@mahgister: one of the difficulties of discussing system attributes, including identifying problems, trouble shooting and the like is that we aren’t in the room to hear it for ourselves and use our own intuition--we are at a remove, and as I think Mapman’s comment about words evidences ("words, words, words"). all we can do at best in this medium is talk in terms of practices, specific areas where a problem may exist or ask questions that better direct the inquiry. In this respect, the Internet is cumbersome.
To me, the process often starts when a listener complains about shortcomings in their system and often, the discussion focuses on gear as well as set up practices. But, that means that the listener has expectations-based on hearing other systems, or simply based on what they want to hear in their mind vs. what is being reproduced by the system they are using that seems deficient. In short, for one reason or another, the user is saying "is this all there is here? I expected more!"
I know many happy users of systems that are world’s apart in concept, design and execution. And in that, I mean that there are many ways to achieve an optimal sound from a given set up in a room; moreover, if the room size is larger, there is more flexibility.
I grew up with The Absolute Sound and Stereophile when J.G. Holt was writing and publishing it-- and there, I think we Americans were shortchanged by not learning about developments in the Far East using high efficiency horns (which were all but dismissed until, in my estimation, Avantgarde put them on the map in modern mainstream high end audio in the U.S., the KLIPSCHORN being treated as a relic from the past), until the US audio press (through people like Art Dudley) gave attention to high efficiency/low power SETs which reached mainstream readers in the U.S. at least. (I acknowledge that there was knowledge in this area on the "fringe" but it was not part of the mainstream mantra- ask about an A7 VOTT and you’d typically be dismissed as a deadhead or worse. I remember an old Kondo review of something that delivered 20 or so watts a channel at a cost of $80,000 and it was subject to ridicule in some circles rather than saying, "hey, what is this about?).
To me, there are so many ways to reach sonic nirvana, which depends in part on the individual’s preferences, taking into account room, budget and sorting through the myriad alternatives in hardware and content delivery method, that it is almost impossible to describe an acceptable basis for "True Sound" (I treat this as an undefined, and meaningless term since it varies from listener to listener). Somebody who wants to listen at a metal at 100db is a different buyer than someone who wants to listen to chamber music.
I’m hardly a purist in the sense that I just want it to sound good. My choice of cartridge these days makes no claim to "neutrality" but I like the vivid aliveness of the horn experience, underpinned by controlled deep bass, with transparent midrange. I play LPs as my main source, and a lot rests on the phono front end. Even cheap-ish digital sounds good on the main system, and I can imagine how much more I could improve in that area.
There are so many branches to this hobby, and different sub-strata that is almost impossible to catalog the equipment that would meet a listener’s criteria in a given room. But we can make an approximation based on the known character of commonly available components, and typical combinations (X brand amp with Y brand speaker with Z brand wire). Beyond that, the variables become immense and almost unworkable.
I’ll give you an example and then close. I made a lateral change in phono preamp some years ago that dramatically improved the imaging and overall body of the instruments in their presentation. The dollar cost was incremental compared to what I had been using.
Likewise, by adding a fresh pair of subwoofers, and changing cartridges from one high end line that is very well regarded as neutral (Airtight) to another which, while famed, has always had this technicolor reputation (Koetsu stone bodies) gave real gravitas to the bass (which the new woofer set up helped deliver). I am now in happy land. And this, with a system that has otherwise remained largely unchanged for, as I mentioned, better than a decade.
I did change rooms when I moved, and paid a lot of attention to the power system, starting at the service entrance. I played with positioning. I took advantage of DSP for the new woofer system. But, most of the "improvement" was not the result of any one tweak; instead, taking advantage of the dimensions of the "new to me" room, I set up the system accordingly and, over time dialed it in.
I assume, as I said earlier, that the competent audiophile can do this themselves (I’m neither engineer nor acoustician), but there are people to help. And at worst, rather than spend X thousand dollars on an equipment upgrade, having the right person consult on equipment set up and layout in a given room is often well worth the cost.
I really have no agenda to promote- I don’t make money from consumer audio but, like quite a few readers here, have been "around the block" a few times. I think I have realistic expectations for what a good system can deliver, and my personal taste may or not reflect what others prefer, given their listening habits and preferences. That’s why I’m pretty agnostic on brand promotion, though I respect known synergies among certain components. I do think that high end audio costs more in real dollars than it used to, and part of that has to do with the commercialization of everything. That’s just the nature of the world we live in; to replace certain tubes in my main system, I paid more for the same thing than 5 years ago. For someone first venturing into these waters, there’s a lot to learn, a need to get solid information and the ability to compare with their own ears (very difficult, but not impossible) and access to information and support. Hell, despite my years at this, I need access to info and support. Nobody knows everything.
But, it’s fun learning, isn’t it?
