Warm vs. Analytical

It appears, at least to me, from reading the responses that there is not an overall consensus on the definition of these terms, as well as other audio terms; this really doesn't surprise me. The list of audio terms is outrageously enormous which just adds confusion, IMO.

One says Neutral is ideal another says Neutral is boring; one says warm is good another says warm is not good.

Looking at some of the definitions given at the Stereophile link can further the confusion.

It is no wonder there are many disagreements.

FWIW -
neutral - Free from coloration.

warm - The same as dark, but less tilted. A certain amount of warmth is a normal part of musical sound.

analytical - Very detailed, almost to the point of excess.

dark - A warm, mellow, excessively rich quality in reproduced sound. The audible effect of a frequency response which is clockwise-tilted across the entire range, so that output diminishes with increasing frequency. Compare "light."

light - Lean and tipped-up. The audible effect of a frequency response which is tilted counterclockwise. Compare "dark."

coloration - An audible "signature" with which a reproducing system imbues all signals passing through it.

(As you can see, some definitions need others to define themselves! At least in audio slang.)

It is good to know the meaning of these terms, keep in mind that they are still one man's opinion. Of all the amps named in this post, and many morenot named, you can find an opinion on the sound of that amp. Just know that you can steer the sound of a well made amp in any direction, a cheap, not well made amp will maintain its sound no matter were you want it to go.

Could amp be analitical and worm both?

I have heard dSC Elgar and Rurcel + Accuphase transport through Lamm 1 monoblocks, speakers Grand Utopia on HE 2001 in NY, and sound seemd to me simultaneously analitical (I could heard every detail) and somehow worm. It was perfect to me.

I'd like to add more terminology to the sound description wording:

Sexy -- usually associated with Dark during an intercourse.
Dull -- usually associated with hangover syndroms next morning.

Agressive -- usually associated with disobedient wives that do not allow to listen to music at high volumes.

Illegal -- same as above but with neighbors complaining to the management.

Kholeric -- usually associated with small sound imperfections that drive listener to get off the listening chair or couch to readjust system, reconnect wires and powercords without end.

Charismatic -- usually associated with extreamly nice finished equipment that drives to believe that it sounds good.

Repulsive -- usually accosiated with old vintage equipment and opposite to the previous termin.

Imperative -- usually associated with break-in period and at certain cases might blend with Agressive where applicable.

Forgiving -- usually associated with happy wife after Bloomingdale shopping and opposite to Agressive.

Spontaneous -- usually associated with listening despite sounds of vacume cleaner.

Reading through some of the subsequent responses, I want to make it clear that I was not endorsing common perceptions engendered by these terms, just reporting them (nor was I trying to define them). I personally have a low tolerance for both excessive or obvious warmth *and* analytical-ness, and consider 'neutrality', to the extent that we can obtain or be sure about such a thing, to be a virture.

I also think that the definitions offered above only touch on some of the aspects involved in generating these perceptions - the question actually goes beyond just tonal balance to me - but I'm going to refrain from expounding further since it's all very subjective anyway. But for the record, I find Rockvirgo's explanation to cover the whole gestalt more satisfactorily than a technical exegesis likely would.