I also agree with Sean. We have an audiophile society where I live. We go to each other's homes and bring our own music and listen. All of us have expensive ($50k and up) and well designed systems. Most of us have dedicated or simi dedicated listening rooms. Every system has it's strengths and weaknesses (even at that price level). We all enjoy the listening sessions, but I'm pretty sure everyone goes home and says--"I really like my system the best". I know I do--and I know a few others think the same. It also has to do with the music you like. I like jazz and female vocal recordings--I have electrostatic speakers--no surprise there. You can probably imagine, however, that my system is really not optimized for amplified rock or pop music. The system has to work for the listner and the music the listner likes--a price tag doesn't make it a good system.
equipment sound bad?
I took one of my favorite recordings to a local shop and played it on huge $11,000 Martin Logans and huge Classe amps. My recording sounded "bad" on this setup, whereas I had always enjoyed it before and I think I know why. Because the system was so transparent, had so little coloration of its own, it revealed more accurately that the recording itself was not very good. I don't think there was a problem with the room, the components or the speakers. OK, the room did have some strong rear wall reflections, but for the sake of discussion, let's say that the system was near perfect.
So, here's proposition #1 - we audiophiles have devoted our souls to searching for better and better sound reproduction only to find that when we get there, it can be a less than satisfying experience. Ironically, we wouldn't know how bad the recording was if we had a more mediocre system. Is this our reward for the pursuit of aural perfection?
Proposition #2 - it's all about perception. What sounds great to you might sound bad to me. Should we pursue the most musical systems instead of the most technically accurate?
So, here's proposition #1 - we audiophiles have devoted our souls to searching for better and better sound reproduction only to find that when we get there, it can be a less than satisfying experience. Ironically, we wouldn't know how bad the recording was if we had a more mediocre system. Is this our reward for the pursuit of aural perfection?
Proposition #2 - it's all about perception. What sounds great to you might sound bad to me. Should we pursue the most musical systems instead of the most technically accurate?