Should a good system sound bad with bad recording?

I am not sure the issue breaks down as simply as "realistic and accurate" versus "euphonic." I think your system has to do PRAT well to be consistently enjoyable across the musical and recording quality spectrums. There are a lot of other factors, including the voicing of the speakers. But I am still trying to figure out all the issues and the right balance between them.

First of all, welcome back Slappy! Of course their is one option that is taboo in many minds, equalization.

Jaybo: interesting point. Is the issue of resolution one that we should care about then? if the complete concert is about 200MB (thus about 120MB per 1 hour CD), how can this be an "audiophile" recording? I think I am missing sthg here. I like your perspective though as it goes against the "grain"!

I think it would help greatly if you had bass and treble control......i am finding out that high end means only playing a few recordings and not being able to play most........so what is the point of paying alot of $$$$$ to not be able to tolerate most recordings???

I have Krell gear and i hear from a relative,"you need a mixer", "not enough bass" and it pisses me off.

Spend the big bucks and then everything sounds like crap.

If it's a professionally done recording and you're playing it from at least a 16/44 source (or some loseless equivalent) then something is wrong with your system and/or your setup if you're finding a significant percentage of new recordings are "unlistenable". A good system will show the flaws of commercially oriented recordings, but it shouldn't make them sound like crap.

EQ and tone controls can correct for tonal imbalances, but nothing can undo excessive compression.