Should a high end system be flexible, or demanding?

douglas_schroeder

cleeds, yes, I do have actual evidence of my claim. First, I have built hundreds of audio systems from extreme budget on the low end of a couple thousand dollars up to HiFi at the $100K mark. In reviewing I compare such systems continuously ...

That's the logical fallacy known as appeal to authority. You do not provide any actual data to support your statement:

The fact is that most audiophiles' systems are not nearly as good as they think.

An audio system that cannot play all music, all recordings superbly, is not much of a high end system. There are fundamental weaknesses, shortcomings in a system that cannot sound terrific with all genres of music and all recordings.

@douglas_schroeder 

I had a quick peek at your system. Very impressive. It represents the opposite of my approach to audio. (Mine is strictly single driver, back loaded horn, flea powered SET etc.) Now clearly your system will do a lot of things mine won't, but I think you'd be mistaken if you think your system comes close to working as well as mine on the material mine is focused for. And by mistaken, I mean dead wrong.

Now I am not suggesting one system, or one approach, is better than another. They are simply the result of different interpretations of what good sound reproduction is supposed to be. Long story short, your system will not play all recordings superbly if by "superbly" we mean a standard accepted by every discerning audiophile. Nor will mine. However, without doubt, both our systems are high end.

@douglas_schroeder

"The hard limitations of the genres of speakers and components becomes clear as day when many systems are built and assessed using a wide variety of musical genres."


Agreed.

I was happy listening to my collection of largely 60s/70s rock and pop for years and years on my small Rega bookshelves until a friend introduced me to Coltrane and Davis via his large bi-amped KEF floorstanders.


It soon became apparent that the tiny Regas, despite their superior midrange, could not do justice to those vintage Blue Note recordings the way the KEFS could.Without the double bass driving along the rest of the band, the performance lost most of its impact and momentum.

"Ye cannae change the laws of physics, Captain!" as a certain Scottish engineer may or may have not said.

I often use the phrase “in the same league”to describe a system that can compete with another. High end is essentially the big league. 


Some systems are Dodgers, well financed and capable of winning more but not all contests. Others are Orioles, then everything in between.

That’s for comparing things on some absolute scale which really does not exist for home music systems.

Then there is that everybody has their favorite team. Could be any of those teams in the big league. We tend to call those people “audiophiles”.

A system either works well or it doesn’t to meet a users needs. That is the main thing.

A good system will reproduce acoustic instrument naturally, period...

All others sound ’s phantasm are not for me...

For example a system that could translate "heavy metal" dynamic waves of sound....Or organ bassier note....my system could do a very good job about heavy metal but i dont buy gear to create  the most powerful dynamic possible in my room...

I dont need it... And i dont need the costly speakers that could do the job....I dont listen dynamic first....But timbre instrument first....

I guess my system is, in his class S.Q./price ratio, very good... More flexible tough than demanding...I will say optimal....

Acoustic is the key....Not the price paid neither the electronical design.... Acoustic is the key....Acoustic may cost nothing....

😁😎😊😊