Only three manufacturers?

There are a few more manufacturers but these are the BIG players. All three have been around for a long time and have never wavered on their philosophies. I for one am in their camp. I too believe that these parameters are important and someday when better testing becomes available, it will be proven to be important since that appears to be a must in this world today---proof! Funny how people pick their truths.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and as the fellow stated above, everyone has one. Just look at any one requesting any speaker information and how many suggestions you get.
I do find it interesting that some of the main stream electronics folks use Vandersteen. Not because they think it is the best speaker on the planet but because it lets them hear what is actually there. Also, the engineers from some of these companies use the same speakers. A short list includes Audioquest, Steve McCormack, Ayre and Aesthetix to name a few off the top of my head.
There are a lot of proven inaccurate speakers out there that people use and that's fine. If they like them more power to them.
I always thought "High end" audio was interested in improving the art and some of this stuff is a giant step backwards(even on a test bench.) The term "High end" is overused just like "High efficiency" on a 10 Seer AC unit. It is all marketing BS and about the dollar.
I have been at this for 37 years and watched the "Hits" of the day come and go. There is only so much that can be done with designs and I genuinely think manufacturers screw it up so that can lay claim to a different sound. Honest improvements do not jump out of the woodwork every year! Most people will steer away from the accurate system because it isn't exciting. We ARE accustomed to certain inaccuracies that most find pleasing.
As for Playboy, yeh, they listed the 3 "Major" players but they need to stick to what they do best.
Also, for the fellow that mentioned JM Labs, why would they make one speaker correct in these parameters and no others?
I personally think we would all be better off if we get our heads out of magazines and educate ourselves.

The older Dahlquist speakers of the 70's were an early attempt at time alignment only. They are not and never were phase correct. Even Vandersteen's earliest Model 2's in the 70's were not time and phase correct. Vandersteen, a few years later, introduced phase and time correct speakers of a sort.
I truly believe that current manufacturers today use their argument against time and phase speakers because it would drastically raise the price of their product and hurt their bottom line. I also think it would be too expensive to R&D this design for market. Also, Vandersteen holds patents on his specially designed drivers. It takes years to refine designs.

Go back through the archives and read "Time coherence - how important and what speakers?" I think this thread will pretty much answer any questions you have.

Stevecham, not to start an argument but I think this misses the point. The idea of time and phase speakers is to allow a recording and its cues to be reproduced for better or for worse, in phase or out phase. Time aligned speakers as REPRODUCERS, in my opinion, are better at giving a more accurate presentation of the recording event no matter how it was recorded(which is not the issue.) If you use non time and phase speakers, then they are going to mess up a mess even more in reproduction of the original phase and time mess.
Maybe if recording studios paid more attention to these parameters, a lot of our CD complaints would go away. I think a lot of CD's inherent problems IS due to phase issues. One of the reasons people like analogue is there are NO phase problems with the reproduction of this source. The stylus stays in phase with the reproduction of the grooves.
CD players alter phase relationships and if the source is all out, then we compound the problem.
Just my opinion for what it's worth. Go back and search time and phase discussions. This has all been hashed out before.

It sure would be nice. I wanted to add one last thing. Back a few years ago, B&W did do a recording that corrected time and phase and played it back over their speakers for a blind test to see if it mattered. When the results were tabulated, it was shown, that without fail, that the corrected version was detected almost 100% and was listed as the better recording. Makes you think.