How do you judge audio components and speakers?

To evaluate a system we need not only some well known recordings but a room adapted to the specific system we want to evaluate if not , how could you know the real potential of the system under evaluation in bad room conditions ?
This is the customers perspective....

Not the reviewers perspective for sure, who change the gear he listen to every month and who will never bother himself to optimize the gear under evaluation in the best working condition....( it takes months of listening experiments to tune a room to a specfic system)

Us customers we are conditioned in a Pavlovian way about gear upgrade and the attention focussing on gear brand name, with NO or VERY FEW BASIC knowledge in audio magazine about the way to optimize what we already own....

They sells gear, they dont inform about the essential... Who will pay their publicity if they will inform us that we can afford high-end sound experience at low cost modulo mechanical, electreical and especially acoustical information ?

There is 3 laws for me in audio hobby :

---Diminishing returns or/and accelerating returns are subordinated to the OPTIMIZATION PROCESS...

---The optimization process is constituted by the three working dimensions controls : mechanical,electrical and acoustical ...

---The relation between the audio system and an acoustically controlled room reveal how bad system worsen way more and good one improve hugely more...

Evaluating by the weight and the number of internal pieces is nowadays meaningless...Minimal design can mean low noise and each addition of new processors in the design is a trade-off between the speficic associated noise which is introduced and the way it will affect, correct, or degrade the signal... Engineering is an ART based on science....Not on weight...

My dac is minimal in parts and weight and stupendous in my acoustically controlled room ....And The Berning ZOTL amplifier for example weight very little...

Sometimes less is way better....

@jackhifiguy 

I would broadly agree with everything you say, especially the point about some systems being too revealing for certain less than perfect recordings. 

The problem wortj bearing in mind is that it's virtually impossible to find anything that comes close to satisfying so many differing criteria.

Therefore, whenever I hear music being reproduced, I tend to try to keep my evaluation as simple as possible by focussing on a few essential qualities as possible.

1 absence of sonic nasties -  coarse treble, sibilance, indistinct bass, overhang etc

2 life-like timbre

3 dynamic range, transient speed and attack.

Anything else, imagery, disappearing speaker, articulate natural sounding treble etc would all just be extras.

Alas, my search for this mythic speaker goes on.

Anything else, imagery, disappearing speaker, articulate natural sounding treble etc would all just be extras.

Alas, my search for this mythic speaker goes on.

Imaging, and "disapearing speakers" , are not "extras" they are acoustical fundamental factors which can perfectly be controlled at will by understanding of room acoustic...

And ALL acoustical factors anyway are interrelated, bass,dynamic, treble, mids, imaging, soundstage , LEV/ASW ratio, Timbre, they all reacted together to any change in the room...

People dont realize it because in their non controlled room all these factors work in a non synchronized and non optimal way in an apparent separated way ... Like i already say, even a single straw location can change the sound of a room and in some well prepared conditons it is perfectly audible...I know because i experimented it non stop 2 years in my audio room ...

By the way i dont need "mythic" speakers to do the job, only relatively good one... Acoustic is a science which can improve any good speakers, never mind his brand name...

But sometimes to increase for example transient and dynamic we must also decrease the electrical noise floor of the System/  room/house...

And any speakers, even "mythic" one will need vibrations and resonance control to improve  timbre and all other acoustic factors...

@twoleftears 

ghdprentice,

My modestly sized Mytek Brooklyn Bridge was packed with components and weighed a veritable ton. It ran hot. It also decided to go completely black & dead a couple weeks after the warranty expired.

I replaced the Mytek with a Cambridge CXN. The Cambridge is standard rack size and is a veritable fly weight by comparison. I haven't opened it up to look, but I'd guess  that the device separates the streamer and DAC sections with a good deal of empty space. In any case, it runs extremely cool. That lack of heat gives me confidence that it'll last me far longer than the Mytek did. I am also enjoying the sound of the Cambridge much more than I supposedly should be.

@jackhifiguy I'm in agreement with most everything you stated. I'd only suggest a system can't be too accurate, rather the recordings that sound inferior are inaccurate. However, I understand what you mean, many times we want our systems to have a bit of sweetening in order to sound good with  mediocre recordings. In a perfect world one would want an accurate system to reproduce accurate recordings.