families of audio concepts, mixing, and listening

Hi all,

I've been reflecting on the recent revival of high-efficiency horn speakers with low-power amps -- helped, no doubt, by Klipsch's revival of its heritage collection of designs -- and I have a question about what I see are families of innovations, each with their own tradeoffs. 

The older system was, very basically, low-power, simple, linear amplification, driving loudspeaker-cabinet designs that provided mechanical efficiency, whether through horns, the gain provided by a wider baffle, or some combination thereof. But the frequency response was, let's say, lumpy.

The newer system: minimum-baffle tower or monitor designs with high-power, low-distortion sold-state amps to push out air from really strong, small, high-excursion woofers that do a better job, at least in terms of frequency response. 

So, first of all, is that basically right? 

I grew up with the latter designs reigning supreme, early 80s on. I never gave the older designs a chance. My dad had a 10-watt solid-state serving speakers he built himself, an 10" woofer in a 30" "tower" design with a plastic Realistic supertweeter on top. It sounded like you might expect. My friends parents put their JBLs on the floor behind the sofas. Then well-to-do friends' parents got Missions and big NADs or Denons and rocked out clean, loud sound, just in time for CDs, right around the time when people stopped listening to music.  

Now I'm hearing all manner of chatter from audio cognoscenti about how we need to give horns and vintage-style $4k JBLs or better-priced Wharfedale Vintons another chance. As cynical as I can be about such turns of the wheel of audio fortune, I wonder about an earlier, formative marketing push for high-power, minimum-baffle, crystalline perfection ready for the digital age. 

I've heard Klipsch Heresy's in a San Francisco dive bar and f$%^ if it doesn't play rock. I've heard AR3s in Montreal record shops. They aren't linear; they are chesty. The bass sounds right, or if it's wrong, I don't care.  

My current setup is Vandersteen 2ce Signature with 2wq sub and  Pass X150 X1 Pre. The bass is great, just great. The midrange I am having trouble with, probably room-associated. I think it's versatile and lovely, playing indie rock, jazz beautifully and classical ok. But it's certainly minimum-baffle, low-efficiency design (Yes, time-and-phase-coherent, etc., but lets leave that aside from this basic taxonomy for now).

So what's my question? 

Do I owe to myself to find a dealer who can show me a good version of the old way, not so much tube. vs. solid state, but one type of system vs. another, each with its own tradeoffs? What are those tradeoffs? 

Finally, on the mixing side of the equation: if most hi-fis back in the 60s and 70s were large, wide-baffle speakers, high efficiency, with their chesty bass, wouldn't studios have EQed for such systems? If so, do we need one system for 1950s-70s music and one for 80s to the present?  Or,  gasp, introduce equalizers and modelers to help us understand how it was supposed to sound at the time the recording was made? Audio purity aside, would that not be the more scientific approach? 

Just a fun question. Please no Comic-Book-Guy responses. 

Much love from the COVID Bubble. 

Paul.