jonheal wrote: > By definition, I would think the "average" audiophile would be looking > for equipment that reproduces music as accurately as possible.
I don't agree with this. On several levels. I don't agree that there is much of an "average audiophile" as audiophiles seem to divide into at least two groups: 1) music lovers 2) gear lovers Second, I don't agree that 'accuracy' is the goal. I believe that the goal is, at least for acoustic instruments, the sound of real instruments in real rooms. Which for me is more musical than accurate. > Again, by definition, it would seem that good "studio monitors" fulfill > that requirement, in that they are supposed to color the music as little > as possible. Studio monitors are designed to be revealing. That is not exactly the same as accurate. And its not at all the same as musical. I have decent studio monitors in my studio, Mackie 824, they cost a bit over a grand for a pair. They are wonderfully accurate. My main listening room has Sonus Faber Concertos, with a Rel sub. They are much more musical than the Mackies. And they are a lot better looking, higher WAF. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
