iceman16 said:
busb said:
IMO, this is the most important question any propective purchaser needs to ask themsleves: do you build a system that files off the rough edges of bright or edgy recordings or do you build a system that that gives no quarter to poor recordings? If I listened to exclusively classical, where most recording are rarely poor, I go for a system that wasn't "warm". If most of your listening is pop where far too many are badly recorded, I'd want to trade some excitement for an easier & less fatiguing sound.
To me, it boils down to what percentage of the music you love is poorly recorded. I personally have gone the no compromise route so a small number of recordings sound pretty damn poor.
I don't believe that throwing loads of money at the problem necessarily helps that much - you can't buy your way out of poor recordings with expensive gear.
I agree busb... IME a good recorded music sounds more enjoyable than a £££ system.
I too agree with busb.
I'm currently leaning towards buying a pair of Martin Logans, which are ruthlessly revealing. 80% or more of my listening is classical, and on the whole I've been careful to buy good quality recordings, though the stuff from the 1950s and earlier is a bit dodgy. Still, I reckon there's so much beautifully recorded classical music out there that it's worth my investing in a system that gives no quarter.
But I also agree with Cno: if you're going to go for a very revealing sound, it's important to get the electronics right, so that they aren't passing any "nasties" up the chain.
Matt