there is no "most realistic speaker", only most realistic systems. and imho there are two basic types of "realism"-
1. up front and in your face (exciting sounding) and
2. laid back "sense of ease" effortless sounding.
one may be fatiguing after awhile while the other may be so relaxing you might doze off half-way into the cd/record.
my preference after hearing a pretty fair number of stereo's is #2, although a great #2 should wake you up pretty quickly when the composition gathers force and fury. #1 will have you dissecting the music for things that are supposed to be there but they're not audible enough, or things that ARE there that you are convinced are artifacts, although 95% of what you hear is unquestionably "so close" to an actual performance you are continually amazed and impressed.
NOW, if you were to take a decent tape recorder to an orchestra or band rehearsal hall, set up two (just two) very good microphones on boom stands, and make a 15ips or 30ips recording, take it home, and play it on an average or high end stereo, doesn't really matter which, you would hear a very raw sound, even unpleasantly so. but with a little patience, after awhile you might get used to the "flawed" sound and start enjoying the lack of studio (professional) treatments. you would hear the musicians in the room with fresh ears- in other words your ears would become the microphones instead of the complex series of electronics you would find visiting sony or telarc.
i've heard these raw tapes, and with all of their limitations it is a remarkable experience to hear what you just played, no audio cosmetics deftly applied. so that is a third reality that one should keep in the back of their mind just so you never forget how drums, and brass, bassoons and piccolos keep you wide awake and attentive, excited about the piece they're playing- and not the way it's being played back.
1. up front and in your face (exciting sounding) and
2. laid back "sense of ease" effortless sounding.
one may be fatiguing after awhile while the other may be so relaxing you might doze off half-way into the cd/record.
my preference after hearing a pretty fair number of stereo's is #2, although a great #2 should wake you up pretty quickly when the composition gathers force and fury. #1 will have you dissecting the music for things that are supposed to be there but they're not audible enough, or things that ARE there that you are convinced are artifacts, although 95% of what you hear is unquestionably "so close" to an actual performance you are continually amazed and impressed.
NOW, if you were to take a decent tape recorder to an orchestra or band rehearsal hall, set up two (just two) very good microphones on boom stands, and make a 15ips or 30ips recording, take it home, and play it on an average or high end stereo, doesn't really matter which, you would hear a very raw sound, even unpleasantly so. but with a little patience, after awhile you might get used to the "flawed" sound and start enjoying the lack of studio (professional) treatments. you would hear the musicians in the room with fresh ears- in other words your ears would become the microphones instead of the complex series of electronics you would find visiting sony or telarc.
i've heard these raw tapes, and with all of their limitations it is a remarkable experience to hear what you just played, no audio cosmetics deftly applied. so that is a third reality that one should keep in the back of their mind just so you never forget how drums, and brass, bassoons and piccolos keep you wide awake and attentive, excited about the piece they're playing- and not the way it's being played back.