So, a reviewer just said something I need to talk about.

I very much judge a system by how well you get a sense of the performer as a three-dimensional person, as well as how realistically the actual recording is conveyed.  Whether it's Horowitz in Carnegie Hall, Coleman Hawkins standing at a ribbon mic in 1958 or Charles Munch coaxing a response from the Boston Symphony, I'm certainly more interested in hearing the character of the performers and the sense of their physical presense.  What's the point otherwise?  I mean, what's a stereo for if not to take you to places and hear people you otherwise never could?

And I welcome any reviewer of musical reproduction equipment who takes the same POV.  If a reviewer says something like, "With speaker X you get a clear sense of Horowitz's nervousness after ten years away from the concert platform," I'm interested! ;-)

I have spent many years conducting research to understand how people perceive products of various kinds. The aim of this research has been to provide designers and engineers with feedback regarding how particular product features influence consumers' perception.

Differences in source material may well be factors in the perception of audio system quality. The way to resolve that is with a standardized set of source material that spans the range of potentially relevant audio system qualities. Whether you personally like the source music (or any other acoustic material) is not the issue. Professional taste testers face the same issue. However, they are trained to focus on the physical qualities of products rather than their own personal likes or dislikes. Musicianship might be an important quality of audio reproduction, but, if so, it can simply be included as a factor in the standardized sample of source material. In fact, a formal study to test this would be interesting to do.

So much is written about recreating the experience of having the music performers standing in front of you in your listening room. Perhaps this is possible for un-amplified voice and stringed instruments, but from my experiences in rock bands, this would be deafening. Not just amplified music... having a horn section in front of you in an enclosed space could exceed the threshold of pain. I always played with ear plugs in order to protect my ears. An audio rig that faithfully reproduces a live band in an enclosed space should be able to have enough bass slam to turn your chest cavity into a passive radiator.

Wow, this a true thinkpiece.  Of course the musicianship is important, along with the musician's emotion traveling through the instrument, recorded excellently with precision gear and reproduced by your Hi-Fi.  Everything is important.

I still use early Rod Stewart and Van Morrison recordings to judge my system changes for this very reason…those records convey both a high quality of sonic representation, AND a joy of musical spontaneity that engages and excites me.  “Cut Across Shorty” with its driving drums and 12 string, “Domino” with its Stax/Volt vibe and rhythmic drive, for example. I also need to play “Kucano Oro” from MA Recordings ‘Old Country’ for its ultra-audiophile recording of Howard Levy, Mark Nauseff, and Miroslav Tadic performing unbelievable musical feats.  All these groups can be enjoyed at “loud enough” but not actual live music levels in one’s living room.