Why I like my home system better than live music

Dracule1, I don't sit and constantly think about how recordings would sound live either. For me it is all about timbral accuracy. You will never know if your system is reproducing recorded music properly without comparing it to live acoustic music.

Its great to have a piano in the house to give you an idea of how your system is performing.

Is this how you used to think before you gained more experience?

I think there are times when we give our stereo system too much credit.

Rrog, I think you give live music too much credit. I heard live music screw up the sound of a great acoustic guitar because of bad acoustics of the hall. I play the classical guitar so I pretty much know the timbre of the instrument. The right recording is great better than live in many cases, but not better (timbre I mean, not my playing) when I'm actually plucking the strings. So ultimately, if the moon and sun align live music better, but getting them to align is bitch. We agree ultimatley, but practically live music does not sound as good as some of us have made it out to be.

Irv when you listened to the soundlab's was it a tube or solid state amp driving them?
I have M2's driven with tubes and cymbal stricks are very lifelike on my speaker/amp combination;I find it strange that a soundlab speaker failed to impress on that test;maybe Mapman is right with a upstream system error.

You know, now that you mention it, I think the Sound Labs were driven by Audio Research tube amps. My last opportunity to listen to SLs was a slightly used pair of A1 px (the audiophile version) in the owner's home. So you may have got me on that solid state statement, though I have heard SLs driven by solid state amps. I was so fascinated by the speakers I can honestly say I don't remember much about the rest of the system (but it was very high end). I was also listening to CDs only, in case anyone else wants to argue the analog case. ;)

Ya know, if there was ever a speaker a person could fall in love with, it's the Sound Lab A1s. When they're good (like on full orchestra, chamber music, acoustic jazz, etc) they are incredible. I ended up not buying them because I do like rock and roll and contemporary jazz a lot, and for these types of music I find the SLs a little frustrating. I also suspect that part of the SLs magic is a coloration, and part of it is the dipole nature of the beast, and you also need a near-perfect room to situate them properly.

All I can say is try the test yourself and see if you think I'm full of bs or not. A lot of high end speakers convey a lot of information, so that you can hear minute differences and nuance, but they fail various realism tests. (My Legacys were like that.) I just find it interesting that in my personal experience I stumbled upon a little test that so few speakers pass. And the two that do are very controversial, to say the least. Lots of people on Audiogon don't think the B&Ws or the Revels are best they've heard.

While I enjoy music over my system quite a bit, it cannot match the enjoyment of a live concert (I listen to mainly classical and small folk and jazz ensembles). I think a big part of it, apart from the sheer volume and power of an orchestra going full tilt which no system can match, is that every so often the stars align or whatever and you experience a magical moment where all the musicians are on the same page, or a performer just gets it right, and you hear true inspiration, both in the playing and in the music. Those moments are rare, but I find far more of them in live performances than on recordings.