GMA Callisto VS. Merlin TSM

hi drubin,
if you take a speaker that has flaws or a character of its own and combine that with a flawed recording and those flaws are embellished, you can end up with a mess. but if you take a flawed recording and play it through a neutral and accurate design, then the faults can become more listenable and the music can then be appreciated. that is the point. no one is trying to make a speaker that covers up faults.
and bombaywalla,
i specifically used a very soft tone so nothing could ever be taken as mud slinging and because i am a gentleman, i do not ever do this as a rule unless provoked and that rarely happens. i have respect for gma products and will not say anything against them.
so why not leave a man alone who is enjoying his new purchase instead of grinding away at him. he said he was offended already, what does that tell you.
here i am sticking up for my customer and not his speakers.
regards,
bobby

Bobby, that mud-slinging comment was not aimed at you by any chance! Just wanted to be clear.
My post was aimed at making songwriter's comments clear as it seems that they were being miscontrued. Your last post has said the same thing in your own words. Thanks again for re-iterating.
I agree w/ you w.r.t. leaving the man alone to enjoy his purchase. I would not have re-entered the thread but did so when I saw the misinterpretation of sonwriter's comments.
Well, what do you know.......you got Drubin again playing doubting-Thomas & taking the same tack as some other members posting before him!!!! what, do these guys just don't want to understand???

What? Why do you say that about me Bombaywalla? I was merely offering up another way to say what songwriter is saying, and what I think Bobby is saying, in response to Minbean's position.

Ooops, Drubin!! Sorry! looks like I'm to be blamed for mis-construing your comments! LOL!

>> I find this issue of making all of one's recordings
>> sound good very interesting.
to me, this read like a sceptic's comment!

>> It is something I look for in components, but probably
>> would not were I a reviewer or designer.
I was iffy on interpretting this one too!
if the component makes all my music sound good for the correct reasons, then, as a reviewer/designer, I'd seek such a product.

I can see that. But I've read a lot of reviews in which the reviewer says something like, "as glorious as this component sounds on great recordings like the pablum in my music collection, it will also let you hear every wart, zit, and hair out of place on less-than-perfect recordings." And we've been fed that line for decades and I think that implicit in it is the premise that this is the price one must pay for having great gear. (And conversely, buy something euphonic if you want to listed to old Beatles records.) My old Quad 57's, as musical as they were, were very very fussy about recordings and very revealing of upstream changes (also, I was younger when I had them). Ditto the Thiels I owned recently. But not so much for my GMAs, Harbeths, and ProAcs. If I were a reviewer, I might opt for that greater transparency to what is upstream. As a music lover, I think not. As an audiophile and music lover, I am perpetually conflicted.