Speakers The single most critical component

@mahgisterdo you have links or papers about this active treatment?
did you ever compared active vs passive treatment?
I mean, 95% of top level studios still use simple passive treatment. when well made, its very good...

Paper?😁

I am not a scientist in any way...

My idea come from an article in acoustic research from japan in 2008...When i was arguing with an engineer about imaging...

I used homemade tuning set of pipes and tubes orientable and tunable...The idea is first in Helmholtz...

Any room being a distribution of pressure zones i used my tubes and pipes grid or mechanical equalizer and tuned them like someone tune a piano...

Better than a mic : your 2 ears... My sound is good for my nearfield listenin(3feet) and very good also for my regular position (8 feet) i have a dedicated 13 feet square room height: 8 1/2 feet....

The response frequency from a mic adjust the sound for a position of listening in millimeter.... It is a partial helping tool that do not replace a passive acoustical treatment...But complement it for some people ... I dont have one...Instead i used my own device...

I called my mechanical equalizer activation of the room because the tool is an active part of the room....Unlike an electronic equalizer and without his limitations...

the passive treatment is useful and the active after that is powerful...

read that to begins with my idea comes from these concepts:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223804282_The_relation_between_spatial_impression_and_the_law_of_the_first_wavefront


The creation of this device cost me nothing...

I use orientable straws of different size and diameter, plumber copper pipes and pvc tube in my basement...

I tune 32 of them of different size between 8 feet and 12 inches around my room and near my speakers... you will understand why reading the article.... The location is important and the orientation of the neck also in the room....


It takes me hours to created them on an evening whim but few weeks for the best tuning... 😊😉

You must use ONLY acoustical timbre perception of voice or instrument to tune the sound...No electric or amplified or electronical music.... The reference point is human timbre...

my 500 bucks system is one of the best in relation to the ratio S.Q/price....

Upgrading it appear useless to me....

 I know that a relatively good audiophile experience is related mostly about acoustical settings if we supposed relatively good basic gear to begins with...

 People dont know acoustic power they bet their money on very costly gear.... this is simply ignorance...

 For sure many system are better than mine but i can assure you that they dont cost 500 bucks.....Anyway when the piano filled my room 3-d i dont think about the limitations of my system .... there is none that put me in the urge to invest money .... It takes me 2 years to figure out how to controls: vibrations, decease the electrical noise floor but the most hard part was the acoustic...

My goal is the best possible at NO COST.... i succeeded...

The notion that there is only one right approach, which implies only one correct set of priorities, is unreasonable.  I am a fan of extremely dynamic speakers, such as full-range, full-range used as wide range drivers in multiway systems, and horn-based systems.  But, there is no one approach that does everything right and so we all pick our favored set of compromises. 

I've heard a lot of different wide-range drivers and I have not found any particular approach is consistently best.  Among my favorite is a large  field-coil driver--Jensen/ERPI M10 (13" driver); I also like the AER 8" driver and several systems I heard with Voxativ drivers.  At the Capital Audiofest, I heard a prototype speaker by Classic Audio (I believe) that had an 8" field coil driver and a powered woofer; I really liked the vividness of the speaker, but, if I were to ever own it, the sibilance would have to be substantially tamed.  Sibilance, peaks in the upper midrange and treble, lack of bass and weight, are common issues, particularly with the smaller wide range drivers.  Larger drivers are typically lacking in top end response and have too narrow high end dispersion (even when they employ whizzer cones to improve dispersion).

I have not heard a "holy grail" driver of this type.  I know a lot of fans of the Western Electric 755a, but it is too thin, colored and rough sounding for my personal taste (substantially improved with a tweeter added to the system); I much prefer the Western Electric 756 (but it really requires a tweeter).  My personal pick would be the Jensen M10 with a field coil tweeter, but, I don't think I can afford that system.
  

One could ask: what is it you want to achieve and like in particular with with wideband speakers/drivers? A noteworthy trait is their alluring simplicity sans cross-over of any kind, and another is they're a single point source per channel - with all that entails and the advantages that offers. I would imagine though some people also have an inkling towards their often found character or signature (as elaborated on by poster @larryi just above) as a certain flavor of sound they like, even though it may deviate from a more "correct" imprinting in certain respects. 

Where a point source goes Tom Danley's Synergy horns are a potential "having your cake and eat it too" scenario that offers the advantages of a point source without the pitfalls of most wideband drivers. They do need a cross-over however to handle the response of the different drivers (that sum as a single point when configured the way they are), be that active or passive, and presently they're only found as pro segment offerings - which nonetheless shouldn't keep one from acquiring them for a home setting. Danley does have their more domestically oriented Signature Series coming soon, for those interested:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBl5lhmzRKA