Why do only US makers focus on time coherency?


Just curious...it seems that the handful of truly time and phasecorrect speaker makers...Vandersteen,Thiel,Meadowlark,Green Mtn,Thiel,etc,,,are all US based companies...why is this? Are there any Euro/Brit speakers that come to mind? (Besides Quad stats?)
128x128phasecorrect
Most of the research I've seen (admittedly not much), suggests that phase coherence is not audibly significant except in extreme cases. That's not to say this is a settled issue, but it would explain the tendency of many companies to deploy their R&D dollars elsewhere.
Sean99...well done...very articulate answer...and as a former Spica owner myself...you have good taste has well! cheers...one last note...there was a post awhile back...hell...I might have even initated it...at any rate...Joeseph from JA brought up a good point...if time/phase is that important and detectable...why do phasecorrect speakers sound different? I actually think they share more sonic traits that other speakers...that is very spatial, 3-d imaging...however...not everyone is a proponet of this sound...some prefer a more forward, "in your face" presentation...which Brit speakers(I hate to generalize) due very well...hey...I like most Brit speakers to boot...but I prefer the addictive quality of phasecoherent sound when pushed to buy....
Another discount...most people have never heard the sonic benefits of a truly phasecorrect speaker...including other competing companies...which maybe why they so eagerly discount the forementioned benefits...
Can someone give me an example of a speaker that images as well as or better than the spicas that is not coherent (spica's aren't coherent, but do a reasonable approximation).

Perhaps I'm completely wrong for associating imaging with phase and time coherency ? After all in the studio mixing and mastering I can't believe that all the "aural exciters", compressors, limiters etc etc are time coherent ... so the CD / LP already has phase and time errors at the source ?

I've heard it said that a narrow baffle reduces diffration and improves imaging, but the baffles on the spicas are nearly 2 feet wide around the tweeter !!

I've heard it claimed that concentric woof/tweet improves imaging, but my spicas image much much better than some kef 103/4 reference speakers that use the concentric design.

I've heard it said that small stand-mounters image better than large speakers, but the spicas just killed a borrowed pair of Spendor s3/5s in the imaging department (well in just about every department).

So what exactly does determine if the imaging thing happens ?

(My europas arrive on Friday .. I will post a review comparing them to the spicas in a month or so. I don't change equipment often, nor do I frequent shops or shows, so I can't compare more widely ... but the spica angelus sets a high benchmark for realistic live music reproduction above 100Hz.)

Oh, and I wasn't bashing B&W .. horses for courses ... I've never heard a better rendition of AC/DCs "Bullet to bite on" than through DM603s ... very grin inducing !
Dawgbyte: What thread appr 1 week ago was discussing the Walsh driver? I somehow missed that one. Sean
>