How close to the real thing?

With the same speakers and electronics, I have heard great differences in realism with the same recordings. Of late I am hearing greatly more ambiance and note decay with double DSD versus 44.1 PCM on many different recordings. All this means, of course is that the filters have been moved upward to nearly 100k Hz. Also, I've heard the benefits of having linear power supplies rather than the cheap switching supplies so common in our electronics.

I have also heard greater realism using the Tripoint Troy with the new Thor SE grounding cables that keep RFI and EMI out of the signal. Subtleties in the music and background are revealed once the garbage is removed.

I've also heard the importance of what my components sit on. Two different technologies dominate the field, IMHO. Stillpoints converts vertical vibrations into heat and Star Sound takes the vibrations to ground rapidly with the use of a mix of brass and steel. I hear brass and high hat as well as drums sounding better with the Star Sound and more of a sense of ease with the Stillpoints.

Finally, there are magnets in cabling. High Fidelity Cables has shown me that the more the better using magnets. These cables have dramatically revealed realism for me that I once thought was impossible. Each and every version of these cables have increased the number of magnets used, the price, and the realism.

Would Iever go back to what I was listening to just three years ago? Not unless I was very curious as to how bad it was then.

Obviously this is a silly question but..... What kind of live music and in what setting? a symphony? dont even get me going. the reflected sounds and omni directional noise coming form the instruments is simply never going to be replicated that well. we listen to a representation of live music, not live music of course. We can sit in a concert hall and listen to the loudest mahler or wagner and never fatigue or feel strained . our biology knows real naturally produced sound when it hears it and there is no effort by the brain to correct it. some of these posts have said as much. other than that we are arguing over who has better mechanics.

Veroman, I think there is much more to it than you say, such as ambience, note decay, sharp leading edge, human noises, timbre of instruments, but this is a senseless argument. I seldom buy seats that would give me the perspective that the mikes enjoy.

I don't live in a big city but used to attend meetings in Chicago and sought to buy returned seats in the center and front of Chicago's orchestral hall for the Chicago Symphony performances. I also heard many jazz singers performing there. My university has a very poor theater. The only good seats are in the front three rows. I've heard symphony performances, musicals, opera, jazz groups, and rock groups there. Frankly, my home system save for the visual perspective is better than those at the university.

My greatly improved music reproduction is largely based on vibration control, better grounding, ics and other cables, power cords and other ac conditioning, and digital sound source.