How competitive are you with your system?

toddalin   --- Mihorn has shown my case. 

  -- Here is the direct transfer:  ttps://youtu.be/CoOp12ayIVg

  -- And wavetouch version: https://youtu.be/lM-vtW-bygs

Ignore soundstage/imaging/separation.  These are not comparable unless close-up micing is used and even then the playback equipment may not support it for what it is in the room.

Where did the bass go??? Where did the harmonics go? Why does it now sound "boxed in" and not open?

Hello,  

The purpose of hi-end audio is recreating the original music. My system recreates the orig music faithfully. My room isn't recording studio. So, my video includes the sound of my room (with minimal acoustic treatment).

My system consists same simple gears at shows and at home for videos. The Show 2021  Microphones in my recording are 6ft from speakers. You can see in this which I speak and record music non-stop. 

Where the bass go? My speakers woofer is 5.25" and goes down to 44hz (-6db) and I like it. When I want more bass, a sub can be added easily - 2024 audio show (w/sub). 

Sound boxed in? Not open? - my system sounds the most neutral, open and cleaner than any system in the world. 

My system's sound-stage and images (especially mid-range) are the most life-like. Compare Wavetouch vs. others below. Every ears are different. You might like different from my liking. Alex/Wavetouch audio

Original - FINK

Wavetouch audio - FINK 

Focal - FINK ,   Thiel - FINK ,  PMC - FINK ,  Montemer Horn-FINK ,  Avantgarde -FINK

@mihorn 

In the YouTube listening exercise laid out in your above post, the recording of the Thiel 3.7 sounds closest to the Original, followed by the recording of the Avantgarde.

For what it's worth.

At the risk of belaboring the obvious, I'm not sure it is worthwhile to compare lossy audio of different systems recorded in different rooms by different people with different recording devices and different recording skills; however, the sonic differences between the various videos are striking.

I let the sound of my systems speak for themselves. I never hesitate to let others hear their sound qualities, which can be discerned even through audio recordings of them embedded in YouTube videos. In my head, I know where their sound quality ranks & how it compares to others systems I have heard and it is always, in the words of the great Bad Brains, “I Against I”. 

My system challenges me to a fight every time i turn it on.

Are you gladiator? Who are you going to fight with? Why do you wish to pick up the fight?

It’s interesting that the majority of the many people answering the question claim they are not competitive.  Why do they bother responding to this thread if it didn’t occur to them at some point how others’ systems sounded.

Just don’t force the issue. Most of the AGs here aren’t interested in competing with each other’s systems. Rather, they respond to posts like this to express their views on what they believe is the right or healthy attitude. In my opinion, your goal should be to assess how closely your system can reproduce the sound of a live performance on stage. The evaluation criteria can include timbre accuracy, tonal balance, soundstage, imaging, detail retrieval, and so on.

That said, my observation suggests that something may be lacking in your system. For example, in a previous thread, you highly praised a particular CD—a compilation of excerpts from various classical masterworks. As I noted at the time, in some tracks the cello timbre seemed off, and the mixing lacked proper center-stage image / focus. The music appeared to come only from the extreme left and right channels. Furthermore, since the CD is just a collection of excerpts, it feels disjointed—something many classical listeners wouldn’t even find appealing.

I didn’t mention all this earlier out of politeness. But if your system is truly as outstanding as you’ve claimed, why didn’t it reveal those flaws to you? Is your setup capable of exposing such deficiencies? If not, I wonder—how competitive is it, really?