Okay, I'll try to fill in here...

1) Yes, I've listened to some of the Polks and NHTs you listed, and given the descriptions of your sonic preferences, I would go with the Axioms. In particular, NHTs are good speakers but they are VERY inefficient (insensitive) -- and to my ears they did sound like that.

2) The Axioms' bass are as tight, or even tighter than the NHTs. MUCH tighter than the Polks.

3) 4) Yes and Yes. Imaging/soundstaging and "disappearing" capabilities (transparency) are extremely important attributes of speakers both in 2-channel stereo and multi-channel surround configurations. IMO, the Axioms excel in these areas.

5) One can produce a boomy and sloopy bass as well as a tight and accurate bass, using either sealed or ported designs. Individual design details are MUCH more important and relevant than these cabinet alignments.

6) A popular configuration is to have multipole speakers (such the QS series) as side surrounds and monopoles as rear surrounds. But it is up to your preferences, too.

7) To my ears, the VP150 wins in clarity and details.

8) See 5). Again, specific design details of these drivers and crossovers, as well as the "voicing" within the completed speaker, are MUCH more relevant than the materials used in the tweeter diaphragm.


As for the receiver, in addition to Rotel (which is excellent), I would suggest you consider the Yamaha VS-X2400 and Pioneer 53TX/55TXi -- these receivers feature the YPAO/MCACC automatic room/speaker EQ, which many folks here (including myself) regard as seriously useful. If you are interested in DPL IIx, I believe that a IIx-updated version of the Yamaha 2400 will soon be available in North America (Asian version is already IIx-savvy).