better gear, worse recordings

I suspect that what you're experiencing isn't a function of getting better equipment, so much as the fact that, over time, you've become more discerning, and more conscious of the fact that a lot of recordings really aren't very good, from a technical standpoint.

My advice would be to concentrate on assembling a system that makes great recordings sound great. When you find recordings that are too shrill or too flat, tweak your tone controls a little, or get yourself an equalizer.

I had the same problem. Detailed and somewhat bright gear (Thiel, Adcom, Rotel) made everything sound thin and unmusical. I got a Rega Planet 2000 and everything came back to life. It seems that the answer is all about system synergy. I think I read Mike VansEvers say that a system of class B/C components that match each other well will always sound better than straight class A equipment with no synergy.
As for artists, I noticed Pink Floyd recordings can sound better on some equipment and worse on other equipment but it always sounds good.

the amazing experiance of hearing a great recording on a great system far outweighs the drawbacks on bad recordings. if you've ever heard well-recorded music come alive, you will not want to settle for a less revealing system that makes bad recordings more listenable. isn't that kinda what this hobby is all about...to push the envelope of music reproduction at home? a boombox would suffice if we just wanted to enjoy music. just my $0.02.

All of the systems are different. What is noticed with the latest system (and best to date) was staying on par with the recording. The bad recordings still sound bad but better than before and the good recordings are much noticeably better to just being astoninglisly good. Maybe should feel fortunate. I do hear some friend's systems that make cetain good recordings sound even better, but not so good with some of the bad recordings. This is very hard and almost seems impossible to get perfect. There is no perfect for all areas. Maybe this is why many of us make changes. It is a hobby.

Audiotomb; good thread but difficult to grapple with. I found Scott's (Sns) assessment above particularily astute and interesting, or said another way, I agree with much of what he says. I recently made a major speaker up-grade, ie from warm/forgiving to much more revealing-- but not analytical and lo and behold I had a whole new CD collection. I've got a feeling that has happened to everyone on this thread-- or reading this thread.

I found the "double edged sword" aspect that others have alluded to regarding recording quality and system quality to be true too. But I also found that it's not easy to predict what recordings are going to "survive" being played through a more revealing system, eg I have some remastered Jerry Lee Lewis CDs that sound very "musical" even though there are still some problems with the recording-- but PRT was retained. And the newly re-mastered CCR CDs are great-- they use JVCs K2 20Bit Super Coding system. I have purposely built my system to be musical, and don't equate either "high resolution" or "analytical" with high end audio. I'm too damned old to mindlessly pursue "resolution"-- I want musical.

Most audiophiles don't seem to like C/W music-- I do like some of it, but interestingly, I've found so many C/W recordings that have come out of Nashville that it can't be a coincidence. Nashville recording engineers know how to consistently produce good recordings, and I mean recordings that sound excellent on my pretty revealing system. Recent examples are Allison Moorer's "Alabama Song" CD, and Alison Krauss' "Forget About It"-- I don't actually know if these are Nashville recordings, but they are C/W and Bluegrass. How about Dolly Parton's "Sparrow"? And Emmylou Harris' "Cowgirls Prayer" is so good that it has survived several major upgrades. Enuf, and Cheers. Craig