I believe <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com/interviews/232">Ken Kantor</A> said it first: a couple of years ago, in his September 1990 interview with Robert Harley (Vol.13 No.9), he remarked that "there's no reason why a two-way 6" loudspeaker can't be the equal of almost the best speaker out there from a certain frequency point upward, with the possible exception of dynamic range." When I read those words, they rang true. If you put to one side the need to reproduce low bass frequencies and can accept less-than-live playback levels, a small speaker can be as good as the best, and allow its owner to enjoy the benefits of its size&mdash;visual appeal, ease of placement in the room, and the often excellent imaging afforded by the use of a small front baffle.

I believe <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com/interviews/232">Ken Kantor</A> said it first: a couple of years ago, in his September 1990 interview with Robert Harley (Vol.13 No.9), he remarked that "there's no reason why a two-way 6" loudspeaker can't be the equal of almost the best speaker out there from a certain frequency point upward, with the possible exception of dynamic range." When I read those words, they rang true. If you put to one side the need to reproduce low bass frequencies and can accept less-than-live playback levels, a small speaker can be as good as the best, and allow its owner to enjoy the benefits of its size&mdash;visual appeal, ease of placement in the room, and the often excellent imaging afforded by the use of a small front baffle.

I believe <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com/interviews/232">Ken Kantor</A> said it first: a couple of years ago, in his September 1990 interview with Robert Harley (Vol.13 No.9), he remarked that "there's no reason why a two-way 6" loudspeaker can't be the equal of almost the best speaker out there from a certain frequency point upward, with the possible exception of dynamic range." When I read those words, they rang true. If you put to one side the need to reproduce low bass frequencies and can accept less-than-live playback levels, a small speaker can be as good as the best, and allow its owner to enjoy the benefits of its size&mdash;visual appeal, ease of placement in the room, and the often excellent imaging afforded by the use of a small front baffle.

I believe <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com/interviews/232">Ken Kantor</A> said it first: a couple of years ago, in his September 1990 interview with Robert Harley (Vol.13 No.9), he remarked that "there's no reason why a two-way 6" loudspeaker can't be the equal of almost the best speaker out there from a certain frequency point upward, with the possible exception of dynamic range." When I read those words, they rang true. If you put to one side the need to reproduce low bass frequencies and can accept less-than-live playback levels, a small speaker can be as good as the best, and allow its owner to enjoy the benefits of its size&mdash;visual appeal, ease of placement in the room, and the often excellent imaging afforded by the use of a small front baffle.