Look up conjugates.

===>"Every passive element adds a sonic signature period."

Why stop at the electronics? That's the point here. You have mechanical and acoustical elements also, and they are just as much a part of the deal.

===>"You cannot seperate the amp circuit from the speaker in cause/effect scenarios."

That's also the point. Nor can you separate the cabinet size, type, shape, horns if used, ports if used, speaker suspension, cone mass, breakup modes, etc.

===>"I have many 1-3 watt amps, some killowatt amps, some 15 watt amps. They all sound better with no passive elements between them and the single voice coils."

You think _everything_ sounds better that way? Well, you have a right to like what you like.

Lets agree to disagree on that. Our preferences may not be the same. It is not my highest goal to have the voice coil of a fullrange speaker connected directly to the output of an amplifier. It is _my_ highest goal to have a good sounding speaker system.

Take for example a high efficiency fullrange speaker with Qts=.2 on an infinite baffle. Most people will probably find it shrill. You will have to use EQ in one form or another to bring up the bass. You can use electronics or you can put the speaker in a cabinet that boosts bass. Another way to do it is with a subwoofer, and that will keep bass off the fullranger. Any of these are better than the fullranger by itself IMO.

Maybe you would be happier adding mass to the cone or removing magnet material. You might like using a back horn. You and I might agree on one of those things. I see them as possibilities but the difference between us is I don't see them as being the _only_ possibilities.

===>"I apply no desclaimers or apologies in advance for metiocre sound, my results are predictable."

That's the problem, you have made no concrete predictions. To make the general statement that any amplifier sounds better connected directly to an unspecified fullrange speaker is vague and doesn't pass muster IMHO.