Most forgiving high end speaker 10k-20k?

Sounds real, sorry, been working like crazy, traveling all over east coast. Have dropped in to read responses quickly but no time to chat.

I'm going to give a listen to the Sonus Faber and the Zu Def Mk4 (if I can find it to listen to). Like some others have stated, while I would likie to find some forgiving speakers, I dont want to be put to sleep. I still want musicality (toe tap inducing),tonality (the wood in woods, the resonance) and a forward "they are in the room" sound (not recessed, mid hall, and similar descriptions). If I dont get the last word in accuracy or detail, I'm fine with that.

Personally, I think the audio community, manufacturers and buyers alike, have become way too obsessed with absolute accuracy and to-the-last-degree detail. In fact, I'll go so far as suggesting that "absolute" accuracy is unattainable (at least at reasonable price points), and maybe many confuse pristine clarity without substance or body as some form of this accuracy. This is of course just my very humble opinion (no need to flame me if you think otherwise). Perhaps the opposite is true, maybe I confuse a little added distortion or midbass hump or tubiness/loose bass as "musicality" when in fact it just represents pleasant inaccuracy. It is what it is, but based on what I'm reading in mags, I do believe we are in an accuracy/clarity/detail fad of amp/speaker building. Again, JMHO.
PS- Sounds_real, now dont take me to task if I disappear for awhile, lol)

Jeff if you choose a speaker that suits your own taste (over the longer term) you have made the right choice irrespective of the level of detail or accuracy it truly has. It does not matter what others think. In my opinion though, I do think that people listen too much to leading edge detail rather than also listening within the body of notes. An example for me is hearing the richness of tone and micro dynamics within single notes being sung on female vocals. To me, this level of detail adds the emotional content. I would also add that I believe that as you get speakers that are more revealing, they add excitement, and your great recordings become better, but you hear some new flaws, your mediocre recordings are more listenable but are more exposed, and some poor recordings become unbearable. Overall you enjoy more of your collection -- my opinion.

I AGREE WITH MAPMAN regarding the underlying basis of the question- i.e.- what really well made speaker will sweeten up poor recordings? well, what is a "poor recording"? there's muddy, there's thin (like an old Charlie Parker album),
there's ear-bleeding treble, boomy bass, hiss(sss), background noise, etc.
then there's poorly MIXED albums (what do you propose can correct that?).
now i know of some systems that just sound pretty decent on just about everything, but they are generally called "MID-FI" and they play popular music the way most people like to hear it- ample BASS and a wide-open upper-midrange and treble. you simply do not have to pay a great deal of money for a system that plays MDNA (madonna) or AEROSMITH, this level will also do justice by ok-recordings of jazz and even some classical.
so who needs HD-Audio anyway? if you lust after a level of resolution that makes you believe you are "there", then you have to take a critical look at each piece of the system (plus your room) that gets out of the way of a good recording. and there is an abundance of good recordings, SACD, internet, or just properly engineered in the 1st place. but IF such a well-designed system doesn't turn a terrible recording into a clean clear balanced one, then just adjust your ATTITUDE towards what your real goals are in spending your hard-earned money on a stereo. it's THERE you will find that you really WANT
Realism, or you would much rather get something that "does the job, period".
of course back in the 60's and 70's most of the equipment fell into MID-FI or "HI-WATTAGE MID-FI (that cost a little more but still had the same design).
so either way you couldn't lose; it all just depended on how LOUD you wanted
to play your music. but the sound quality was pretty good overall. i am no expert on when and why things became more "complicated" with the advent
of Quad Speakers and Levinson 25 watt "class-A" amplifiers. that some people had the money for this gear was apparent. i just didn't know anyone who did for a very long time afterwards, or why they would even bother.

Agree with the Harbeth recommendation, but Spendor should be auditioned as well. Spendors and tubes go together very well especially if one is looking for a less analytical sound than the typical high-end speaker.

Hesson11: Hey Bob, I agree about the tone controls. In fact, maybe that's an answer all by itself. Maybe all we need is old fashioned "tilt" or "presence" boost to make the unlistenable once again listenable, even on a very revealing, unforgiving speaker. McIntosh preamps always had tone controls, no? The new Classe CP-800 preamp has tone controls AND parametric EQ, AND bass management. Perhaps the answer is to keep the ruthless speaker for all it does with great recordings and just EQ the bad/mediocre ones?