tomcy6 --
Thanks for your reply.
As 213runnin pointed out, we could go back to the moon today but we couldn’t do most of what’s being done today in the 60s. Go to Space.com or the Hubble Telescope website to see some awe inspiring pictures. People were excited about going to the moon because no one had ever done it before. I doubt it would cause much excitement today and would instead be considered a colossal waste of money, something else our government is much better at today. :)
Think of the audiophile as a space voyager. Would he or she be more excited about working on a space station circling the earth in close orbit for 90 days, or walking on the moon for a few hours? Walking on the moon has been done before, yes, but for the man or woman to actually walk on its powdery surface, to take in the vista of being outside in space (albeit in a spacesuit), looking at the earth hanging out there in the darkness as something that can supposedly be hidden behind the thumb of a stretched out arm (so it has been told), really walking on another celestial body - this is most definitely an Experience that is bound to change a person, or so I believe. With limited tech they took a giant leap (sorry for the pun), a pioneering spirit I’d like to see re-invigorated with todays technology.
I don’t know what you mean by "I’d aim higher than that" but let me guess and rephrase my point.
Todays speakers create a greater sense of awe and are more practical and attractive to the vast majority of listeners than 30s speakers would be if they were widely available. People talking in movies inspired awe in people in the 20s, but it no longer does, even though the soundtracks of current movies are far more sophisticated.
There are a few systems around using 30s speakers that may sound very good and are the "best" sounding to the people that own them, but, given the choice, the vast majority of people would prefer a system using current technology. This is a matter of taste and anyone who prefers 30s speakers will get no argument from me on whether they are the "best" FOR THEM. I fully acknowledge that 30s speakers are the "best" to the people that love them and would not try to convince them that they could get better sound from modern speakers.
There’s a lot to comment on here. "Aiming a little higher" would, in effect, be questioning your claim that "the vast majority of people would prefer a system using current technology," insofar we’re talking typically newer designs. Most people haven’t even heard 30’s speakers (or their kind), so where’s the reference other than speculation? And let’s not get too fixated on whether speakers are from the 30’s or 60’s, or even build today based on older designs but refined with contemporary technology. The main point I feel is the type of speaker being addressed, and this involves primarily bigger size and higher efficiency (and, in effect, the use of horns). Practical issues at present often involves technology to work around size (and price) constrains, among other things, and this is rarely about achieving the best sound quality in absolute terms, but more how to minimize and work around the effects of a variety of practical limitations. I also fully acknowledge taste and whatever’s "best for me," just as well as many won’t be able to house a pair of very large speakers, but let’s not forget that "practical and attractive" is no measure into achieving the best in sound quality.
However, I would put my money on the best current systems sounding better than the best 30s systems to, say, 90% of listeners.
That’s a bold claim, and one difficult to test. I wouldn’t bet on it :)
No doubt, there a great sounding current designs. A week ago I listened to a pair of Peak Consult Typhoeus Momentum at the factory in Denmark (retail price: over €100,000/pair) with Chord preamp and CD-player + Gryphon Antelion poweramp, and their sound boggled my mind. Absolutely amazing. And yet, a great sounding horn system can do something different; adding a sense of tactility, presence and even more ease that ultimately blurs the distinction between what’s reproduced and live to a fuller extent. But that’s just me.
