neutrality vs. realism


What is actually the final goal of high-end audio: to reproduce recorded music as neutral as possible or to give the highest possible level of realism? For some manufacturers (like Spectral and Madrigal) it is the ultimate goal regarding their amplifiers, to sound like no amplifier at all. There is less coloration, less "house sound", more "truthfulness". I think this is a good basic consideration, but it must not derive the sound of it's musicality. Those amplifiers are generally sounding lifeless! Don't get me wrong, this is not about the tubes vs. solid state controverse at all, because I think that solid state amplifiers are able to give a high level of musicality without sacrificing neutrality (Boulder, FM Acoustics). What seems perfect on paper is not always the way to go: "neutrality" and "perfect measurements" are not the synonyms for musicality and realism.
dazzdax
Crown Royale Bourbon!? I thought that Crown Royal was whiskey. No wonder you can't agree on "realism", you don't even know the "real" whiskey!

Salut, Bob P.
Whiskey,bourbon. I don't drink anymore so who cares? Besides, it's spelled Royal, not Royale. And who said I can't tell what's reality ? As they said in the Old West, Bob, " Here's lookin' at ya "...I'm sorry you missed the point of my story,you little nit-picker,you...
Sherod, I didn't miss the point of your story, but what is most of audiophilia if it isn't picking nits. BTW, I did spell Royal correctly the second time!
You and your friend were not really discussing which system was more realistic (both of your systems are quite good), but discussing taste. Goes with the bourbon, er, whiskey.

Salut, Bob P.