Difference between today and yesterday.

Detlof- I've been bi-amping with planars for years(tubes/top and SS/bottom) with a pair of 10" drivers(Nestorovic's) in 8', tapered, damped transmission lines. They don't move enough air to fill a stadium, but have reproduced(with a healthy amount of realism/authority) the 16hz, 32ft stops of the Grand Ruffatti Organ on Crystal Clear's 'The Fox Touch'(Toccata and Fugue in D Minor)in my every listening room(thus far). When I built them, I did so to help my Acoustat Model III's(what I owned in 1980) keep from arcing, and to increase the dynamic range of the system. NO-I can't get the impact of a full philharmonic orchestra, BUT- The live club jazz, outdoor rock and music in church venues I've recorded are rendered quite well. Have you heard an album called 'Into the Labyrinth' by 'Dead Can Dance'? It was recorded in the Quivvy Church(Los Angeles). Wonderful ambiance, and guaranteed to give your entire sound system a healthy workout(huge drums/lots of percussion, and some very strange music). Vocals are to die for in that acoustic(some is a capella), and excellent engineering.

Douglas- I agree with the greatest part of what you said. Everyone is born with certain innate talents and abilities. Many things are/can be learned, however, such as being able to listen to individual instruments or voices in an otherwise busy acoustic for instance. My hearing(and sense of smell) has saved my life more than once, because I learned to sense what did and didn't belong in the then present environment. That's how deer avoid getting killed too. They are very familiar with their surroundings. Deer that are around humans a lot, never learn to fear them(not good if you're a deer). If you listen to live music all the time, your recognition of it will adjust to whatever is going on with your hearing. If I were to stop listening to live performances, and lost some high freq. sensitivity: I would at that point have to boost the treble to get what my memory said was missing. If I stay current(and focused) in my listening: What I hear in the live venue is still what I am looking for from my system. I'm certain(though I have protected my hearing as a valuable asset over the years) that I have sustained some loss(still test very good), BUT- I've still no problem telling the silkiness of Zildgian cymbals as opposed to the brassiness of Sabians(for instance). The bands I run sound for keep calling me back, because they get compliments on their sound they don't get otherwise. As I said in an earlier post: It's a matter of what you love(That's what you will stay consistant with). I can't help the engineering or equipment used in the recordings I purchase. I do know that my system is accurate based on my reference materials, and if what's being played is lacking in some area: I know it's the software, and not my hardware. I fully agree with The Duke(and Mrtennis): If it sounds good (to you), it is good. I always say, "If one person likes it- It's art" (whether I think it stinks or not)!

I do want to remember that the original post was: are speakers from yesteryear as good as today. And my response was: yes, from certain perspectives. Again, the midbass is wrong in very many speakers, yet it is rarely noted in reviews. My opera singer friend can tell --quite easily -- which speaker has a good midbass. He does not have to "compare" speakers: he's a musician. He listened to (good) recordings and was able, on the basis of his own personal experience with piano, flute and a few other instruments, to determine which speaker most accurately sounded "right" in that area. Memory, per se, is not a requirement here if one is a musician.
I think we got a little off track on fthe subject of the (original) post. It is not about personal preferences: it was a simple question of whether older speakers could compete with current speakers. In some cases, as I pointed out, they are equal to current equipment. In some cases, probably not.

This thread is a Mobius Strip; flips back around and goes nowhere.
Blessed Easter! :)

is it possible that musicians might disagree ?

if so, the answer to thread is: it is a matter of opinion and preference ?

if you can't compare the recording with the sound of the instrument recorded, you don't have a scientifc assessment of the accuracy/inaccuracy of timbre of a stereo system. you have an anecdotal account, based upon memory. even if you are a musician, your recollection is not perfect.

there is no reference, other than memory to compare to the sound of a stereo system, unless the musician is playing in the room and a recording is made of the performance.

if memory is the basis of judgment the result is conjectural, not factual.