Looking for the next level in imaging...

MBL is a poor choice for your quest.

Look at "concentric driver" designs....TAD, KEF Blade, etc.

It appears (in light of some speaker suggestions mentioned above) that many have very low standards for what is "3D", "deep", "huge", "enveloping" or not... 😁

You could also get the Theoretica Applied Physics BACCH processor (forget speaker shopping)...3D holographia for ages! In support of your quest, it is a significant enhancement even if some speaker design you acquired is a bit of a dud.

But, if you do go with the higher end concentric driver designs suggested above (they can do a good job on their own..In fact, it is a characteristic trait of such designs). But, they can as well be taken to the umpteeenth level with BACCH.

Good luck.

P.S.

I use a TAD E1TX w/ BACCH. Not to brag here, but, you ain’t heard 3D envelopment from 2 speakers until you heard something like that. Following the science is generally a good idea for guys on quests.

@mahgister Please answer this simple question. A recording of a trio. Guitar, Bass and Sax. The recording engineer has mixed the final tape to have all three mics/instruments playing an equal signal from left and right channel. This puts the sound of the recording with all three instruments in the center of the stage. Are you claiming there is any stereo equipment or room treatment, or combination of each that will produce a playback in my listening room where the three instruments are spread out across the room, and for good measure, the sax is in the center and five feet in front of the guitar and bass? That is what I called into question with the statement, if it’s not on the recording, it’s not in your listening room. Cheers

The notion that everything remains at the mercy of the mastering tech and his recording’s limitations/inadequacies is a bit time warped and assumes that everything remains the same as it was 50 years ago

Some very smart guys at Dolby, DTS, Yamaha, Sony, etc got together and advanced technologies in object based/spatial audio to address just this. You would need a minimum of 6 speakers ( 2 fronts, 2 surrounds, 2 heights) to do justice to their spatial upmixing codecs. The speaker count would go up from there depending on how nitpicky one gets. If you have a native spatial mix, that’s great. But, they will try to salvage even crappy stereo mixes.

In other words, these codecs can decompose the recording and "spread it out" in a 3-D dome (aligned with your multi speaker perimeter) and create all kinds of depth wise layering, spatial nuance/cues and detail, that’s simply impossible in stereo.

If you are an ardent believer in 2 speakers only, BACCH can do a relatively dumbed down version of the above mentioned and offer something relatively convincing.

Some new FPGA dacs (hrtfs, whatever proprietary code’s in there) used in purist stereo will try to create an even more dumbed down version of the above mentioned

You could try to help things out with speaker design (concentrics are an example), positioning, etc. For example, if you have speakers flat against a wall and sit flat up against a wall (no 6 to 8 ft of space behind you), everything goes to sht from there, etc.

@mijostyn

I want to hear exactly what is in the recording. I do not want to hear any editorialization by the room.

How is this possible without attending the recording session? Don’t we want a presentation that we consider natural and representative of the live performance. In other words, all of this depends upon our own preferences. Many of us must compromise due to our room, budget and other constraints, but ultimately we want our system to, as much as possible, have seeming presence of the musicians and instruments in a pleasing space.

Some musicians don't care...Some musicians care, but have to compromise a lot...All kinds of recordings get produced in very unfavorable circumstances. Even an artist who cares will quit being nitpicky when he needs to get paid ( considering the fact that a vast majority of the masses who buy the albums don't care).

I have demo'd my rigs to multiple musicians from different genres, a multichannel object based/spatial rig, a 2 channel rig with BACCH and purist stereo rig (I can literally do that in the same room).

I've asked them, "You are sitting here listening to 3 different presentations of your album...How would you prefer your album sounded? Demo 1, Demo 2 or Demo 3?

Not a single one of them has picked purist stereo, thus far!

Perhaps musicians listen about as well as we would performing.

?!

I wonder if you are thinking about some 19 yr old punk rocker screaming at a bar into a 300 dollar plastic PA kit.

I am not a professional musician (not my livelihood), but, I’ve been known to be strapped to a violin (piano to a lesser extent) since I was single digits old. Are you implying that the average "audiophile" I run into at shows could hear a violin better than me? In fact, I have a few different violins. I could play/record a few different pieces on 2 of them and I can safely say you wouldn’t be able to say which is which. To me, the difference is night and day (must be some kinda voodoo indeed).

I know my place... A friend of mine is a sax guy, who’s been tied to it longer than I have to my instrument. Do I hear it better than he? Absolutely not! Another friend of mine is a Ghanaian musician who only lives a couple of miles from me. I certainly ain’t no expert of him. His way off describing music would sound quite bizarre to some, but, he is also the most golden eared bat I’ve ever known.

When I’ve done blind tests with gear swaps, the "audiophiles" I’ve known have always failed by a mile. I could trick em all day long. 😁 The guys who reliably pass such tests are the musicians I know.

Strange thing is...You seem to be dismissing decades of dedication and pain one may through with an instrument...just like that. Well, frankly, I don’t give a crap..., but, sure, Okie dokie.

Lots of good ideas and suggestions to work through.  It's why I love these forums!  So much to think about before you make a decision!.  I will say this -  the most intriguing idea (and I forget which responder/poster said it) that you can't reproduce what isn't there. Helluva observation! However, I thought  that's why Dolby Atmos and Sony 360 were brought to market.  Which then made me reconsider what I'm after. Thanks for the good debate!

@polkalover , Sony's 360 reality audio set up in a proper rig is mind blowing! They are the only real competitor (besides Apple, to some degree) with the clout to beat out Dolby, imo (Dolby became a monopoly for a bit after beating out DTS, Auro, etc). Dolby also has to cater to the movies/ tv people. Sony is way more focused on music.

Eitherway, both of them have many incentives and are getting an increasing number of artists (and the mastering apparatus) by the day to work within their respective eco-systems. They are here to stay.

Someone said, "Use a horse to pull your carriage, it was made for that kinda thing"

But, an audiophile said, "No, i will use my dog. But, never fret, he's a super dog! If i give him enough steroids and rub him down with emerald dust, he will beat a horse, pulling that carriage! And if in case, my super dog fell short, it must be the carriage's fault"