose bass or undisciplined problems,there`s good control,articulation and nuance, so feedback is`nt always mandatory. In the end what matters is proper amplifier-speaker compatability.
Regards,

I 2nd Clio9s recommedation of Audiokinesis for a speaker line to consider. A great sounding speaker with the lower powered Atma-sphere S30s (30 watts, Class A, Triode, OTLs) - a killer combination at a relatively low price (for this hobby). I think the speaker was actually developed with the amp which goes a long way to ensuring amplifier/speaker compatability. If I did not own the Merlin VSMs, it is a speaker line that I really would be interested in; it caught my attention at RMAF.

Yes the Atma-Sphere S-30 was used in the voicing of Audiokinesis designs, but IIRC so was NuForce. Duke happens to be a dealer for both brands so he certainly had access to each.

My reasons for recommending these speakers is really about the flexibility and the fact that you can audition many types of amps with little worry as to compatibility. I have run 2 watt 45 and 12 watt EM7 SET amps, 35 watt EL-84 push pull, 70 watt KT-88/EL34 push pull, and 300 watt solid state amps with my speakers and the sound has always been pleasing, if not somewhat different.

I'm sure there are other flexible speaker designs out there and if I were the Op these would be the types of speakers I would focus on. I for one am in the camp that the system should be built around the speakers.

Unsound, you used the phrase

numerous requests

Your request for links which I provided does not constitute the above and my response also satisfied your lone request.

So your statement above is clearly misleading.

With regards to Norman Crowhurst, he does imply that negative feedback is beneficial. I pointed to him because he supports my claim about odd orders being distorted in a small degree by the presence of negative feedback. IOW he does not make a value judgment- that is made elsewhere, for example by Nelson Pass.

However in Crowhurst's text if one is familiar with Chaos Theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory we see that Crowhurst shows the formula for feedback; compared with that of a classic chaotic system that the two are nearly identical. He also mapped the Strange Attractor that is characteristic of the resulting Chaotic system that an amplifier is when using feedback. These things are not coincidental; the presence of bifurcation (distortion) is predicted by Chaos Theory and Crowhurst, despite Crowhurst's writings preceding the formation of the branch of science we call Chaos Theory.

Now the fact that Chaos Theory predicts negative feedback to be a destabilizing factor in amplifier design is something that should not be ignored (BTW, many designers will mistakenly claim that negative feedback is a stabilizing factor). However no value judgment is made, simply the expression of what is.

It is other studies including the rather simple and repeatable test (to which I have already referred) that make the value judgment. That judgment is not entirely mine, BTW, but a fairly large consensus in the audio community which agrees that odd orders are unpleasant to the human ear (and is the reason that over 50 years after the introduction of transistors, tubes have failed to become a footnote in audio history). All I have done is outline what is.