$40.000 speaker advise. Check out my list

I can be quite assured of this, is a modded pair of $6,000 speakers will out perform many $40,000 pair of speakers. Maybe discovering many different things to increase a speakers performance has my confidence in this. The parts to mod may be anywhere from about a hundred to maybe a thousand pending how much you do. My thinking is why would someone ever pay a speaker manufactuer $40,000 is beyond me when modding $10,000 or less speakers or so profitable.

Interesting, so what speakers have you done these specific comparisons with? Also, what makes you think that what you find subjectively pleasing is something other people would find pleasing acoustically? Those kinds of generalizations apply to you and your opinions, not necessarily all, or even many, other people. Perhaps they hear something you don't, that is possible you know, as per this article on hearing psychology: http://psy.ucsd.edu/~ddeutsch/

I think self pride and knowing you have a jaguar instead of a modded chevy is the deal IMO!

Well, if you can generalize a whole population of people who own certain items based on your own prejudices concerning the pricing differences and sound quality of those items, then it must be true... Or, perhaps you are just biased because of those prejudices.

My mistake, I guess the Dynaudio C1 room was treated with curtains like the Vandersteen and Wilson rooms.

I guess I wouldn't mind hearing those Magico Minis again in a better setting, all things considered. Not hanging something around the room to at least make the music intelligable is gross underplanning IMO considering a speaker designer has some knowledge of acoustics and what effect higher frequency reflections will have on the sound quality...

Jkalman - I'm curious to know what your sound reference is? I always use acoustic instruments when evaluating equipment because I know what real violins, cellos and pianos sound like. For those instruments, I've never heard a Vandersteen speaker sound less than excellent. They unfailingly produce a natural instrumental timbre when set up properly. However, if you use studio produced rock/pop recordings as your reference, then anything goes because no one really knows how they should sound except the mixing engineer. Then the evaluations become entirely subjective (which is OK if that is what floats your boat but it does not allow one to judge the true accuracy of a component).
Mark

Jkalman - I'm curious to know what your sound reference is?

Krisjan,

I like acoustical material as well to give me an idea of how accurate a speaker sounds, especially since I have been playing instruments myself for over 18 years (~25 years if you include piano). I play electric as well as acoustic instruments, so I like to hear how that sounds too. The thing about "grain" and "dimension" though, or "lifelike" qualities to the sound. Those are characteristics you notice pretty easily when they are there, or not there, especially when the speakers aren't fooling you into thinking you are hearing the real thing and not just speaker output.

However, if you use studio produced rock/pop recordings as your reference, then anything goes because no one really knows how they should sound except the mixing engineer. Then the evaluations become entirely subjective.

Since every consumer recording is in some way put through a studio engineering process (as far as I am aware), including acoustic music, I don't think that is a practical statement, seeing as "every recording" is, as such, subject to your criticism. So no one "really knows" what any recording is "supposed" to sound like except the engineer who made the masters. You are still left with having to decide based on subjective preference, i.e. - what sounds more "real" to your ears. To my ears, the Wilsons sound more "real," than the Vandersteens.

Also, if you want to really replicate the experience of the engineer, you would need to use the exact speakers the engineer used, as well as his studio space, so you get the same acoustical environmental effects he was getting during the mastering. Unless he used Vandersteens during the mastering process, there is no way they will be accurate in terms of what the engineer was trying to portray, as every speaker is colored differently. I'm sure you can see what a dead end argument the whole thing becomes.

Lasty, you would need the engineers ears and brain as well, since we are each subject to perceptual differences that cause us to hear things a certain way dependent on our unique ear structures and brain processing. http://psy.ucsd.edu/~ddeutsch/

Keep in mind, I never said you should hear "how I hear," or like "what I like." I simply stated that to my perceptions they don't sound as good as the Wilsons (or even close...) or the Dynaudios.

BTW, when you consider the studio monitor speakers used by most sound engineers, and how those monitors sound quality wise, you really don't want to recreate what they originally heard during the mastering process IMO. Often really crappy speakers are used intentionally to account for worst case listening situations.

Take my Samson Resolve 80a studio monitors. Objectively they measure "excellently." Unfortunately, all the best measurements in the world can't stop these speakers from sounding dimensionless, grainy and uninvolving... i.e. they sound "dead." OTOH, if you can make a recording sound even remotely good on those, you can guarantee they will sound good almost anywhere!