Bad recordings and high end audio

@tomic601 you have those Quad, Vandersteen and mbl?   Wow.   You have hit the jackpot!   Those mbl are a whole different thing.  Best sound I ever heard was mbl set up really well in a customized showroom.  I took notes on how they did that if interested. 

@mapman Well i left out a few speakers including Theil, Apogee..yes i have hit the high life - grateful. I don’t own the MBL but back when i had the right size room for them, Ispent some serious time w them in a dedicated room. The system  Wadia spinner DAC, CJ GAT preamp, Musical Fidelity AMS-100 amp, Kubala cables, Elrod power…. pretty fine sonics. As you knows big image but less resolution than a point source. No free lunch.

Too much noise, but you're right to listen before you buy.

In a former life I sold systems. I was once asked by an engineering student 'why does - jazz musician xyz - sound better on my TV than on my top-end system'? Because the source - live tape or feed - is better than your turntable. He went on to build a better turntable. 

If you enjoy music, you should consider prioritising the accessibility of the music when selecting a system. A good test is to play something which should be interesting, but you don't normally enjoy, and see if you can get it. Led Zeppelin maybe, I find jazz quite demanding. Afro-beat? Soul? Punk? Grunge? Hip hop? Try a range of music over the edge of your comfort zone.

Rhythmically complex music tests the system. 'Noisy' complex music tests the system. The more that's going on at the same time, the harder it is to follow the contributions. 

IME musicians require less clues to follow the music. A good system provides those clues to those of us who're less familiar with the source material. See the comments on Steely Dan.

As a number of people have alluded, eg copy tapes, the quality of the front end is critical. 'Garbage in, garbage out' if you prioritise let's call it transparency over tonal balance.

Classical music lovers tend towards the latter, most others to the former. Maybe you can have both, but it'd be expensive. 

Regarding recording quality, I listened yesterday to an audience CD of Robert Plant, backed by Fairport Convention, loaned by a friend who saw it live. Sound quality is more than good enough to convey the extraordinary performances. 

And it's the same with most albums; if the system is good you will hear the performance despite any technical shortcomings. Which are rare in studio recordings. That's what I'd look for. If they can't demo a system on which you can understand Led Zeppelin, something isn't right. Move on.

BTW some disks are popular for demoing systems because they always sound good...

Fancy remastered albums can be very good, but not always. As a rule with analogue masters I prefer the earliest pressing from the country of the master recording. These can be noisy and have the usual dirty analogue issues but the music's good. This shouldn't matter with digital masters but I haven't compared.

A lot of comments focus on the speakers, even more on the amplifiers, and many on setup cables etc.

My advice would be to put a significant proportion of your investment into a good turntable. Arm and cartridge are secondary. It will deliver the clarity, timing and insight you seem to be looking for. 

Recommendations - you didn't ask but Vertere, any Roksan, or Rega, similar to Project. A lot of high-end audio is expensive in the sense of being highly-priced but not performing consistently well. These are good.

A secondhand Roksan would be my choice for value for money, ideally a Xerxes 20-plus.

Secondhand gear - why buy new? Particularly with solid state amps. Pass Labs are good.

if pass labs is too much you might want to try Bryston or maybe Parasound. I have heard the maggies with Bryston amps and it was really good. Whatever you do make sure you get enough juice. I had a really nice classe integrated that with 150/225 watts was not enough for the maggies so I got the pass. Happy hunting!

Led Zep sound about as good (bad) as their music.