High Performance Audio - The End?


Steve Guttenberg recently posted on his audiophiliac channel what might be an iconoclastic video.

Steve attempts to crystallise the somewhat nebulous feeling that climbing the ladder to the high-end might be a counter productive endeavour. 

This will be seen in many high- end quarters as heretical talk, possibly even blasphemous.
Steve might even risk bring excommunicated. However, there can be no denying that the vast quantity of popular music that we listen to is not particularly well recorded.

Steve's point, and it's one I've seen mentioned many times previously at shows and demos, is that better more revealing systems will often only serve to make most recordings sound worse. 

There is no doubt that this does happen, but the exact point will depend upon the listeners preference. Let's say for example that it might happen a lot earlier for fans of punk, rap, techno and pop.

Does this call into question almost everything we are trying to ultimately attain?

Could this be audio's equivalent of Martin Luther's 1517 posting of The Ninety-Five theses at Wittenberg?

-----

Can your Audio System be too Transparent?

Steve Guttenberg 19.08.20

https://youtu.be/6-V5Z6vHEbA

cd318
I watched the video and practically, I think he nailed it pretty well. The example of pop music on Magnepans is a classic example of wrong speaker for a particular kind of recording. Been there, done that. But that is not strictly a case of too high performance for the genre. The issue is also lack of performance regarding large scale dynamics with planars. You will hear the music but probably seldom feel it.
Interesting Steve worked at SBS. Did not know that. He reviewed Ohm Walsh speakers recently and was very impressed. The time I went to Sound By Singer and mentioned I owned Ohm Walsh speakers the guy there totally dissed them.  I do not think it was him but not sure.
Huh? Some of my favorite music is on crappy recordings. A good system just allows you to hear further into the recording be it bad or good. Contrary to some opinion here, there are some excellently recorded popular records. Many of them are trying to give you a different experience than being at a live recording. It is part of the art form. Amused to Death (Roger Waters) is an example. 
It is really a mater of priorities and how much you are willing to spend.
You can build a system for about $120,000 that is very close if not SOTA.
Spending more than that will not get you much farther. You might call that the point of diminishing returns. 
As a young audiophile you start with what you can afford and over time you evolve your system until you get where you are happy. That point does exist. If you wind up with piles of money and want to buy $145,000 amplifiers, well why not? Are they worth that much? Hell no, but if they make you happy why not? Most of us can't go that far but trust me on this, you don't have to. It is much harder to build a SOTA system on short money and I have heard some very expensive not so hot sounding systems. 
Does the quality of an individual recording mean anything? Not if you like the music. There are loads of audiophile "candy." Super recordings of bad music. You can buy those if you want your system to sound good.
Right now I am listening  to a half speed mastered version of The Captain and Me. The best of both worlds:)
Listening further into bad recordings is not enjoyable IME — the warts just get easier to hear. Yes, there are some good pop recordings, but sadly not many. When I want to listen to poorly-recorded music I like, I just fire up my Bluetooth speaker or earbuds as I can more easily just enjoy it for what it’s worth without feeling like I’m chewing on tinfoil. Anyway, that’s how I deal with it.