Speakers that reveal bad recordings? Not for me.


Why is it ever desirable to have speakers that simply reflect whatever they are fed, for better or worse?
I can control the upstream equipment, but I cannot control the quality of the recording, which severely limits my freedom of music choice, defeating the purpose of an audio system. This just seems like common sense to me, and I get annoyed when a dealer or whomever mentions this as sign of quality. (Thanks for reading my rant.)
rgs92
Post removed 
I agree, all recordings should sound better on the highest resolution systems.

Having said that, this is not easily accomplished, one may have to search for years to find the correct synergy. Resolution and forgiveness are not necessarily exlusive sonic attributes.

Just a thought. I've always thought that attaining maximum resolution AND musicality was the essential quest of the audiophile/music lover. Others may have either or both of these traits to varrying degrees, your inclination likely guides your search.
Why is it ever desirable to have speakers that simply reflect whatever they are fed, for better or worse?
Answer Monitoring. A well designed loudspeaker will sound good even if musics poorly recorded.
I have never found that getting better gear made records worse. It always sounded better. If you hear it worse, the "better" gear just isn't, set up poorly, or both.
The recording is what it is. A bad recording is not the speaker's fault. That's what signal processors like dynamic range expanders tone controls, and equalizers are for, to make a lesser recording sound better.