John Matheson wrote:
You may be feeling smug and your speakers will do some weird
imaging things that you may like - but they are utterly
incapable of recreating the sound of a real acoustic source
as it would sound if it was in the same room.

Gee, that sound like the basic problem with stereo itself, as was
well established by some pretty smart people based on first
principles some 70 years ago.

They have a power response that has severe and extreme
discontinuities,

A property that EVERY musical instrument in existance shares to
degrees FAR worse than loudspeakers do. Ever seen the frequency
dependent radiation patterns or power response of a violin, a
trumpet, a flute, timpani, pipe organ, piano, guitar? By your
implicit criteria, they'd sound perfectly awful in a room.

But they don't. If you think that a speaker with perfect power
response and non-frequency dependent radiation pattern will
accurately recreate the sound of a real acoustic source such as
the examples above, then you need to seriously rethink your
assertion. If a real acoustic source has a highly non-uniform
power repsonse and radiation pattern, how will reproducing the
sound of such from one or two points that have a completely
different radiation pattern sound the same (hint: it won't because
it can't)?

I am glad you enjoy your system, but that does not equate to
accuracy or correctness or even my definition of high fidelity

YOUR definition of high-fidelity? Who asked you? Who cares but you?
If your definition is based on wrong assumptions such as you make
above, then we'd be better of not asking.

because it plays some things well or sounds nice to you.

And that is EXACTLY the criterion the speaker need to meet, for
him. In that context, the speaker are perfect. As yours are for
you.