Speakers 10 years old or older that can compete with todays best,

All acoustic factors that contribute to a better sound are numerous they are all different but all are related acoustically ...The electronics of component and their design , the system /room acoustic , the psycho-acoustics specific ears filters of the owner and his specific audio journey and experience and experiments , and the specific working embeddings dimensions : mechanical,electrical and acoustical controls of the Ears/ room/system/house, by control here i spoke about electronical control but also often forgotten the mechanical controls , ALL aspects are important and differ in impact to begin with the specific synergy level between components as the first starting point ...

Remember now this : there is a minimal acoustic satisfaction threshold SPECIFIC different for each of us , or M.A.S.T. to be remember easily and there is also an optimal satisfying acoustic threshold or O.S.A.T. similar for all of us by the way  ...

The minimal and optimal tresholds differ by all the factors i described in the first paragraph above...Not only by price and evident design quality of the components ...But the two levels the minimal and optimal had something in common they represent in their price bracket/ sound quality ratio , a BALANCE between all acoustics and audio factors which are implied , one in a minimal way, the other in an optimal way ...

Mike Lavigne seems to me along the years here with all his posts very happy and satisfied by his audio system/room ...He is on the ultimate OPTIMAL level of possible satisfaction, which is almost evident for everyone because of the quality of design and the room quality and his expressed knowledge ... His system is among the costlier one here...

I am myself with a 700 bucks system/room , very happy and completely satisfied AS WELL AS HE IS ... I am on the MINIMAL level of possible satisfaction ...Which level when reached give to us music already with a good timbre, spatial aspects and immersiveness with my speakers as well as with my headphones...

People in general want to improve our system, Lavigne or mine , the costlier here and the less costlier , without knowing all the factors enumerated in my first paragraphs... They even dont know how to tune a room , as someone here said to me that room tuning dont even exist, then i will invite people to not criticise anyone system...

Think twice about what you know and what you dont know ...Perfection dont exist in musical and acoustic playback but trade-off , wise one and unwise one , wanted one and unwanted one ... Our ears/brain are not perfect they are efficient in their own specific way and history ...

Remember : everybody must learn how to hear and listen and it is not given by gear upgrades mainly ...

Psycho-acoustics science rule audio not the gear name or price...

By the way i know how to improve my system drastically but at a price which will be 15 times at least my actual price...I cannot and i dont need it because of the M.A.S. T. i enjoyed...

It is the same thing for Lavigne , it will be very hard to improve his system drastically and anyway he dont feel the necessity nor the urgency because he is on the O.S.A.T. side of audio...

My Linn Nexus from 1988 still sound great!

Nexus are Linns best selling speakers of all time. Matched with a Hsu sub,  they really shine at higher (+70 db) levels. Recently purchased  a backup used set for $150. My system consists of an LSA Warp 1 amplifier,  Audible Illusions Modulus 3a preamp, Wiim Pro Streamer, Gustard r26 Dac. And Chord Clearway interconnects. Love it!

@phusis One other thing i have also learned in this hobby is this: it is just as easy to go backwards in regards to SQ when you implement something into your system, as it is to go forwards...and many times, even easier!

Interestingly, the dealer I visited most recently utilizes a Linn turntable with the latest thinking by Linn on the interface between the table and the upstream phono stage. Their phono stage is now built into the table and called the Urika 2. This phono stage takes the analog signal and transforms it into the digital realm to send it upstream. Essentially, one listens to a digital signal when now playing the top flite LP12 Klimax model with Urika 2! On paper, this looks impressive, because not only is the signal taken immediately from the tonearm via a very short lead to the phono stage, but also the potential for loss of signal is now limited upstream, due to the digital conversion/aspect. Unfortunately, in real life, what I always hear when i hear this set up is the following...1) a severe lack of depth portrayal 2) a sheen that can only be considered as a digital artifact that pervades across the whole frequency spectrum and 3) a certain timbral aspect to the high frequencies that upon first listen is impressive, but actually wears on one as time progresses. My point here is that while Linn ( a well respected company within the a’phile community) believe that their way forward is superior to what has been done in the past, in my personal opinion, they have actually gone backwards. Is DSP the answer? Possibly in some systems, but I would say that an ’analog’ solution would be preferred firstly, if at all possible. At least to my ears, and IMHO.

So, to add to my last post...here is a question for the folks on this thread...

Is it possible that more experienced a'philes will have enough knowledge/experience of how to put together a system so that it has the least chance ( i'm not saying that all of these folks will not occasionally make mistakes and regress, but also not make obvious mistakes, like ignoring room acoustics, cabling, etc) of in fact going backwards as regards to SQ in their rooms/systems? 

I would put up ADS Speakers against almost anything for use at home.