Joe, there are a number of test CDs out that you could use to test how accurately your system portrays depth. The test track usually has a person walking around a room talking and/or striking a percussion instrument. At different points in the room the speaker announces how far away he is from the microphone. XLO, Chesky and I think Stereophile have test discs with this type of track. As a rule of thumb, there are two types of audiophiles. The first type wants to know exactly what's on the disc. Their motto is accuracy. The other type of audiophile wants all the detail and nuances of the music, but they want to music to still sound "nice". A recessed soundstage can contribute to the nice sound. A true high end system will make some records sound very good and other very bad. There's a wide range of sound quality in recorded music. A good system should reveal these differences. Part of the reason there is a resurgence in single ended tube amps and high efficiency (horn) speakers is that some people want the immediacy, the in your face sound, back. It reads like you are really listening to your equipment and chanllenging what your hear. It's hard to go wrong with that method.
too laid back, or deeper soundstage?
With every equipment upgrade I do I notice the sound is more and more laid back. I guess you can say the stage is getting deeper. But on some recordings I miss the immediacy, especially on vocals. My upgrades were as follows, Adcom amp to CJ, MIT 330 to new shotgun cables, and MSB DAC to Sony SACD. Each upgrade improved the sound in every other way. My speakers are likely next to go. I currently have Spica TC-60's. I listened to Audio Physic Tempo's and they seem even further laid back. Any suggestions on speakers? What about cables? Cables seem to have made a big difference and are probably easiest to upgrade. Opinions? Don't audiophiles want performers in the room? What is this, "it sounds like your sitting in row Z" talk?? Do listeners prefer this?