$20K to spend on speakers…. . wait! There’s a catch!

Another idea is to send a message to Dimitris of Ypsilon and ask him about speakers that he prefers. Not only his electronics is among the very best he also records live music. Flemming of Gryphon makes his own speakers but I would probably ask him too. He likes big scale music.
Lansches will unlikely be the best speakers for orchestral music and hard rock, though. They are elegant speakers not that Rockport/Absolare blow -it-in-your-face pseudo-masculine sound.

Markalarsen Go to RMAF. Confirm your initial impressions.

Blindjim > second best idea here. Thanks much. It actually appears if not RMAF, something akin to it is a necessity, and part of doing business if the investment is significant. At least IMHO.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Inna > Another idea is to send a message to Dimitris of Ypsilon and ask him about speakers that he prefers. Not only his electronics is among the very best he also records live music. Flemming of Gryphon makes his own speakers but I would probably ask him too. He likes big scale music.
Lansches will unlikely be the best speakers for orchestral music and hard rock

  Blindjim > excellent idea. I keep forgetting or forgoing any notion of touching base with the maker as to fundamental things like whose peakers they use to voice their gear. Preffs. Especially when user replaceable tubes are a part of the product.

I gotta say I can’t get it in my head to use Gryphon Diab with highly resolute speakers. Warmish? Probably. But extremely revealing? Likely nope. But then again, these are my fundmental unproven biases or theories and matching preffs. To go with Gryphon, I’d seek purely amps. Not an INT. at that point one should I guess look at Constellation, BAT SS,   Vitas, etc.

Ones which have my close attention are Bermister, T+A, Nagra, VAC & ypsalon of course.

On spkr Ht. its probably like having the speaker close to any other surface. Or wall, issues with Reinforcement or reflections arise.

High end gear should be revealing. This includes speakers, if they are not they are not high end speakers but a campwood making noises. That's exactly what most of us listen to. You want the see-thru quality not a fog. This doesn't mean unbalanced and bright, no. 
And it costs a lot, so it should.

@Inna > You want the see-thru quality not a fog. This doesn't mean unbalanced and bright, no. And it costs a lot.
 
Blindjim > OK. I’m forced to agree on paper. In theory. Principally however, what I’ve found as resolution increases, my catalog of CDs begins to diminish. Why? Mediocre to even decent recordings lose attraction. They simply do not sound at all worth listening to with any regularity, or at times ever. At least not on the main system.

Well, let me clarify, at least in past system efforts with what was affordable then..

If the price to have highly or highest resolution gear is to severely limit the library, I’m not too sure I want to pay it.

I’d not want to be spinning or clicking on only 100 or so albums out of 2400.

Just thinking out loud here…
Lingering curiosity says maybe, the gear I used previously which sent me indirectly to ‘tube land’ was not refined in its ability to peer thru the ‘fog’ but was etched and bright. I suppose that’s possible. AKA VSA VR4JR, BW. Krell KAV 250. Lamp cords and bell wire for cabling.

These inadvertently showed me the impact of a tube pre. It also told me to step up the game on the amp, so the BAT vk500 replaced the entry level Krell. And so on yada, yada.

With tube power pre & mono amps and more educated implementation of NOS tubes, PLC, racks, stands, iso, room treatments, and cabling I found as much resolution there, as I heard from friends pass labs xa gear & ML panels. Even at dealers showing more expensive outfits. (ayre + Wilson + transparent) Or other similar SS powered setups. Yet glass seemed to have a dimension SS did not, everytime.

It also allowed me to playback more content. Sure, bad stuff still sounded poor. Dry. Thin. Bright. Or just uninvolving. Immediately. But it could be tolerated.

Consequently ‘ultra’ uber resolute equipment as I read thru articles ‘in between the lines’ or as it is stated vividly by the writer, really concerns me on a few fronts.

Perhaps in the levels I’m investigating, my stated fears/concerns are nonsense. Dunno.

I do know too much of a good thing, is too much of a good thing, fairly often, and a system needs matching on more levels or areas than merely resolution. One can’t just belly up to the bar and ask for the most revealing source, power train, speakers, and cabling expecting all will be well when strung together. It would astonish me were all of that possible.

I don’t know much about digital so can’t express any specific opinion. However, I think that just as in analog to make digital sound better one must do it first of all at the source, that’s transport, dac, digital cable and power cords. It is wrong to ’correct’ the sound with amps and speakers. Tuning the sound is another thing. There are warmer sounding guitars and cooler sounding guitars, and they both might have the same resolution. So might different speakers. But cd will never sound as natural as tape or vinyl, one can only try to approximate it. Some people do report that the higher resolution their systems become the more difficult it is for them to listen to poor quality digital. This has not been my experience, but then again I don’t expect much from my old CEC belt drive player. I expect much more from my turntable.