Phil Leigh;164882 Wrote: > At no point did I mention "distort" - you invented that. > > My point is simply that some systems can handle certain types of music > better than others. For example, Quad ESL 57's sound rather nice with a > bit of light choral...but they don't really make a great job of Led > Zeppelin. > > So, if I mostly listened to choral stuff I might well be inclined to > own a system with the Quads - and I wouldn't buy such a system if I > mostly listened to hard rock. > > The idea of striving to faithfully reproduce the source is fine, but in > practice this is easier with some sounds than others. So, IMHO it is > essential to use a wide variety of source material that is relevant to > your own listening preferences when choosing speakers etc. > > > As you (all of us) have no idea what the music is actually supposed to > sound like unless you were the producer/mastering engineer, we are only > making subjective value judgements anyway - there is no absolute truth > to compare fidelity against.
The search for the "ultimate" playback system continues...When you mentioned the Quads (I had fond memories of the ESL-63!), I realized that the blend between fidelity and dynamic range for some speakers remain elusive, the delicate Quads are an extreme example, superb for low level high fidelity sounds, but has poor dynamic range for rock and roll. I was mainly concerned with ultra flat frequency response and not dynamic range in my earlier comment, they are nearly equal in importance. My bad! Happy Holidays! -- empty99 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ empty99's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3488 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30820 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
